Mexican describes the Mexican mind.
by Luis Gonzalez de Alba
Introduced and translated by
is very unusual to find a Latin American author who does not blame
his countrys ills squarely on the United States. This is
especially true of Mexicans, who are all taught in school that
the United States invaded and dismembered their country in 1846-1848
and has ruthlessly exploited Mexico ever since. Most Mexicans
cannot conceive of the wealth and power of the United Statesand
their own poverty and weaknessas anything but proof of American
Monument to the revolution,
Luis Gonzalez de Alba is that
rare Mexican who is able to see his country as it really is. In
this short 1997 essay, My Teachers Lies, he brilliantly
captures the delusions and contra-dictions of the Mexican national
Don Luis was born on March 6,
1944, in Char-cas, a small desert village in the state of San
Luis Potosi. He came to Mexico City in the 1960s to study psychology
at Mexicos leading university, the National Autonomous University
of Mexico, and was a leader in the student movement. The government
arrested him in the wake of the Oct. 2, 1968, massacre of students
and workers, and he spent two years and eight months in prison.
Don Luis has written novels and
plays, but has achieved greatest success as a science writer.
Needless to say, his political writing is controversial; this
essay originally appeared in a now-defunct magazine called Tendencias,
which was published in El Salvador. In 2002, he expanded on the
ideas in this essay, and published a book of the same title, My
Teachers Lies. Neither the essay nor the book was translated
The true history
of Mexico is a long series of glorious defeats and
a weighty directory of fallen heroes.
Don Luiss refusal to accept
the distortions of the political, academic, and media elites is
grounded in a thorough understanding of Mexican history, and he
refers to people and events with which Americans are not familiar.
It may seem distracting to go back and forth between the footnotes
(page 4) and the essay, but most Americans will find the notes
necessary. In any case, Americans would be well advised to learn
the history of a country that is clearly determined to play an
ever-larger role in our affairs.
Demolition of Myths
The Vision of the Vanquished
true history of Mexico is a long series of glorious defeats and
a weighty directory of fallen heroes. Cuauhtemoc1
is our purest hero, but not for his deeds, nor his nation-building,
nor his victories, since he did not have time for such things,
but only because he is the great loser. Hidalgo2
is the Pater Patriae [father of his country] by decree,
not for his achievements. Morelos3
headed another uprising that was scarcely noted in our immense
expanse of territory, and his defeat was absolute. Guerrero4
turned into a simple fugitive lost in the mountains of the south,
where he could have stayed to die a natural death from old age,
since in no way did he affect the course of the Spanish Empire.
Madero5 never governed,
and we continue to wait for a workable government. Zapata6
was shot down, and land reform had to wait until Cardenas7
and even longerenough time for the growth of the population
to make it impossible to give land to each peasant, and distribution
created more problems than benefits.
The Perfidious Victors
The accursed victors are deep
within our official hell. The greatest villain is the absolute
victor, the man who made possible the Mexico of today, a country
that was possible only upon the ruins of the indigenous nations,
not one of them remotely Mexican. Hernan Cortes is the Father
of Mexico8 because
without his victory, the present population of Mexico would not
exist. However, we choose to define ourselves as the conqueredthe
vanquishedin absolute denial of the father, the Spaniard
and conqueror who triumphed because of so much evil.
The Process of Identification
Mexican social psychology has
an unusual research theme in our identification with the vanquished
and not the victorious, although we are sons of both. We say that
they, the Spaniards, defeated us. But
do we not have eyes of all colors and complexions of all shades?
Do we not name ourselves Carlos, Miguel, Antonio, Maria, Carmen?
Our surnames are Gonzalez, Lopez, Aguilar, Toledo, Segovia. The
idyllic and silly image we have of the Aztec Empire we imagine
to ourselves in Spanish, and when we insult Spain, we do it in
Spanish. This is a country greatly in need of psychoanalysis,
where in spite of so much nativism, the Indians cannot stage an
uprising without some White Man brandishing a camera at them.
A Tale Told Backwards
If this country had been conquered
by the 300 Spaniards of Cortes with ten starving horses and some
ancient blunderbusses, it ought to make us ashamed just to talk
about it. The Conquest was the result of indigenous
hatred of the barbaric savagery of the Aztecs. The fall of Tenochtitlan9
was the result of a massive popular revolt. Independent for just
a hundred years in 1521, the Aztecs had oppressed their subject
nations with extremes of savagery never reached by the Nazis.
The schoolboy version that Mexico was conquered by a foreign
power is childish, ridiculous, and damaging in the first
place to the Indian Nations. If 300 Spaniards really had conquered
a city that had a population of half a million in the midst of
a territory with a population of 20 million, truly they would
have been Gods. However, 1) Mexico could not be conquered because
it did not exist. 2) Spain was nothing more than a small country
recently freed from a thousand years of Arab domination. 3) It
was not only Spaniards, but also thousands of Native warriors
who, oppressed by the reign of Aztec terror, took Tenochitlan
and razed it with all the hatred and fury imaginable.
The Childish Sickness of the
We are a childish nation that
always tries to blame outsiders: The Spaniards conquered
us, say the children of blue, green, and chestnut eyes,
whose names are Fernando and surnamed Cortes. We learn to degrade
ourselves, and self-pity sickens us with sympathy for ourselves.
We are full of willfulness, a quality that entitles us to everything,
and if we do not get it, it is because of foreign evildoers: the
Americans robbed us of the Northern Territories, the bad Mestizos
get the good Indians drunk, and the Indians forget their values.
We explain our poverty as the result of the imperialism of the
United States, which has opened the veins of Latin America.10
But we never ask ourselves why we are not the imperialistic country
and the United States a poor country with open veins. Or we claim
we are poor because our politicians are swindlers and sluggards,
but we do not observe that our governments spring from ourselves.
When We Grow Up
The Virgin of Guadalupe:
patroness of soccer champions.
To become adults we need two treatments
for two failings that are, in themselves, a paradox: excessive
humility and overbearing arrogance. First, we must not picture
ourselves as the humbled product of a defeat. Second, we must
not believe ourselves to be the favorite son of a heavenly mother
who solves all. We are poor because of our mistakes, our history
of violence and destruction, and because of our Catholic disdain
of science, which is the basis of industry.11
Likewise, we do not win Olympic medals or soccer championships,12
first of all, because of the Virgin. If she wanted us to win we
would emerge winners in everything, wouldnt we? The second
reason we are not winners is because we are a nation of potbellies
for whom sport is a Sunday television program watched between
beers and rich slices of barbecued pork. However, no taxi-driver
would ever explain it this way. We lose because of bad luck or
the bad faith of others.
Will God Speak Through
the Aryan Race?
Cuauhtemoc, the unsullied
The feminists have taught us to
change the gender of a phrase to discover the masculine sexism
hidden in everyday matters. Let us try the same thing with our
vociferous racialism: Will God speak through the Aryan race?13
Let us suppose that was the motto of Heidelberg University. Would
demonstrators not be applauded if they splashed paint on it? Or
the mountain-climber who scaled the rectory tower to obliterate
that declaration with a hammer? A monument to the German race,
to the Aryan essence of Germany, would it not suffer every conceivable
attempt to wipe it out? But what is dignity in the poor is abusive
arrogance in the rich. Deutschland Uber Alles seems racialist
to us, but There are not two like Mexico14
is only simple national pride. It is true, certainly, but a platitude,
because the same applies to Guatemala or Nigeria, and it lends
itself also to the type of joke that backfires: there are not
(14951525) was the last of the Aztec emperors. He defended
the Aztec capital against the conquistadors in 1521, and after
his defeat and capture, he reluctantly went into Spanish service.
In 1525, Cortes tried him for treason and had him executed, even
though many Spaniards considered him innocent. He is said to have
died defiantly, and is considered Mexicos greatest hero.
Hidalgo (17531811) was a priest whose campaigns against
Spain launched the independence movement. In 1810, he started
a revolt in the hope of improving conditions for Indians, and
marched on Mexico City with an army of 80,000. After winning an
initial battle he was defeated by the Spanish, fled north, was
captured and shot. Sept. 16, the day on which Hidalgo called for
insurrection, is a national holiday, Mexican Independence Day.
It is in this sense that Hidalgo is the father of his country
by decree, and not by achievement.
Maria Morelos (1765-1815), also a priest, joined Hidalgos
insurrection and succeeded him as leader of the rebels. He was
initially successful, and issued a declaration of independence
from Spain in 1813. Two years later, royalists defeated and shot
him. Like Hidalgo, he is a hero of the early struggle for independence.
Guerrero (1783?1831) was a Mexican soldier who joined the
war for independence in 1810 under Morelos, and became leader
of guerrilla forces. He served briefly as president of Mexico
in 1829 but was overthrown in a revolt, and was shot in 1831.
Madero (1873-1913) was the original leader of the Mexican Revolution
of 1910 to 1920. The revolution against seven-term president and
dictator, Porfirio Diaz, was ostensibly for land redistribution.
It led to a confused and violent period during which local power
was in the hands of warlords and guerilla bands. Madero managed
to make himself president from 1911 to 1913, but was overthrown
and shot. He is nevertheless a great hero, and Mexico celebrates
Revolution Day every Nov. 20, the day in 1910 on which Madero
denounced President Diaz, declared himself president of Mexico,
and called for insurrection.
Zapata (1877?1919) was another hero of the Mexican Revolution,
but was an enemy of Madero, whom he thought not radical enough.
Of peasant origin, he controlled the state of Morales, where he
drove the wealthy off their estates, and divided the land among
peasants. Another great hero, he was assassinated in 1919.
Although Don Luis does not mention
him, Pancho Villa (18781923) is a somewhat more ambiguous
hero of the revolution. Born Doroteo Arangol to a
peasant family, he joined a bandit gang as a teenager, and adopted
the name of the gang chieftain after police killed him in a shootout.
In 1910, he joined Maderos rebellion and operated in the
north. After Madero was shot, he quarreled with other revolutionaries,
and fled north, where he continued as a bandit and guerilla fighter.
In 1916, he and his men attacked Columbus, New Mexico, murdering
townspeople and burning most of the town. General John Pershing
led an expeditionary force into Mexico and pursued him for 11
months, but could not catch him. Villa knew the terrain and was
popular with the Mexicans, who refused to help Pershing despite
a $5,000 reward on Villas head. This greatly adds to his
sheen in Mexico today, but his popularity could not protect him
from other Mexicans. He was assassinated in 1923, and some peasants
pray to him as if he were a saint.
Cardenas (1895-1970) was another anti-Diaz revolutionary, who
managed to avoid being shot, and served as president from 1934-1940.
He initiated serious land reform and nationalized the oil industry.
His was perhaps the first honest, reasonably successful attempt
to uplift the whole country. He did not loot the treasury, and
lived a notably austere life.
Cortes (14851547) conquered Mexico during the famous campaign
of 15191521. He is the father of Mexico because
of his affair with La Malinche, an Aztec noblewoman who was his
interpreter and consort. Cortes could have had many women, but
was faithful to La Malinche during the campaign, and had a son,
who is celebrated as the first Mexican. Although,
as Don Luis points out, Cortes is not a hero to the Mexicans,
Columbus is. Mexico celebrates October 12the origins of
the mestizoas Dia de la Raza or day of the
was the name of the Aztec capital conquered by Cortes, and was
the precursor of todays Mexico City.
refers to a popular 1971 book by the Uruguayan communist, Eduardo
Galeano, Las Venas Abiertas de America Latina, which blames
all the ills of the region on the United States.
Library of the National
Mexican won a Nobel prize for literature, and another shared a
peace prize. No Mexican has won a prize in science. Neighboring
Guatemala, with only one ninth the population, has won one Nobel
prize for literature and one for peace, both unshared.
has a population of 100 million, which is more than reunited Germany
(82 million), France, or England (both 60 million), but it won
only one silver and three bronze medals at the 2004 Olympics.
Soccer is the national pastime, but Mexico has never won the World
Luis has taken the motto of the National Autonomous University
of Mexico, Will God Speak Through My Race? and changed
it to Will God Speak Through the Aryan Race? He credits
this type of analysis to feminists, who claim that language is
riddled with sexism. An example would be to point
out that the masculine often stands for both sexes, as in Every
student should raise his hand.
are not two like Mexico (Como Mexico no hay dos)
is a slogan the government used to promote tourism. It did not
work very well, and instead became the butt of jokes of the kind
Don Luis cites.
La Raza Cosmica or La Raza Comica?
by Raymond McClaren
is another historical figure Don Luis might have mentioned in
this essay, who perhaps better than anyone exemplifies the Mexican
national character. In his excellent article The War With
Mexico in the September 1995 American Renaissance,
Eric Peterson asks: Why would they [the Mexicans] make war
with the United States when they had been unable to subdue a breakaway
territory [Texas]? Astonishingly enough, they fully expected to
win. Further in the same paragraph Mr. Peterson writes,
Indeed, the Mexican dictator of the moment, Mariano Paredes,
boasted that he would not negotiate until the Mexican flag flew
over the capitol dome in Washington.
There is nothing astonishing about
the Mexican expectation of victory or the blowhard boast of President
and General Paredes. He is a character entirely at home in Don
Luiss Mexico, and almost single-handedly justifies the old
South American observation that Mexicans say, do, and believe
in things that are unnatural (Los Mexicanos dicen, hacen, y
creen en cosas que no son naturales). Despite Paredess
claim, it was the American flag that flew over the Citadel of
Mexico City, El Castillo de Chapultepec.
It is unusual to encounter a perfect
representative of a national type, but the illustrious Mariano
Paredes fits the profile. Like so many figures from Mexican history,
his biography reads like an opera plot. He was a general who helped
put Santa Ana in power in 1841 but turned against him when Santa
Ana did not reward him sufficiently. He helped overthrow Santa
Ana, but the presidency went to Jose Herrera. In 1845, he led
a revolt against Herrera, charging him with compromising the honor
of Mexico by negotiating with the United States over Texas rather
than taking up arms. He became president for part of 1846, but
bungled the war he so actively sought.
Rather than fight the Americans,
Paredes led a campaign into Jalisco against domestic enemies.
Meanwhile, General Winfield Scott, whom the Duke of Wellington
called the greatest soldier alive for his Mexican
campaign, defeated larger forces in four battles on his way from
Veracruz to take Mexico City. Paredes was kicked out of office
in 1846 because of the war, briefly went into exile in 1847, came
back and plotted yet another revolt, which failed. He managed
to avoid being shot, and actually died of natural causes in 1849.
Despite his complete failure during the war with the United States,
Mexicans consider him a great military leader. Paredes is just
one more loser to be added to Don Luiss list, and he, too,
is a kind of Mexican hero.
More bombast than bombs, he started
an unwinnable war, but to the Mexican mind he accomplished great
deeds because for Mexicans, words are deeds. Mexicans are masters
of the most primitive psychological defense known: denial. Thus,
despite the fact that Paredes wanted war with the United States,
and intended to conquer great chunks of it, as every Mexican knows,
the Americans stole the Northern Territories. The
Mexican-American War of 1846 to 1848 brought Anglo-Saxon order
to 525,000 square miles of Latin squalor and chaos, but a complex
blending of corrupt American motives and Mexican predation is
reestablishing the squalor and chaos.
Ruins at Palenque.
Because of the psychological capitulation
of its neighbor to the north, Don Luiss nation of losers
has a chance to win after all. What Mexico could not conquer by
force of arms or by economic or cultural dominance, it may win
through sheer fecundity. What Mexicans could never achieve on
their own, they may conquer because of the unwillingness of Americans
to defend what they have created. Today it is the norteamericanos
who believe in things that are unnatural.
• BACK TO TOP • •
Fraud on the Increase
habits are taking root.
reviewed by Thomas Jackson
How Voter Fraud
Threatens Our Democracy
2004 173 pp.
much self-congratulation about the quality of American democracy,
our elections are surprisingly vulnerable to fraud. As Wall
Street Journal writer John Fund explains in Stealing
Elections, we may have some of the worst-protected balloting
systems of any country that holds regular elections.
There is great variation from jurisdiction
to jurisdiction, but our elections are easy to jimmy because
they are based on the honor system. In the past, election
boards have assumed only eligible citizens would register
and vote, and there has been only cursory protection against
fraud. Now, as Mr. Fund boldly explains, blacks and Hispanics
often take advantage of lax enforcementsometimes in
the most brazen wayand then call their critics racists.
Despite persistent charges that Republicans
kept blacks away from the polls during the 2000 election and
would do the same this year, vote fraud is largely Democratic.
There are several reasons for this. First, it is easier to
buy votes from poor people. Second, Democratic candidates
are often life-long politicians desperate to keep their jobs,
whereas Republicans who lose elections often have private
sector professions to which they can return.
Third, liberal notions of inclusion
go along with the view that making sure everyone gets a chance
to vote is more important than worrying about strict eligibility.
This year, for example, Kerry supporters split 62 to 19 in
favor of the importance of inclusion over procedure, whereas
by 59 to 18, Bush supporters thought integrity of eligibility
standards was more important than making sure no one was wrongly
excluded. These positions reflect partisan intereststhe
doubtful voters kept out by the rules are likely to vote Democratbut
conservatives like rules and procedures more than liberals
do. Women tend to be liberal and worry more than men that
eligibility rules could unfairly exclude someone.
Finally, although Mr. Fund does not say so
specifically, it stands to reason that blacks and Hispanics
are more fraud-prone than whites. They break almost all laws
more often than whites, and Third-World immigrants are used
to cutting corners. As a consequence, voter fraud is concentrated
among black and immigrant populations.
Varieties of Fraud
When Americans think of election fraud they
imagine Africans or South Americans shooting opponents or
confiscating ballot boxes. That doesnt happen here.
Fraud is less blatant, and usually involves phony registrations
and gimmicky ways to cast absentee ballots rather than deliberate
miscounts. Since fraud is at the margins rather than at the
heart of the system, it is usually not possible to steal an
election unless it is close.
As Mr. Fund boldly explains,
blacks and Hispanics often take advantage of lax
enforcementsometimes in the most brazen
wayand then call their critics racists.
The long-standing Democratic campaign to
increase turnout by making it easy to register has made it
easy to break the law. The National Voter Registration Act
(the motor voter law) was the first bill President
Clinton signed. It imposed fraud-friendly rules on every state
by forcing drivers license bureaus and welfare and unemployment
agencies to offer no-questions-asked mail-in voter registration
to everyone. The law also made it hard to challenge new registrants
or to purge deadwood from the voter rollspeople
who have died, moved away, or gone to prison.
Lax registration means non-citizens, minors,
and felons can register. It makes it easy to register in several
locations and vote more than once. When it is hard to purge
voter lists, enterprising citizens can cast ballots in the
names of neighbors they know are dead, in jail, or out of
Voting in someone elses name is one
of the most common types of fraud. Nationally, 12 percent
of registered voters never vote, and political activists often
take their places at the polls. The motor voter
law made this problem worse because only about five percent
of the people it put on the rolls bother to vote. The more
inactive voters there are, the easier it is for someone to
borrow their franchise.
Clearly, it would be much harder to vote
in someone elses name if people had to show photo ID
at the polls, but only 17 states require this. Eighty-two
percent of voters favor requiring identification, but Democrats
have consistently headed off reform by arguing it would intimidate
poor and non-white voters.
In 1997, Louisiana wanted to require ID at
least from new voters who had registered by mail and whom
no election bureaucrat had ever seen. The state was under
1965 Voting Rights Act requirements to get federal permission
for any change to election rules, and the Clinton administration
refused, arguing that asking for ID would remind blacks of
the days when they couldnt vote. The feds backed down
only after it was widely pointed out that Mr. Clintons
FDA had just ordered all retailers to card anyone who wanted
to buy cigarettes and did not look at least 27 years old.
The pretense that an ID requirement will
terrify blacks lives on. In Mississippi, anyone over age 65
is exempt from the requirement because elderly blacks might
be reminded of the days of fire hoses and police dogs. (How
do they prove to poll watchers they are over 65 without showing
Sloppy registration has serious consequences.
The voting age population of St. Louis, Missouri, is 258,532
and the number of registered voters is 247,135, for a completely
unrealistic registration rate of 97 percent. Not surprisingly,
the city gets unusual results. After elections in 2002, an
investigation turned up no fewer than 24,000 fraudulent voters.
Of this number 4,405 had voted in the names of dead people,
2,242 were ineligible felons, and 15,963 were registered in
more than one place and could have voted more than once.
For four years, a St. Louis dog named Ritzy
Meckler was registered to vote. Her owners put the dogs
name in the telephone book as a privacy measure, and someone
harvested it for a phony registration.
St. Louis does have procedures to purge the
rolls of people who have not voted in four years, and who
cannot be reached at the address they gave when they registered.
A voter must re-register or go before an election judge to
be reinstated. Mr. Fund writes that recently all the judges
were Democratic and many were openly partisan. He writes that
some black judges reinstated voters only on condition that
they vote Democratic.
. . . for the second
Anyone who proposes cleaning up this loose
system faces accusations of racism. William Lacy
Smith, the citys black congressman, promises racial
trouble if anyone investigates.
Mr. Fund argues strongly that absentee ballots
are the most vulnerable to fraud. Because they do not require
a trip to the polls, the authorities never really know who
cast them or under what circumstances. When mail-in registration
is combined with absentee voting, election officials may never
see a voter at all.
Twenty states have no-excuse absentee voting,
which means people can mail in their ballots for reasons of
pure convenience, not because they will be out of town. In
many states, the aged and incapacitated can vote absentee,
and nursing home managers have been known to rent out the
residents to activists who help them fill out
ballots. In 2002, Democratic operatives were caught on video
giving food and money to mentally ill people in exchange for
In three of the no-excuse statesCalifornia,
Utah, and Washingtona voter can leave a standing order
with the elections board to mail out an absentee ballot before
every election. People die or move away, and the ballots keep
coming. The resourceful can intercept ballots, forge signatures,
and keep voting for years. Operatives sometimes go through
the projects and sign everyone up for regular absentee ballots.
When the ballots come, the activist makes the rounds again,
distributing small gifts in exchange for the right vote. One
great advantage of absentee balloting is that a bought vote
stays bought whereas vote-buyers can never be sure what someone
will do in the voting booth.
Oregon has a 100 percent mail-in ballot system.
This means registered voters get ballots in the mail without
even asking for them. It is easy to steal a ballot from a
mail box, and the large number of people who dont vote
anyway never miss them. Many of these ballots are, of course,
cast by someone else.
Even if it did not lend itself to fraud,
Mr. Fund opposes voting by mail. Proponents say it increases
voter turnout, but this is a false claim. He also thinks the
pilgrimage to the polls is part of the ritual and solemnity
of democracy, and should not be given up. Finally, absentee
voters have to decide early, and may miss late developments.
In California, some women who voted absentee for Arnold Schwarzenegger
would have voted for someone else if they had waited until
election day and learned of his record as a groper.
Convictions for violations of campaign and
election laws are very rare, and Mr. Fund doesnt hesitate
to point to race as one of the reasons. Most of the criminals
are Democraticoften non-whiteand Republicans are
afraid to make a fuss. They have not even been able to quash
the completely unfounded charges that they kept blacks from
voting in 2000, and it is now an article of faith among blacks
that Republicans will do anything to bottle up the black vote.
Mr. Fund cites only one case in which Republicans
could conceivably be accused of targeting blacks. In 1986,
the Louisiana Republicans sent letters to all the voters in
precincts in which Republicans got less than 20 percent of
the vote, to see if the voters were still at those addresses.
When they got 31,000 letters back, they asked the election
authorities to purge those voters from the rolls. These Democratic
neighborhoods were overwhelmingly black, and the Republicans
never heard the end of it. Since this episodenearly
20 years agoRepublicans have had an abiding terror of
doing anything even faintly racist.
Republicans used to stand outside heavily
Hispanic polling stations, carrying signs in Spanish that
said Non-citizens cant vote. This, too,
has gone down in the annals as outrageous intimidation of
non-whites, increasing Republican timidity.
With prosecution unlikely, many people do
not bother to hide what they do. Among the Mexicans in Texas
there is a profession called politiquero. Practitioners
regularly persuade elderly or illiterate Chicanos to get ballots
by mail, and then bribe or browbeat them to vote the right
way. Herminia Becerra, who calls herself the queeen of Brownsville
politiqueros, is proud of what she does, claiming that
she helps choose candidates who are good for the community.
Republicans control the state house, but are afraid to tighten
the system for fear of being accused of racism.
In South Dakota, corruption is most common
on Indian reservations, where Democrats register all sorts
of doubtful and bogus voters. It is common for Democrats to
herd Indians to the polls in vans, and sometimes to give them
money for voting. The reservations also have a tradition of
reporting their results last, after the count is in for the
rest of the state. This makes it easy to know just how much
extra help a candidate needs.
Recently, Democrats offered a $3 bounty for
new voter registrations on the reservation, and Becky Red
Earth Villeda collected no less than $13,000 for her efforts.
She saw to it that people registered as Democrats but also
forged a huge number of new registrations. When this came
to light, tribal officials defended her and fought every attempt
to get evidence against her, claiming that the white man did
not have subpoena authority on the reservation. According
to a prosecutor who worked on the case, the government gladly
dropped its investigation into what was promising to stir
up embarrassing charges of racism. Reporters who
looked into irregularities faced the same charge.
Wherever there are large numbers of immigrants,
there is the risk that non-citizens will vote. In 1996, Orange
County discovered that in one five-month period 125 registered
voters had excused themselves from jury duty on the grounds
that they were not citizens. No charges were filed. In the
countys vote that year that ended Robert Dornans
congressional career and replaced him with Loretta Sanchez,
the INS estimated that as many as 4,023 non-citizens voted.
The election was decided by fewer than 1,000 votes.
Mr. Fund reports that Hawaii is another swamp
of dirty politics, where former Governor Benjamin Cayetano
did not hesitate to use his power to punish people who tried
to keep fraud under control. Non-citizen voting and absentee-ballot
fraud have been so bad there have actually been a few convictions.
Other rare prosecutions have been in Miami,
which, as Mr. Fund explains, has long since supplanted
Chicago as the epicenter of the countrys most colorful
political life. The 1997 race for mayor was so rife
with vote buying and absentee-ballot fraud that prosecutors
easily convicted City Commissioner Humberto Hernandez. All
along, he had boasted to friends he could head off trouble
by claiming racial persecution. He screeched as promised,
but went to jail anyway.
Many jurisdictions are switching to electronic
voting machines in the hope that they will eliminate ballot
ambiguity and faulty counts. So far, they have not fallen
victim to the mass tampering or partisan hacking that some
people fear. Mr. Fund does note, however, that unlike the
machines used to run state lotteries, there are no standard
reliability protocols for voting machines. Ever since the
Help America Vote Act of 2002 dangled a potential $3.9 billion
over what had been a sleepy industry, there has been a rash
of corruption and contract kickbacks.
One possible advantage of voting machines
is that when they go haywire it can be so spectacular no one
fails to notice. In a 2003 election in Boone County, Indiana,
the machines recorded 140,000 votes in a jurisdiction in which
only about 5,000 people cast ballots. Well-tested software
should solve the problems of security and reliability, but
even the cleanest vote counts will do nothing to stop fake
registrations and absentee-ballot fraud.
Franchise control is one area in which Americans
could learn from Mexicans. To get a voter card, a Mexican
must have his picture taken, sign his name, and give a thumbprint.
The voter card has a serial number, and a photo with a hologram
over it. Every voter must produce the card and have
his thumbprint scanned at the polling station to see if it
matches the one on file.
This system is clearly designed to deal with
Third-World corner cutting. The honor system may have worked
when the United States was largely European and blacks could
not vote. An increasingly Third-World population needs Third-World
• • • BACK TO TOP • •
and the Election
Hispanicsor whitesthe key to victory?
by Stephen Webster
November 2, President George W. Bush won reelection by a
convincing, if not overwhelming, margin of 3.5 million votes
(51 to 48 percent) out of more than 115 million cast. His
Electoral College victory of 286 to 252 is less impressive,
the closest for an incumbent president since Woodrow Wilson
in 1916. Still, with most pre-election polls showing the
race either a dead heat or with Pres. Bush narrowly ahead,
the President exceeded the expectations of most of the mainstream
Why did Mr. Bush win? Most
pundits are happily telling us it was because he increased
his share of the non-white vote. In 2000, when he lost the
popular vote and eked out an Electoral College victory,
he polled poorly among minorities. Blacks voted for Al Gore
90 to nine percent, Hispanics, 62 to 35 percent; Asians,
55 to 41 percent; and Jews, 79 to 19 percent. White House
political strategist Karl Rove started courting these voters,
particularly Hispanics, and the Bush amnesty proposal announced
earlier this year is a prime example of Republican Hispandering.
Mr. Rove dismissed worries that this strategy could anger
the GOPs white base, arguing that conservative whites
had nowhere else to go. Mr. Rove seems not have noticed
that the easiest way for Republicans to win elections is
to maximize their share of the white vote. With one percent
more of the white vote, George W. Bush would have won easily
According to media-commissioned
exit polls, the Rove strategy appears to have produced mixed
results. Although Mr. Bush increased his share of the Asian
vote to 44 percent (up three percent), and he received a
quarter of the Jewish vote (up six percent), taken together
these two groups represent only five percent of the vote.
And while the President did see his share of the black vote
increase two percent, an 89 to 11 result is hardly a victory.
The only non-white group from whom Mr. Bush received a significant
number of votes was Hispanicsan alleged 42 to 44 percent,
up from 35 percent in 2000. As we will see, these numbers
may be fishy, but if they are accurate it would mean the
Hispanic vote almost exactly mirrored the Asian vote. Accurate
or not, we can be sure that they will be trotted out for
ever after as proof that Hispanics are assimilating, and
voting more and more like white people.
Analysts say more Hispanics
were drawn to the Republicans because of the amnesty plan,
increased GOP advertising in Spanish-language media, and
especially the Presidents opposition to marriage for
homosexuals. This combination is supposed to have produced
something approaching a miracle: the biggest share of the
Hispanic vote since Ronald Reagans 46 percent in 1984,
including 59 percent of the Hispanic vote in Texas, 56 percent
in Florida and Georgia, and an overwhelming 74 percent in
Oklahoma. Thirty-four percent of California Hispanics reportedly
voted for Mr. Bush, as did 43 percent in Arizona, and 44
percent in New Mexico.
As VDARE.com columnist Steve
Sailer has pointed out, some of these numbers are hard to
believe. If Mr. Bush really got 59 percent of the Hispanic
vote in Texas, why did he lose in counties that are overwhelmingly
Hispanic? Mr. Bush lost 15 Texas counties13 of which
have Hispanic populations of 75 to 94 percent. If a strong
majority of Hispanics was voting Republican he should have
won these counties with no trouble. One of the other counties
he lost is home to the liberal college town of Austin, and
the other is heavily black.
Even stranger, if 59 percent
of Hispanics voted for Mr. Bush, it means white support
for the Republicans in Texas dropped by one percent whereas
in other states, it rose by an average of about three percent.
Why would he suddenly lose votes in his home state? Likewise
in New Mexico, for Mr. Bush to have carried 44 percent of
the Hispanics, he would have had to lose a chunk of the
white vote. This, too, makes no sense.
Mr. Sailer points out that
pre-election polls showed Mr. Kerry winning the Hispanic
vote by about 60 to 30, and pre-election polls for the vote
as a whole were pretty accurate. Furthermore, according
to a 14-state exit poll taken by the non-partisan William
C. Velasquez Institute, the Hispanic split was 67.7 percent
to 31.4 percent in favor of Mr. Kerry, which would be a
decline in the Hispanic vote from 2000, and is consistent
with strong Hispanic opposition to the war in Iraq.
But let us assume Mr. Bush
really did get 44 percent of the Hispanic vote. This would
mean he got about 1.5 million more Hispanic votes than in
2000. They were nice to have, but were just 1.3 percent
of all votes cast. Subtract them, and President Bush still
wins the popular vote, 50 to 49thanks to whites.
Hidden in all of the post-election
spin about how Republican outreach to Hispanics
won the presidency is what Samuel Francis and others have
consistently pointed out (see Its Race, Stupid,
AR, January 2001): Mr. Bush lost the popular vote in 2000
because just 54 percent of whites voted for him. In order
to win, Republicans have to get about 56 percent of the
white vote, and that percentage will increase as the electorate
darkens. Mr. Bush exceeded this threshold on Nov. 2, winning
58 percent, which means he got 5.65 million more white votes
than in 2000. This represents 4.8 percent of all votes cast
in 2004, and therein lies the Presidents victory.
Without those whites, he would be on his way back to Crawford.
If the President had made even a soft racial appeal to whites
by repudiating amnesty or denouncing affirmative action,
his white vote might have approached 60 percent, and given
him an Electoral College landslide.
For all the talk about bringing
non-whites into the party, Republicans realize that whites
stand between them and political extinction on the national
level. And contrary to what Karl Rove may publicly profess,
he knows whites do have somewhere else to go: They can stay
home, as many did in 2000. The Republican Party made a huge
effort to bring out conservatives in 2004, especially the
evangelical Christians, who oppose homosexual marriage and
support the Iraq war. These votersoverwhelmingly whitewere
the Presidents strongest supporters. Nearly a quarter
of the electorate, they voted Republican 78 to 21 percent.
Without another contentious
moral issue like homosexual marriage, the Republicans
may not be able to repeat the 2004 victory, especially if
they think that is what won Hispanic votes. Furthermore,
pandering to Hispanics will run headlong into growing anger
among whites over illegal immigration. With both presidential
candidates equally boneheaded on immigration, the national
vote told us nothing, but congressional races told us a
According to Mark Krikorian
of the Center for Immigration Studies, every shift in Congress
replaced an incumbent with someone who is at least no worse
on immigration and, in some cases, considerably better.
In two racesJohn Thune v. Tom Daschle in South Dakota
and Pete Sessions v. Martin Frost in Texas, the Democrats
illegal-coddling was a campaign issue that helped push them
out. Tom Tancredo of Colorado, who is the best man on immigration
in the whole Congress, easily beat back a challenger fueled
by rich pro-immigration backers, and every member of his
Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus who was up for reelection
won another term.
One disappointment was the
failure of the Fire Dreier campaign in Southern
California against Republican David Dreier, a notorious
wet on illegals. The anti-Dreier movement, led by two popular
radio hosts did force him to his narrowest victory margin
in 24 years (54 to 43 percent, and the lowest margin of
any California incumbent), and seems to have knocked some
sense into him. He has changed his tune on immigration,
and is now a good bet for a vote in favor of strict control.
Had some effect.
The most gratifying results,
however, were in Arizona, where Proposition 200, which requires
proof of citizenship or legal residency to vote or to receive
public benefits, passed 56 to 44 percent. According to polls,
no less than 47 percent of Hispanicsand there are
a lot of Hispanic voters in Arizonasupported the measure.
The political establishment, big business, and the media
were all behind the well-funded Vote No campaign,
but as they always do on immigration, the electorate showed
more sense than its rulers. Similar ballot initiatives are
now likely in other Western states, and at least a few politicians
will have paid attention.
One who did not appears
to be Mr. Bush. Amnesty is a losing proposition, but he
is pushing it again anyway. His own party will rebel, and
the voters will be furious. If he actually manages to pass
an amnesty, whites will desert the GOP, and as amnesty adds
more non-white voters, prospects for the Republican Party
will dim. Survival is the first law of politicseven
for Mr. Bush.
• • •
BACK TO TOP • •
O Tempora, O Mores!
Turkey has wanted to be a member
of the European Union since 1963, but has been kept out because
it does not meet requirements for democratic government, human
rights, and respect for minorities. In September, the European
Commissioner for Enlargement, Gunther Verheugen, toured Turkey
and found it is close enough to requirements to justify membership
negotiations. Mr. Verheugen made no promises: Talks should be
suspended if Turkey reneges on human rights reforms or fails to
stay democratic. He also suggested that if the EU did admit Turkey,
it should consider limiting Turkish immigration. European leaders
are expected to endorse Mr. Verheugens recommendation this
month. [Stephen Castle and Pelin Turgut, The Turkish Question,
Independent (London), Oct. 7, 2004.]
Voice of the people.
Still, there is a good chance
Europeans will block Turkish membership. Politicians who oppose
Turkey have been afraid to say so publicly, but now that accession
has become a real possibility, they are speaking up. In early
September, outgoing European Commissioner Frits Bolkestein of
the Netherlands warned that the EU could implode if
it expands too quickly. He cited the example of Austrian imperial
expansion a century ago: The incorporation of 20 million Slavs
threatened Austrias own culture, and the EU risks becoming
an Austro-Hungarian empire on a grand scale. He worries
that some of Europes great cities, including Rotterdam and
Amsterdam in his own country, will soon have Muslim majorities,
and pointed out that Turkish membership would hasten this transformation.
If Europe becomes Islamicized, he added the liberation of
Vienna [from Turkish armies] in 1683 will have been in vain.
Shortly after Mr. Bolkesteins
speech, Franz Fischler of Austria, another outgoing commissioner,
expressed his own doubts about Turkey. He published a private
letter he had sent fellow commissioners saying Turkey was far
more Oriental than European and there remain doubts
as to Turkeys long-term secular and democratic credentials.
In late September, French Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin
asked, Do we want the river of Islam to enter the riverbed
of secularism? [Christopher Caldwell, Islamic Europe? Weekly
Standard, Oct. 4, 2004.]
recommendation prompted an impassioned debate in the European
Parliament. One German member claimed, The future of the
European Union as a peaceful community is at stake. On the
other side, French member Francis Wurtz stated that the West is
no longer a Europe of white Christians, and to exclude Turkey
on the basis of religion is irresponsible and loathsome.
[Elaine Sciolino, Turkey Advances in its Bid to Join European
Union, New York Times, Oct. 6, 2004.]
The incoming European Commissioner
for Enlargement, Olli Rehn, opposes Turkish membership. Moreover,
France has now declared that it will hold a national referendum
on Turkish membership, and Jose Barroso of Portugal, incoming
head of the European Commission, says he welcomes national referenda
on the issue. [EU Fine-Tunes Crunch Report on Turkeys Membership
Bid, EU Business, Oct. 4, 2004. Turkey Entry Splits EU Executive,
EUPolitix.com, Oct. 7, 2004.]
Polls show Europeans would soundly
reject Turkish membership. Fifty-six percent of the French oppose
accession, and only 36 percent support it. Fifty-seven percent
of Germans oppose membership, as do three out of four Austrians.
[John Henley, French Poll Shows Depth of Hostility to Turkey,
The Guardian (London), Sep. 29, 2004. Turkey Faces Long Road Ahead
as EU Opens Door, AFP, Oct. 6, 2004. Austrian President Supports
Start of Turkeys EU Talks, AFP, Oct. 25. 2004.]
The United States supports Turkish
accession. In June, Pres. Bush called Turkey a great and
stable democracy, and said membership in the EU would
expose the clash of civilizations as a passing myth
of history. He went on to praise Turkey as Europes
bridge to the wider world. These remarks infuriated Europeans.
Pres. Jacques Chirac, who favors Turkish membership, said Mr.
Bush should mind his own business. [Susan Jones, Turkey Belongs
in the European Union, Bush Says, CNSNews.com, June 29, 2004.]
Although they are now unenforceable,
many Southern states still have segregation-era laws on the books.
One example is the Alabama constitution, which still requires
poll taxes and separate schools for white and colored
children. Many Alabama politicians, including the governor, think
these provisions are disgraceful, and they backed an initiative
on the Nov. 2 ballot to strike them down.
Many people opposed the initiative,
including Roy Moore, who was ousted as chief justice of the Alabama
Supreme Court last November for refusing to remove a Ten Commandments
monument outside his courthouse. He said what the people behind
the amendment really wanted was to raise taxes. Besides eliminating
the school segregation clause, the initiative would have removed
language saying Alabamans have no right to an education at public
expense. Legislators added this in 1956 in an effort to get around
the requirement for school integration. Mr. Moore argues that
if Alabama declares education a right, courts could require that
the state increase funding for public schools, which could mean
higher property taxes. [Jay Reeves, Opponents To Striking Vestiges
Of Segregation From Alabama Constitution Accused Of Racism, AP,
Oct. 21, 2004.]
Mr. Moore seems to have prevailed
with the electorate, who voted against the initiative by a small
margin, though the final outcome will not be known until provisional
ballots are counted. Mr. Moore accused the initiatives backers
of having a hidden agenda, but he may have one himself. He has
never publicly endorsed segregation, but he is friendly with those
who do. Recently, when he spoke at the Indiana Baptist Temple,
he had his picture taken with a minister who advocates segregation
and believes God means for whites to lead other races. The victory
over the initiative means it is more likely Mr. Moore will run
for governor in 2006. [Mary Orndorff, Moore Speaks to Controversial
Church Group, Nov. 5, 2004.]
The motives of Alabama voters
are also unclear. Although they may have voted down the initiative
because it could have led to higher taxes, four years ago 40 percent
voted to keep an unenforceable ban on interracial marriage in
the constitution. Gabriel J. Chin, a University of Arizona law
professor who is an expert on Jim Crow laws, says, Some
people still support segregation. They wont say it in public,
but they will say it in the voting place. [Alabama to Vote
on Segregation Language, AP, Oct. 13, 2004.]
Nov. 2 brought another victory
for Mr. Moore: Alabamans elected Tom Parker, his former aide,
as Supreme Court Justice. The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC)
campaigned against Mr. Parker. They published a photograph of
him handing out small Confederate battle flags at the funeral
of the last Confederate widow. Flanking him in the photo were
members of the Council of Conservative Citizens and the League
of the South, which the SPLC calls hate groups. The
SPLC also reported that Mr. Parker had attended a party commemorating
the birthday of Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest, founder of the Ku
To his credit, Mr. Parker shrugged
off the finger-pointing, saying he must be doing the right
things if the SPLC was attacking him. If there is
any more appropriate place for the display of the Confederate
battle flag than the funeral for the last Confederate widow, I
would like for someone to explain it to me, he added. Political
correctness should not cause people to dishonor our history.
[Parker Defends Handing Out Confederate Flags at Funeral, AP,
Oct. 19, 2004. Jay Reeves, Ala. Vote Shows Some Old South Sympathies,
AP, Nov. 5, 2004.]
Diana Cortez and Sandra Lopez,
the former mayor and bookkeeper of the small border town La Grulla,
Texas, recently pled guilty to misusing federal grant money. Between
2001 and 2003, the town, which has a median income of only $16,400,
received $410,000 from the Department of Housing and Urban Development
for subsidized housing and community development. Instead of spending
the money on housing, the mayor put it into the towns general
fund, which the two women tapped for payments to psychic Cesar
Macias. They wrote checks totaling $53,700, which were payable
either to Mr. Macias or to fictional businesses with titles like
Macias Machinery & Equipment Supply Company Contractor
and Macias Equipment Company. [Former Mayor Pleads
Guilty to Using Money for Psychic Readings, KGBT 4 (Harlingen,
Tex.), Nov. 4, 2004.]
Richard Sanchez, a 23-year-old
Mexican who was adopted by a Kansas couple when he was a child,
visited his country of birth in September to meet his birth family.
Unfortunately, while at the familys ranch in Chihuahua City,
he fell 40 feet from a cliff and badly injured his head. He had
just changed jobs, and had no health insurance. His family took
him to the hospital but doctors would not treat him because they
had no assurance of payment. A second hospital kept him on life
support for three days before he died. He might have lived if
he had received immediate treatment.
According to a Mexican consul,
it is not unusual for Mexican hospitals to refuse uninsured patients.
In general, Mexican hospitals will not start treating patients
without some prepayment of the estimated charges or some sort
of evidence of how the person plans to make payments, even in
life-threatening cases. The State Department warns that
Mexican doctors are likely to charge foreigners more than locals
and to charge for services not rendered. [Chris Strunk, Newton
Man Finds Tragedy in Mexico, Newton Kansan, October 1, 2004.]
The laws are, of course, different
in the United States, where hospitals must provide emergency medical
care to all-comers, including Mexican illegal aliens, who are
usually uninsured. The cost is cripplingly expensive. Los Angeles
County hospitals alone spend $350 million a year on illegal immigrants.
In the last 15 months six county hospitals have closed their emergency
rooms because of these costs. [Federation for American Immigration
Reform, Immigration ImpactCalifornia, www. fairus.org. Jason
Felch, Valleys Oldest Hospital to Close, Los Angeles Times,
August 20, 2004.]
For most Floridians, hurricanes
are an inconvenience, and for some, a major disaster. To Mayan
priest Miguel Angel Chinquin Yat of Lake Worth, they are an opportunity
to commune with Godor at least the god of the hurricane.
Mr. Yat is the director of the Organization of Maya People in
Exile, and last September, while most residents of Florida were
battening down the hatches or preparing to evacuate ahead of Hurricane
Jeanne, Mr. Yat was organizing a welcoming ceremony
for the storm.
Mr. Yat believes hurricanes are
the forces that helped create the universe, and that spirits reside
in them. When Hurricane Frances came ashore he spent three hours
a day speaking to its spirit and to his departed ancestors. He
says the arrival of Hurricane Jeanne so closely on the heels of
Frances means that Mother Earth has suffered greatly.
[Tanya Wragg, Local Maya Priest Welcomes Hurricanes, Palm Beach
Post, Sept. 25, 2004, p. 10A.]
of the Above
The Census Bureau has a hard time
classifying Hispanics. In 1930, the census introduced a Mexican
category but dropped it in 1940. In 1960, the Bureau announced
that it considered Hispanics white unless they were definitively
of Negro, Indian or other non-white race, and the Bureau
continues to use this classification today (see Who is White?
AR, Jan. 2001).
In 1950, the bureau first introduced
an other race option, intended for some Asians and
people of mixed race, but now, it is most commonly used by Hispanics.
The 2000 census race question asked people if they were white,
black, American Indian/Alaska native, or one of many varieties
of Asian or Pacific Islander, including Chinese, Asian Indian,
Filipino, and Samoan. Forty eight percent of Hispanics said they
were white; two percent, black; 1.2 percent, American Indian;
0.3 percent, Asian; and 6.3 percent, two or more races. The remaining
42.2 percent chose Some other race. In the blank,
most wrote Hispanic, Latino, or geographic
descriptions like Mexican or Puerto Rican.
Dominicans say shes
The trouble is that the Latin
American system of racial classification is different from the
Census Bureaus. There are many mixtures in the region, and
people use dozens of categories, such as jabao, indio, trigueno,
moreno, or mestizo, to describe different ancestries and skin
colors. Hispanics have other quirks. Many Dominicans, for example,
whom Americans would say are black, consider themselves white
because they think of Haitians as black.
The Census Bureau has to come
up with a race for all respondents because government, business,
and researchers need this information for electoral districting,
civil rights enforcement, and the like. Vague Hispanic
answers are a nuisance. Census demographers try to guess the race
of other race Hispanics by checking relatives
answers, and looking up the racial makeup of the neighborhood.
To end the confusion, the Census
Bureau has proposed to eliminate the some other race
option for the 2010 census, and force everyone to choose a category.
Hispanic groups like the Puerto Rican Legal Defense Fund and the
Mexican American Legal Defense Fund have yelled. Carlos Chardon,
the chairman of the Census Bureaus Hispanic advisory committee
resents being forced to choose. We dont fit into the
categories Anglos want us to fit in. The census is trying to create
a reality that doesnt exist. If the other race
option is eliminated some Hispanics may refuse to answer the race
There has been heated debate within
the Census Bureau between those who want clarity and those who
defend Hispanics rights to racial ambiguity. Indeed, during
a meeting on the question, two officials on opposite sides argued
so fiercely that the bureau asked the partisan of the other
race question to resignwhich he did. [Rachel L. Swarns,
Hispanics Debate Racial Grouping by Census, New York Times, Oct.
As part of an image overhaul to
boost flagging sales, Sears has decided to turn 97 of its 870
outlets into multicultural stores, in which clothing,
signs, décor, and displays are geared to Hispanics, blacks,
and Asians. The remodeled stores are in areas where at least 60
percent of customers are non-white.
As part of the makeover, Sears
is hiring more bilingual staff, using more non-whites in advertising,
and introducing clothing designed to appeal to non-whites. After
two years of research, Sears discovered that non-white women have
different tastes from whites, and that what fits the average white
woman is too small for many blacks and too big for many Asians
and Hispanics. They found that Hispanics want stylish,
form-fitting clothing in bright, loud colors like orange and crimson,
and high heelsthe higher the better. Blacks need more plus
sizes. In the multicultural stores, Sears displays the loud clothing
prominently on racks near the entrances. Clothing white women
buy, like the more conservative Lands End line, is relegated
to obscure corners.
Although Sears has been marketing
to Hispanics for years (it started publishing a Spanish language
magazine Nuestra Gente in the 1990s and has long featured
signs in Spanish), the multicultural stores are a more open pitch
to non-whites. [Christina Hoag, Right Look, Right Size: Sears
Woos Minorities, Herald (Miami), Oct. 7, 2004, p. 1A.]
Federal law prohibits tax-exempt
charitable organizations from intervening in any political
campaign on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public
office. The IRS is investigating whether NAACP chairman
Julian Bond violated the law in a speech last July in which he
criticized Pres. George W. Bush.
Not an endorsement,
In remarks representing the official
NAACP position, Mr. Bond said, The election this fall is
a contest between two widely disparate views of who we are and
what we believe. One view wants to march us backward through historysurrendering
control of government to special interests, weakening democracy,
giving religion veto power over science, curtailing civil liberties,
despoiling the environment. The other view promises expanded democracy
and giving the people, not plutocrats, control over their government.
If the IRS determines that the speech was electioneering, the
NACCP could lose its tax exempt status.
That, says Mr. Bond, would be
catastrophic. It would mean that people who give $100 and
who write it off their income taxes couldnt do it anymore.
He admits his speech was highly critical of the President, but
denies it was done in support of Sen. John Kerry (Sen. Kerry spoke
before the NAACP convention while Pres. Bush declined). It
is Orwellian to believe that criticism and partisanship are the
same thing. Its just unbelievable that criticizing the President
would bring the weight of the IRS down on you. Mr. Bond
believes the IRS investigation is intended to stop the NAACP from
registering black voters. The IRS denies this. [Tony Pugh, NAACP
Speech Prompts Tax Probe, Philadelphia Inquirer, Oct. 29, 2004,
The Mount Airy Church of God in
Christ, a black church in Mt. Airy, Pennsylvania, is also in hot
water with the IRS and may lose its tax-exempt status. On Oct.
24, following Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedys pro-Kerry
stump speech from the pulpit, Bishop Ernest Morris told the congregation,
I cant tell you who to vote for, but I can tell you
what my mama told me last week: Stay out the bushes.
The remarks prompted a complaint
to the IRS from Americans United for Separation of Church and
State, the fifth made this year against pro-Kerry activity in
black churches. Director Barry Lynn says Bishop Morriss
statement shows blatant disregard for federal tax law.
The law allows churches to hold
bipartisan candidate forums and distribute voter guides, and they
can invite candidates to speak as long as opponents get equal
time, and there are no demonstrations of approval or disapproval
of any candidate. Pastors may even endorse candidates, provided
they make it clear they are doing so as individuals and not on
behalf of the church, and not during worship services.
Melissa Rogers, professor of religion
and public policy at Wake Forest Divinity School in North Carolina
says Bishop Morris may have crossed the line. The IRS has
said its not just a flat-out vote for Kerry
but the use of code words that will get you into trouble,
she explains. He made a biased statement. Still, she
says the bishop may not need to worry, noting that the IRS is
pretty cautious about going after churches because the agency
doesnt want to be seen as a brigade of spies in the
pews. [Jim Remsen, IRS Asked to Probe Political Activity
at Mt. Airy Church, Philadelphia Inquirer, Oct. 29, 2004, p. B10.]
Like most men of his era, Winston
Churchill had realistic views on raceso realistic, a modern
biographer has decided to censor them. As Gretchen Rubin writes
in Forty Ways to Look at Winston Churchill:
To shield his reputation, this
account has downplayed Churchills deplorable attitudes toward
race. Churchill used opprobrious terms like blackamoor,
chink, wop, and baboo and distinguished between
the white race and others. [emphasis in the original] For example,
he wrote that at a September 1944 conference, he was glad
to record that the British Empire . . . was still
keeping its position, with a total population, including the Dominions
and Colonies, of only seventy million white people. He never
outgrew his views. His doctor recalled that in 1955, Churchill
asked whether blacks got measles . . . . When he was told
that there was a very high mortality among negroes from measles,
he growled, Well, there are plenty left. Theyve a
high rate of production. [Gretchen Rubin, Forty Ways
to Look at Winston Churchill, Ballantine Books (New York), 2003,
Last October, local authorities
arrested 25 illegal aliens working at Rapp Bros. Pallet Services,
Inc. in Williams Township, Pennsylvania. They charged the menall
from Mexico or Central Americanot with immigration violations,
but with identity theft and/or tampering with public records because
they used fake or stolen Social Security numbers to get jobs.
On Nov. 3, the men appeared before
Judge Leonard N. Zito to plead guilty and be sentenced. Prosecutor
Jay W. Jenkins asked for terms in the county jail, pointing out
that identity theft and tampering with public records are serious
crimes. Judge Zito agreed, but said the men apparently didnt
mean any harm. He then found the men guilty, but ordered them
released without punishment. Their crime was simply to go
to work, he says. In some ways, its a sad day
for this country. The men face deportation as criminal aliens,
but since they have been released, it is unlikely ICE will ever
find them. [Tyra Braden, More Than 2 Dozen Admit Working Illegally,
The Morning Call (Allentown, Pa.), Nov. 2, 2004.]
American Indian descendants of
chief Crazy Horse, who helped Sitting Bull defeat George Armstrong
Custer and his men at the Little Big Horn in 1876, are demanding
that a Paris strip club change its name out of respect for their
ancestor. The swanky Crazy Horse Paris club opened near the Champs-Elysées
in 1951 and is widely known for its risqué entertainment.
Crazy Horse monument
under construction in the Black Hills.
On Oct. 16, Alfred Red Cloud,
a member of the Oglala Sioux tribe, delivered a letter from the
tribe to the clubs owners, saying, The name is sacred
to our people. Nobody uses that name back homeeven our own
people. Im not trying to close the establishment down, I
just want the name changed. The letter, written by Harvey
White Woman, a descendant of Crazy Horse and the executor of his
estate, adds, I want the young people of my tribe to remember
him as a strong leader and warrior and not some nightclub in Paris.
[Crazy Horse Kin Want Club Renamed, AP, Oct. 17, 2004.]
When the 109th Congress convenes
next January it will include more non-whites than the previous
Congress. The Congressional Black Caucus will grow by three, to
40 members. Says Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland, I think
the caucus will play a major role and will be listened to very
carefully. The number of Hispanics in Congress will increase
by one, to 23. There will be three East Asians in the House, one
South Asian, and one Indian, Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma.
The Senate will have two Hispanics,
Democrat Ken Salazar of Colorado, who won the seat vacated by
Republican (and Indian) Ben Nighthorse Campbell, and Mel Martinez,
Republican of Florida. There hasnt been a Hispanic senator
since Joseph Manuel Montoya of New Mexico was defeated in 1976.
The incoming senator gaining the most national press attention
is Barack Obama of Illinois, the son of an African immigrant and
a white mother. Mr. Obama, the darling of the 2004 Democratic
convention, will become the first black male senator since Edward
Brooke of Massachusetts left in 1979. Elijah Cummings says Mr.
Obamas election is a tremendous victory for
black candidates, adding It shows that an African-American
who has the right kind of message and is bright and has a lot
on the ball can win in a situation where it is predominantly white.
The media are already raising the possibility that Mr. Obama will
appear on a national Democratic ticket, perhaps as early as 2008.
The next Senate will also include two returning Asians, Hawaii
senators Daniel Akaka and Daniel Inouye. [Jim Abrams, New Congress
to Look More Like Real America, AP, Nov. 5, 2004.]
The sole South Asian elected to
the House of Representatives is Piyush Bobby Jindal,
whose parents immigrated from the Punjab in 1970. Mr. Jindal ran
unsuccessfully for governor of Louisiana, but won a Louisiana
congressional seat in suburban New Orleans with a crushing 78
percent of the vote. Mr. Jindal graduated from Brown University
and was a Rhodes Scholar. Just 33 years old, he has had a meteoric
career, no doubt helped by the fact that he is a non-white Republican.
In Louisiana, he has been secretary of the states health
system, president of the state university system, and director
of a national commission to reform medical care for old people.
In 2001, he was an assistant secretary in the Department of Health
and Human Services, which made him the highest-ranking Asian Indian
in the US government. Like Barack Obama, Mr. Jindal is already
being touted as a rising star in national politics.
Mr. Jindals election was
cause for much celebration in his parents hometown of Sangrur.
Residents are said to have thronged the pharmacies operated by
his first cousins, Subhash Jindal and Harvinder Kumar. [Bobby
Jindal Wins Louisiana, Sify.com, Nov. 3, 2004. Town Erupts into
Joy as Bobby Romps Home, Sify.com, Nov. 4, 2004.]
Josaia Gucake, a Fijian, served
as a senator of his countrys Multicultural Party at a time
when non-native Indians dominated the government of the South
Pacific island nation. When native islanders staged a coup in
2000 and overthrew the government, Mr. Gucake feared he and his
family would be killed as race-traitors for having collaborated
with the Indians, so he fled to the United States with his extended
family, and became an illegal resident of suburban Seattle. Mr.
Gucake applied for political asylum in 2002, but was denied. His
appeal was denied in December 2003, and last month, federal agents
arrested him, his wife, and several of their siblings.
Media coverage of the story has
been typically maudlin. Mr. Gucake reportedly became a senior
pastor at Christ Tabernacle Church in Lynnwood, Washington, studied
to become a paralegal, and helped other Fijians with their immigration
paperwork. His wife Grace cared for old people. His nephew, Joe
Nawaciano, worked for a local charity. We do good things
for the community, he says. The children are heart-broken
at being separated from their parents while in custody, and at
the prospect of leaving school friends. The locals are, of course,
fond of their illegal neighborsThey are kind, gentle
and beautiful people, says Chris Kratz, a secretary at the
high school attended by the Gucakes eldest daughter Adiand
raised money to help with legal and moving expenses.
Immigration authorities held firm,
and deported the Gucakes on Nov. 2, or at least the ones they
could get their hands on. They sent back eight adults and five
children, including Mr. Gucake, his brother, and various cousins
and/or in-laws. Two adults, including the kindly Mrs. Gucake who
cared for old people, are on the lam.
As for Mr. Gucakes fears
for his safety back in Fiji, Nirmal Singh, a spokesman for the
US Embassy says he has nothing to worry about. There has
not been any politically motivated killing, he says, since
the military transferred power to a democratically-elected government.
Everything is back to normal. [Bill Sheets, Fijian
Families Face Deportation, The Herald (Everett, Wash.), Oct. 21,
2004. Bill Sheets, Fijians Lose Fight to Stay in US, The Herald,
Nov. 4, 2004.]
(Republican) Party Line
An AR reader recently wrote President
George Bush, to complain about plans to grant stealth amnesty
to millions of illegal immigrants. He received a polite reply
that included the following:
The President is committed
to keeping America and our borders safe. He opposes amnesty for
undocumented workers and believes that migration to the United
States should be legal, safe and orderly while addressing our
economic, security and humanitarian needs . . . .
Without jeopardizing the
livelihoods of American citizens or control over our borders,
we can make our immigration laws more rational and more humane.
For this reason, the President recently asked Congress to develop
legislation that would match willing foreign workers with willing
employers when no Americans can be found to fill the jobs . .
The Presidents proposal
would help deter illegal immigration by increasing enforcement
against employers who hire undocumented workers . . . .
President Bush respects
and values the role that immigrants continue to play in building
our Nation, and he believes this temporary worker program reflects
our countrys heritage as a welcoming society. If enacted
by the Congress, his proposal will strengthen our economy and
make our homeland more secure.
[Heidi Marquez, Special Assistant
to the President and Director of Presidential Correspondence,
Letter of June 28, 2004.]
On Oct. 22, 30 members of the
League of the South demonstrated outside the Montgomery, Alabama,
headquarters of Morris Deess Southern Poverty Law Center,
denouncing it as an anti-Southern hate group. They waved Confederate
flags and held up signs that called Mr. Dees a scalawag. They
also set up a toilet with a sign reading, Flush the SPLC.
Passersby honked and cheered.
A young Confederate
against the SPLC.
They hate everything that
has to do with the South and with Southern Culture. They hate
Christianity, says Robert B. Hays, director of the Leagues
South Carolina chapter. League member Jim Walters of Texas says
of the SPLC, I think theyre a group of race hustlers.
They are anti-Christian, anti-Southern, and anti-American.
[Crystal Bonvillian, SPLC Called Hate Institution,
Montgomery Advertiser, Oct. 23, 2004, p. 1B.]
Vicente Foxs biggest disappointment
during his term as president of Mexico was to see his plans for
a comprehensive immigration accord (read amnesty)
derailed by the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Mr. Fox hopes Pres.
Bushs reelection will get the amnesty ball rolling again.
After the election, Mr. Fox told the President that given
that neither of our countries will be in elections next
year, we have a year to get this accomplished, adding,
we have to be optimistic that we will take advantage of
this one-year window of opportunity we have.
Mr. Fox and his government were
to make the pitch for amnesty in mid-November when Secretary of
State Colin Powell, Homeland Secretary Tom Ridge, and several
other cabinet officers were in Mexico City. Mexican Interior Secretary
Santiago Creel recently hinted at what the Americans could expect
to hear, saying, Its absurd that (the United States)
is spending as much as its spending to stop immigration
flows that cant be stopped . . . .
The Americans will also hear about
Mexican unhappiness over Proposition 200 in Arizona (see article
on page 9), which the Mexican Foreign Relations Department charges
will foment racial discrimination and limit migrants
access to basic services like health and education. [Mexico
Seeks US Immigration Changes, AP, Nov. 6, 2004.]
The church of Our Lady Queen of
Angels, commonly called La Placita, in downtown Los
Angeles has historically been the heart of the citys Hispanic
population. In 1910, the Pope encouraged Mexicans to go there
for marriage and baptism because the church was run by Spanish
missionaries who were friendlier to them than American priests.
Father Luis Olivares, son of Mexican immigrants, took over the
church in the 1980s, and in 1985, he declared it a sanctuary for
illegal immigrants. At one time he was sheltering as many as 200
people a night. The influx of illegals led to fights, drug-taking,
and begging. The church is in the old part of Los Angeles, and
local shopkeepers depend on tourists. Crime kept the tourists
out, and business dropped 40 percent. Families fled the area.
In 1990 the church got new leaders
who stopped housing illegal immigrants in an effort to bring back
families. Tourism rebounded and merchants were happy. In 2001,
however, the parish went back to its old ways. In 2002, it hired
two activist priests, believers in liberation theology
who declared the church once more a sanctuary. Two hundred homeless
people now come to the church for food every night, and the priests
denounce government immigration raids, and sponsor petitions and
marches in favor of drivers licenses for illegals. Every
Sunday, 10,000 worshippers attend 11 masses. Between masses, there
is mariachi music for the faithful, and the priests exhort the
congregation to activism.
All this has sent the neighborhood
downhill again. In one 30-day period earlier this year, thugs
beat up two local employees, a handgun turned up in the plaza
outside the church, and a vagrant died nearby from a drug overdose.
The neighborhood is once again full of bums and their trash, and
the tourist trade has taken a dive. The new management is unrepentant:
While others are saying no to immigrants, lets have
compassion, says a spokesman. [Teresa Watanabe, Bringing
Back the Fire, Los Angeles Times, Nov. 3, 2004.]
• BACK TO TOP • •
| L E T T E R S
F R O M R E A D E R S
SirWhile John Hunt Morgans
plea in the previous issue for a feminine approach
to the problems we face raising families in contemporary America
is appealing, his examples reveal the difficulties of establishing
the communities he envisions. Orthodox Jews and Amish are animated
by deeply-felt religious faiths, as were the Mormons and, for
that matter, the Puritans. Members of sects believe that nothing
less than personal salvation is at stake in belonging to a community
and adhering to its rules. Do AR readers have the same level of
May I suggest a few more modest
strategies than Mr. Morgans? Establishing small private
schools free from political correctness seems to me a more realistic
goal than selling our homes and businesses, quitting our jobs,
and uprooting our families. But even this is beyond the means
and capacities of most of us. There are two alternatives: Lobby
your school board to requireor at least offerclasses
in European history. Given the biases of texts and teachers, its
pretty hopeless to try to improve the teaching of US History in
middle schools. There are, however, a number of excellent college-level
European history texts that could be used in high school.
Students would learn, of course,
about the great issues that divided Europeans in previous centuries,
and about the atrocities that accompanied European expansion,
such as slavery and the epidemics that killed millions of South
Americans. But they would also learn about the genius and energy
that enabled Europeans to dominate the world and to create societies
of greater wealth and freedom than any that had gone before. At
the same time, we dont have to depend on schools. We can
teach our children European history and culture on our own, on
weekends or during the summer.
It is refreshing to turn from
theory to practice, as Mr. Morgan asks us to do (though anyone
exposed to feminist theory might have reservations about labeling
approaches feminine or masculine). However,
if the practices arent, in fact, practical, we are doomed
only to more frustration and a new round of daydreams.
SirJohn Hunt Morgan has
the right idea in his article Building White Communities,
but needs to think even smaller. Perhaps he alludes to this when
he talks about a small zone. We can do something easier
than trying to colonize a small town. A handful of families could
buy houses in the same neighborhood. They would need to be within
sight of each other, or at the very least, within easy walking
distance. Ideally, this would mean houses on the same cul-de-sac
in a suburb, or a dead-end street in an older neighborhood.
This arrangement would meet the
most important goals of a white community. The members could establish
a consensus on limiting television and other activities. They
could nurture white identity by conscious selection of books,
music, games and other recreations. They could set up a home-schooling
network, whose burdens could be shared among five or six families.
Home schooling would mean greater choice of housing markets, because
high house prices are associated with better schools, and that
consideration would be removed.
By staying in the same metropolitan
area, families could preserve local ties, stay in the same job
market, and maintain contact with relatives. Local ties can be
very important for the self-employed.
Some might consider such a housing
cluster overly intimate and collectivist. However, I do not advocate
any mingling of finances or workjust schooling and social
Certainly, a small town of like-minded
whites would be better than a cluster of houses, but the latter
has more realistic start-up costs, and lower costs mean a better
chance of getting off the ground. Once a group were established,
it could have a snowball effect. Members could eventually exercise
political power in the same way minority groups do in big cities,
and a growing base population would make it easier eventually
to colonize an entire town.
JS, San Diego, Calif.
SirI greatly admire
Samuel Francis and the insights in his most recent monograph (see
review of Ethnopolitics, AR, Oct. 2004), but Im puzzled
by his obsession with the Republican Party. He writes as though
it could actually be salvaged for useful purposes, but its record
suggests otherwise. Can you name one socialist income transfer
program the Republicans have terminated? Didnt they just
enact the largest increase in entitlement spending
(Medicare prescription drug coverage) since 1965? Doesnt
the partys current leader want amnesty for illegal immigrants?
Isnt the Republican leadership just as enthusiastic about
affirmative action as the Democrats?
If we are to save our country
we must, at a minimum, do three things: abolish socialism, control
our borders, and limit the franchise to taxpayers. We could then
rely on natural selection to maintain a European majority. Perhaps
none of these things can be achieved by democratic means, but
surely no one thinks the Republicans are any more likely to attempt
them than the Democrats.
Isnt it time Republicans
went the way of the Whigs?
Michael Johnson, Houston, Tex.
• BACK TO TOP • •