Racial Differences -
Why They Matter
To refuse to acknowledge
racial differences is
to court disaster.
by William Robertson Boggs
The previous two issues of American Renaissance have taken up
what is probably the most forbidden subject in America today: racial differences.
The subject is forbidden for good reason. A frank acknowledgement of racial
differences destroys the basis for policies that are central to American
society. It may even destroy the basis for thinking that a multi-racial
society is desirable or even possible. The reasons for which racial differences
are suppressed are therefore precisely the ones for which they must
be recognized, for America's collective position on these questions
affects the nation's very soul.
Who Promotes Equality?
The idea of racial equality – even of racial equivalence – now
dominates public discourse in America, but who promotes it and why? The
most ruthless egalitarians are Marxists. They stand for an almost nihilistic
rejection of every distinction among people: rich and poor, stupid and
smart, male and female, ugly and beautiful, healthy and perverse. Despite
Marxism's collapse in the Soviet Union and in Eastern Europe, there is
still a small but influential contingent of American intellectuals who
believe that wealth is illegitimate, nationality is spurious, intelligence
is an accident of environment, and race is meaningless.
These ideas are now part of the air Americans breathe. They have enormous
built-in momentum and for most people it is easier to believe an old lie
than to understand a new truth.
However, an increasing number of Americans oppose the investigation of
racial differences because they are afraid of where it might lead. Herbert
Spencer wrote that the greatest of infidelities was the fear that the truth
may be bad; today one of the most common reasons for opposing discussion
of racial differences is the fear that the truth may be very bad indeed.
Many people believe
that the subject of racial differences is so disagreeable and sordid that
decent people should leave it alone.
The most simple and common form this infidelity takes is the view that
the subject of inherent racial differences is so disagreeable and sordid
that decent people should leave it alone. Today it is probably the people
who think this – the well – intentioned obscurantists – who are the greatest
obstacle to free discussion.
Nevertheless, in a society that prides itself on the First Amendment,
there should be a presumption at all times in favor of the truth. Democracy
is said to require the truth. Therefore, the questions that must
be answered are: What is the cost of concealing the truth, and what would
be the cost of revealing it? The price paid for the truth must be enormous
in order to justify ignorance and lies.
The Price of Ignorance
What is the price of refusing to acknowledge racial differences? It
is as simple and as staggering as this: America will never solve
its racial problems.
The most immediate problem is that blacks and, to a lesser extent, Hispanics
are failing in disproportionate numbers. If we are to believe that all
races are equally talented and hard-working then the failures of blacks
and Hispanics cannot be their own fault. They can only be the fault of
white people. Therefore every time a non-white takes drugs, goes on welfare
or commits a crime it is a silent indictment of "racist" white people,
past and present. It cannot be otherwise if all races have the same natural
Because our society has turned its back on the real causes of black failure,
it must devote itself to searching for and "eliminating" spurious causes.
If the theory is that blacks fail because they do not have proper "role
models" we hire unqualified blacks and put them in positions of authority.
If white society has destroyed black self-esteem we promote grandiose fantasies
about African history. If segregated schooling is bad for blacks we send
them to white schools. If we then find that black children get the worst
grades, we devalue the curriculum so everyone can get "A"s. If standardized
tests discriminate against blacks we do away with them. If "racist" employers
prefer not to hire blacks, we force employers to hire them. If a "racist"
society still manages to impoverish blacks we give them welfare and food
Young whites are
saddled with the burden of hereditary guilt.
When one grand project to lift up the black man mysteriously fails,
America embarks on yet another, but each successive failure is taken only
to confirm the terrible truth: Whites must be even more viciously racist
than anyone had thought possible. Therefore, each new experiment is launched
with more denunciations of white wickedness and appeals to white guilt.
No opportunity is lost to invoke the memory of slavery, Jim Crow, segregation,
and the lynch mob.
The effect on some whites of these constant denunciations of "racism"
is an exaggerated eagerness to submit to every black demand. At the least
threat of violence, college presidents promise to build blacks-only dormitories
and hire more black professors. Race riots are solemnly searched for "root
causes." Every silly version of African history and every improbable theory
of "black genocide" gets a respectful hearing. The media's willingness
to bow to film-maker Spike Lee's demand that he speak only to black reporters
is only the latest capitulation.
The other direct effect on whites is that they suffer the very racial
discrimination that civil rights laws were supposed to prohibit. The injustices
of affirmative action are visited on every new generation of white Americans
that applies to college or needs a job. The burden falls on young whites
who have grown up since the abolition of legal discrimination against blacks
and who by no moral legerdemain can be held responsible for whatever wrongs
may have been done to blacks in the past. The meekness with which young
whites accept discrimination and the diligence with which their elders
mete it out to them are among the wonders of our era.
Clearly, if it were recognized that inherent limitations rather than
white "racism" were the cause of black failure, young whites would not
be saddled with hereditary guilt. Today's orthodoxies require that they
be sacrificed to the dogma of equality, while the nation suffers from wasting
thousands of university places on blacks who will drop out and from hiring
untold numbers of blacks for jobs for which they are not qualified.
Finally, recognition of racial differences would be a vital first step
toward removing the debilitating burden of guilt that so many whites appear
to carry. Today's whites need feel no collective guilt because of the status
of blacks. Never in the history of the world has a group of blacks enjoyed
as high a level of material prosperity as do American blacks. It is a level
they would certainly never have achieved on their own.
As research by Linda Gottfredson at the University of Delaware suggests,
affirmative action may have pushed black Americans into even higher incomes
than would have been possible on ability alone. To blame whites for not
promoting blacks even further beyond their natural capacities is ridiculous.
The Effect on Blacks
And how does constant tub thumping about "racism" affect blacks? Naturally,
they begin to believe what they are told about white wickedness. Blacks
might have hated whites for their successes even if they were not always
told that whites are conspiring to oppress them; fulminations about imaginary
"racism" only make their hatred burn hotter.
The black rap singer Sister Souljah recently told blacks that they should
leave off killing each other and kill white people instead. She need not
have bothered. When blacks commit crimes of violence they already target
whites more than half the time (while whites choose black victims only
2.5 percent of the time). A black man is several hundred times more likely
to rape a white woman than a white man is to rape a black woman. According
to the statistics that are beginning to trickle in, more whites than blacks
are victims of "hate crimes."
Black hatred has even reached the following incongruous climax: One
third of all blacks think that the government – the same government that
devises one minority preference program after another – has invented AIDS
as part of an attempt to exterminate them. If ten million blacks actually
think that the government is trying to kill them, how are they likely to
feel about individual whites?
This march of folly cannot go on much longer. Even the white man has
a limited capacity for excusing the failures, hatreds, and delusions of
blacks. Even the most mulish liberals are beginning to realize two things:
First, no matter how many schemes they try, the racial achievement gap
only widens. Second, whites who tell blacks how evil whites are are not
repaid with the love and gratitude they expected. They feel the sting of
black venom along with everyone else.
Eventually, the dogma of racial equality will founder on the facts.
But until it does, our country will waste its wealth and its moral energy
on "solutions" to imaginary problems. Blacks will continue to blame their
failings on whites and to vent their hatred in increasingly terrible ways.
Whites will try to convince themselves that mounting black mayhem is "legitimate
rage" in the face of entrenched white racism. There can be no end to this
madness as long as our nation refuses to recognize the inherent, genetic
factors that limit black success.
Although a continuation of the vicious cycle in black-white relations
is the single most obvious cost of suppressing the truth about race, there
are other costs that may be even more important in the long term. Our current welfare
policies ensure that the unintelligent and irresponsible have more children
than the intelligent and responsible. This means that the average intelligence
of the American population – of all races – is falling, by about one IQ
point per generation, according to a very conservative estimate by Prof.
Richard Herrnstein of Harvard.
The way to stop the genetic decline is to reduce the number of births
to the unintelligent and incompetent. Any plan to do so would run headlong
into the fact that blacks are vastly overrepresented in the ranks of such
people (see book review, page 6). Racial differences are a serious obstacle
even to the study of the extent to which intelligence is inherited. It
stops any talk of eugenics dead in its tracks. If America is not to sink
slowly into genetic mediocrity, it will some day institute eugenic – or
at least anti-dysgenic-policies. This will not be possible until racial
differences in intelligence are understood and accepted.
Immigration policy is another area in which willful ignorance exacts a
high long-term cost. Although there are other decisive reasons to manage
immigration so as to ensure homogeneity rather than diversity, when the
United States accepts immigrants from Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean,
it is likely to be lowering the genetic quality of its population rather
The fact of racial
differences stops any talk of eugenics dead in its tracks.
Americans are notorious for short-term thinking. Our budget deficit
– a crushing financial burden that we seem happy to pass on to our children
– is an example of inexcusable irresponsibility. Current immigration and
demographic policies ensure even worse horrors. How long will it take before
an increasingly non-white, genetically disadvantaged population pushes
its way into every corner of the country? Do we not already glimpse the
future in the unspeakable practices that flourish among the underclasses?
As the ghetto and the barrio expand, they will cease to be unfortunate
enclaves; they will become the United States.
The price we pay for dismissing genetic and racial differences is therefore
immense. In the short-term, whites are punished by affirmative action policies
because of imaginary "racism," while black hatred grows with every year.
In the long term, we have set a course towards decline and barbarism.
"Racism" and Wounded Feelings
What, on the other hand, are the costs of recognizing racial differences?
Obscurantists generally cite two. The first is that public acknowledgement
that blacks are, on average, less intelligent than whites would justify
"racism." Since there is no telling where "racism" might lead-slavery?
genocide? Nazism? – society must be willing to lie in order to combat these
evils. The other is that public acceptance of racial differences would
be an intolerable psychological burden to blacks who are already burdened
by failure, "racism," and the legacy of slavery.
The "racism" argument is usually made by people who seem to think that
whites are only waiting for a pretext to wreak anti-black terror. History
suggests otherwise. For most of the period during which blacks and whites
have been in contact, whites have thought that blacks were inferior. This
never led to genocide. Nor does the belief that blacks are less intelligent
than whites necessarily lead to slavery. Slavery was abolished both
in the United States and in the British Empire by people who were convinced
that blacks were less intelligent than whites. There would be consequences
to the public acknowledgement of racial differences, but not the orgiastic
blood-letting that obscurantists predict.
Some misguided whites might use public recognition of racial differences
as a pretext to vent prejudices and hatreds of their own.
However, would they not be the same people who do so today? The tiny number
of whites who commit irrational acts of violence – and a great many other
people as well – are already convinced that blacks are, on average, less
intelligent than whites. People are driven to violence in part by the profound
frustration of believing that their nation is deliberately ignoring crucially
important facts about race. Public acceptance of these facts and sensible
policies based on them would relieve much of that frustration.
What might these policies be? First of all, quotas and set-asides would
not be defensible in a nation that accepted black limitations rather than
insisting on white wickedness. The immediate cost to blacks would therefore
be the end of unearned benefits. Theoretically, the abolition of affirmative
action might be the sole change in policy. The nation might reconcile itself
to the inevitability of a black/white performance gap and otherwise continue
However, it is likely that an acknowledgement of racial differences
and the genetic laws that underlie them would lead to a revision of immigration,
welfare, and even population policies. The consequences of dysgenics are
so stark that their public recognition would probably lead to some call
Immigrants would therefore be turned back. Babies likely to be public
charges would not be born. Would this be so horrible? In both cases, the
"victims" would be denied something to which they had no right. Society
would benefit immeasurably, and the United States could once more look
forward to progress rather than decline.
Blows to Self-Esteem
The other cost of recognizing racial differences is said to be the psychological
damage it would do to blacks, and to a lesser extent, to Hispanics. Strictly
speaking, that is their own concern. However, there is reason to think
that the truth would hardly be devastating. Each of us, for example, knows
people more competent and intelligent than himself. Are we "devastated"
by this? More to the point, there is evidence that the average North Asian
is more intelligent than the average Caucasian. If this were formally demonstrated
to be true, would white people be "devastated"?[N]
It is gratifying to think that one's group is best in everything but
this is hardly necessary for mental health. When they are not starving
or slaughtering each other, even Somalis and Ethiopians have managed to
rub along without obvious signs of pathology.
If anything, an acceptance of racial differences might be good for
blacks. The nineteenth century free person of color was certainly not "devastated"
by general assumptions about black inferiority. Not even slaves showed
signs of the degeneracy that freedom subsequently brought to some of their
If anything, an acceptance
of racial differences might be good for blacks.
Surely, the assumption of inferiority made it easier to accept
meager circumstances. Surely, a great deal of today's black hatred stems
from the belief that blacks are being cheated out of success that should
by rights be theirs. This is a dangerous, embittering state of mind. In
all of life's competitions, peace comes only with the maturity to recognize
that one has not been cheated by an inferior but bested by a superior.
It is therefore a terrible disservice to blacks to tell them that they
are the white man's equal. This only sets up expectations that are sure
to be disappointed and the resulting hatred could well be much more damaging
than would be the acceptance of genetic differences.
Moreover, unlike the search for imaginary "racism," which solves nothing,
there actually is a long-term solution for genetic deficiency. If they
wished, blacks could embark on an aggressive, sustained eugenics program
to narrow the intelligence gap with whites. It is frequently said that
the first step towards reform that an alcoholic must take is to recognize
his condition. If blacks are to improve, they too must recognize their
But what if blacks refused to accept the verdict of biology? What if they
found it impossible to live side by side with a race that was superior
both in numbers and in ability? Race is, after all, more than differences
in average intelligence. Like all other human groupings, races have many
deep-seated reasons to be conscious of how they differ from each other
and to wish to preserve those differences. Sometimes separation is best
for everyone. There is no theoretical or moral obstacle to separation,
and many a marriage has broken up over differences less remarkable than
those that distinguish the races.
The Price of Ignorance
The San Bruno jail, in San
Mateo County just south of San Francisco, is the oldest operating jail
in the state of California. It is also vastly overcrowded, so county authorities
plan to expand and modernize it. A prison reform group called the Center
on Juvenile and Criminal Justice has just released a report in which it
claims to show that greater prison capacity is not the right solution to
the crime problem.
The group's prize fact is
that in San Francisco, blacks are 16 times more likely than whites to be
imprisoned, and that though they are only 11 percent of the city's population,
they make up 50 percent of the prisoners. This apparently "proves" that
the criminal justice system is at fault and that prison expansion will
only make things worse. The solution, says the protest group, is to solve
"underlying social problems" rather than arrest malefactors.[Yumi Wilson,
Protest Over S.F. Jail Expansion, SF Chron, Oct. 14, 1992.]
Misguided thinking of this
kind is inevitable as long as our society refuses to accept racial differences.
If the races are equal, disproportionate arrest rates can only reflect
social ills. The search for imaginary evils must go on.
These, then, are the choices we face with respect to racial differences.
We can continue to build our nation upon a biological falsehood and condemn
future generations to permanent racial conflict and to the dysgenic consequences
of that falsehood. Or we can accept that the laws of heredity that we so
profitably apply to animals apply equally to ourselves. Only then will
we be able to look forward to progress rather than to retrogression.
Whatever we choose, the laws of nature will not change. Eventually,
our perverse decision to reverse the course of evolution will again be
reversed. A society that forces the competent to support a growing army
of incompetents will some day come crashing down, and in the ensuing chaos
it will be the fit who once again survive. "Drive out nature with a pitchfork,"
wrote the Roman satirist Juvenal, "and it will nevertheless return."
• • • BACK
TO TOP • • •
in His Own Words
The collected papers of a
warrior against dogma.
reviewed by Thomas Jackson
William Bradford Shockley was, at the time of his death in 1989, perhaps
the most reviled man in America. His public image, created by a relentlessly
hostile press, was that of a mad scientist, firmly in the service of evil.
His crime was not merely to have publicized unacceptable views on race,
intelligence, and genetics, but to have lent them the prestige of a Nobel
laureate in physics.
Shockley on Eugenics and Race, edited by Dr. Roger Pearson, is
a collection of Dr. Shockley's papers written from 1965 to 1975. This was
the very decade during which leftist-egalitarian thinking was tightening
its grip on the country. It is hazardous enough today to preach heresy
on the subject of race and intelligence, but to have done so when Dr. Shockley
was most active was to court assassination.
It was only due to Dr. Shockley's prominence as a scientist that he
was able to get a hearing at all. After receiving his Nobel prize in 1956
for leading the team that invented the transistor, Dr. Shockley founded
one of the first high-technology companies in Silicon Valley and was appointed
a professor at Stanford University. When, in 1965, he began to preach eugenic
heresies, his views hit the country like a bomb.
The Future of Man
Dr. Shockley's main concerns can be quickly summarized. The best available
evidence suggested to him that mankind faced a serious dysgenic threat.
The least intelligent were reproducing much more quickly than the most
intelligent, and this backward evolution threatened the very basis of civilization.
Even more provocative was his view that blacks were devolving more rapidly
than whites, since low-IQ blacks were outbreeding high-IQ blacks more rapidly
than low-IQ whites were outbreeding high-IQ whites. Furthermore, since
blacks were devolving from a lower average IQ to begin with, they faced
the prospect of serious, permanent degeneration.
It is important to note that Dr. Shockley never claimed that he had
proven that any of this was happening. All he asked was that the
nation seriously investigate questions of heredity, intelligence and demographic
trends. If Dr. Shockley were proven right then the nation could decide
what should be done. If he were shown to be wrong, he would offer a graceful
The forum in which Dr. Shockley most vigorously pressed his case for
research was the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). As a member of the
Academy he had the right to propose research projects and he did so every
year from 1967 to 1972. Some of the most interesting papers in this collection
are proposals to the NAS.
It is not hard to imagine the reception they received. As Prof. Arthur
Jensen of the University of California at Berkeley points out in his preface
to this book, Dr. Shockley was not a diplomat. Both in speech and in writing
his aim was precision, rather than what we today call "sensitivity."
In his second research proposal to the Academy he urged it to "inquire
into ways to determine how many probable misfits regardless of race will
be born into our potentially great society as a result of present population
patterns." In the same proposal he tackled the race question head-on, pointing
out that to blame all the failures of black people on racism was a misdiagnosis
of the problem. "I sincerely and thoughtfully believe," he wrote, "that
my current attempts to demonstrate that American Negro shortcomings are
preponderantly hereditary is the action most likely to reduce Negro agony
in the future." In other words, if dysgenics were the problem, it could
be solved through eugenics.
This sort of thing was much too racy for the NAS and it turned down
Dr. Shockley's proposals year after year. Eventually, the great physicist
lost patience. He had repeatedly warned the Academy that if differential
birth rates really had thrown evolution into reverse, it was a catastrophe
that required immediate attention. In his last proposal to the NAS in 1972,
he called the Academy's inaction "the most serious and obvious dereliction
of intellectual responsibility in the history of science."
How does a man with
a rigorously scientific mind approach subjects that are usually governed
by pure emotion?
It is clear from his papers that for Dr. Shockley, it was the sacred
duty of scientists to search for the truth no matter how painful the truth
might be. He often told his fellow scientists that "the courage to doubt
in the face of the desire to believe is the true mark of the scientist"
and reminded them of the moral obligation to think. Many of Dr.
Shockley's colleagues did think, and privately encouraged him, but only
a few were willing to lend him public support.
As Dr. Pearson points out in his introduction to this collection, Dr.
Shockley knew that research of the kind he thought vital to the nation's
future would never be possible if the media persisted in calling it "fascist"
and "Nazi." As he found himself spending more and more time fending off
charges of "racism," he began blaming "inverted liberals" who supported
"unsearch" rather than research. He feared that those who thought they
were helping blacks by opposing race-related research were the worst culprits.
"If such effects [dysgenic trends among blacks] are occurring and if entrenched
dogmatism is blocking their discovery," he wrote, "then the consequence
may be a cruel form of genetic enslavement . . . ."
Dr. Shockley never made formal policy proposals, but some of the "thought
experiments" he suggested in his papers come very close. The best known
was the $1,000 Bonus Proposal. Anyone of childbearing age would be offered
$1,000 for every IQ point under 100 if he agreed to be sterilized. Dr.
Shockley even suggested that for people too stupid to learn about the bonus,
"bounty hunters" could be rewarded for calling it to their attention.
The Deci-Child Certificate Plan is less well known. First, all women
would be made sterile at an early age by contraceptive implant. At the
same time, each woman would be issued a number of deci-child certificates,
according to the average number of children society had determined would
be best for the country. If that number were 2.2 per woman, then all women
would be issued 22 deci-child certificates.
A married woman would be able to turn in ten certificates to have the
implant removed for long enough to have one child. She could turn in ten
more if she wanted another child. Women who did not want to have children
could sell their certificates on the open market, so if a woman wanted
five children she would have to buy extra certificates. If a woman were
sure she was going to be a nun she could sell her certificates as soon
as they were issued. Dr. Shockley thought that under such a plan only people
who wanted and could afford them would have children.
The Scientific Mind
The papers in this book were not written for publication in a single
volume so they sometimes cover the same ground. This can be irritating,
but it does highlight the ideas that Dr. Shockley himself thought vital.
At the same time, one of the most edifying aspects of reading these
papers is to see how a man with a rigorously scientific mind approached
subjects that are usually governed by pure emotion. Often he stated the
reasons for his views as a series of postulates, and whenever he took a
position he gave clear reasons for it. But even when he was not being explicitly
scientific, his formulations were often much more provocative than anything
ordinarily found in the social sciences.
"Nature," he wrote, "has color-coded groups of individuals so that statistically
reliable predictions of their adaptability to intellectually rewarding
and effective lives can easily be made and profitably be used by the pragmatic
man-in-the-street." In other words, judgments based on race are meaningful,
and it would be foolish not to make them.
On eugenics, he wrote: "To me, it seems immoral not to view with concern,
and perhaps not to try to prevent the birth of human beings . . . forced
by the improvidence of their mothers and the obtuseness of society to emerge
into the world . . . so disadvantaged by an unfair shake from a badly loaded
parental genetic dice cup."
Finally, even though he was an atheist, Dr. Shockley had a conception
of the purpose of life that he recommended to believers and agnostics as
well: "During the last rational five minutes of my life, . . . I hope to
consider that by demanding objective inquiry and open discussion of human
quality problems I have used my capacities in keeping with the objective
. . . of conferring greatest benefit on humanity."
Dr. Shockley believed that his eugenics work was much more important
than the discovery of the transistor. As he explained,
without a certain level of human intelligence, there could be no transistors
or much else, for that matter. This collection of Dr. Shockley's papers
gives us more than enough to conclude that his last five rational minutes
were probably just as he had hoped they would be.
Shockley on Eugenics and Race is available to readers of American
Renaissance at a special offer of $14.50 plus $1.50 for postage. Please
write to Scott-Townsend Publishers, Box 34070, N.W., Washington, DC 20043.
Telephone orders: (703) 442-8010.
• • • BACK
TO TOP • • •
O Tempora, O Mores!
What is This?
is the shape of the third congressional district of Florida. Why does it
make the original gerrymander look neat and compact? Because it was the
only way to draw a district that would give non-whites a secure majority
so that they could elect a non-white Congressman.
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was originally written to forbid local
practices that were thought to prevent non-whites from voting. Now it has
been reinterpreted to require crazy-quilt districts that will ensure that
more blacks and Hispanics go to Congress. There are now districts all over
the country that are as misshapen as this one. All the old, meaningful
borders like county, city, and school district lines are ignored. Voters
have race in common and not much else.
This is a curious system for a country that is supposed to be trying
to make race irrelevant. The next logical step would be to do away with
districts entirely and simply set aside 12 percent of the seats in Congress
for blacks, eight percent for Hispanics, etc. Of course, if the theory
is that blacks can be properly represented only by blacks, and Hispanics
by Hispanics, perhaps they should be governed, taught, and policed only
by people of their own race as well. Maybe they would even prever that
their neighbors be the same race as themselves. The new voting districts
are a virtual admission that race is a category that matters. It is a pity
that this sort of enlightenment is so rare in government.
Hated for their Virtues
Paraguay is one of the poorest countries in South America, and its poorest
region is called the Chaco. It is a great plain of scrub forest that takes
up more than half of the country's area but contains only two percent of
its population. No one seems to be able to make anything of the Chaco-no
one, that is, except twelve thousand Mennonites descended from small groups
that first immigrated in 1927 and 1930.
The Mennonites trace their religious roots to the early 16th century
in Switzerland and today's Paraguay Mennonites still speak a Low German
dialect called Plattdeutsch. In the Chaco, Mennonites maintain their own
roads, electric power system, schools, hospital, and telephone system.
They even issue their own traffic tickets and run a small jail. They do
all this because the corrupt, ineffective government of Paraguay is incapable
of doing it for them. As one Mennonite explains, "If we waited for the
Paraguyan government, poor things, we'd be dead."
the same time, the Mennonites have thrived on unproductive land that no
one else could cultivate. They produce half the country's milk and nearly
all of its peanuts. Thousands of Indians have come to work for the Mennonites,
who have taught them carpentry and farming, and given them houses with
running water and electricity.
Since the Mennonites are white, their prosperity is said to be due to
"exploitation." In Asuncion, the capital, officials threaten to crack down
on their "state within a state." The Indians who work for Mennonites, and
who live far better than they could if there had been no Mennonites, complain
that they do not live well enough.[Sandra Dibble, "Paraguay: Plotting a
New Course," National Geographic, Aug, 1992.]
This is a particularly clear examples of something that happens all
over the world. An unproductive group benefits enormously from the presence
of a productive group. The unproductive then complain that differences
in achievement are due to "exploitation."
Detroit on Drugs
The Detroit Urban League has just completed a survey of Detroit boys
and girls between the ages of 11 and 18. It found that 30 percent have
a family member who sells drugs, and 41 percent know someone at school
who sells drugs. Fifty-one percent said it would take less than five minutes
to find someone from whom to buy drugs, and 70 percent said it would take
less than 15 minutes.
Despite the fact that virtually everyone these young people knew in
the drug business is black, nearly half said they thought drugs were part
of a white plot to exterminate blacks.[Patricia Chargot, Survey finds some
youths see drugs as plot, Detroit Free Press, 9/29/92, p. 3A.]
Sir Cyril Burt (1883-1971) was a pioneering student of the heritability
of intelligence. He did some of the first studies of the intelligence of
twins, and concluded that about 70 percent of the differences between individual
IQ scores are due to heredity. Burt was one of the most admired psychologists
of his day, but his reputation has since suffered greatly.
Shortly after his death, Burt's integrity was attacked by scientists
who promoted the view that intelligence is influenced much more by environment
than by genes. They claimed that Burt faked his twin data and that two
assistants whom he had said helped him gather data never existed. The media,
always eager to discredit hereditarian views, gave these accusations banner
headlines. In 1980, the British Psychological Society endorsed the charges
and formally denounced one of its most distinguished members. Today, most
people who know Burt's name at all know only that he was a "fraud."
In fact, in the last several years, Burt has been vindicated. The two
assistants have been found, and the "faked" data were perfectly good. Had
he been alive when the accusations were made, he could have easily refuted
them. The smear campaign got as far as it did because Burt was a prickly
man who worked alone. No other scientists knew his habits well enough to
defend him. It is only now, after careful investigation, that the attacks
against him have been shown to be reckless and ideological. Two books,
The Burt Affair (1989) and Science, Ideology and the Media (1991)
show that if there was fraud, it was on the part of Burt's accusers. In
fact it appears that one of his most vociferous accusers may have destroyed
some of Burt's unpublished work.
The media have, of course, been quiet about the new findings. However,
it is the British Psychological Society that has perhaps behaved most disgracefully.
In 1980, it happily kicked the corpse and pronounced Burt a fraud. This
year, in response to a petition from members that it acknowledge its error
of 12 years ago, it announced primly that it should not "attempt to pass
corporate judgment on the alleged misconduct of any member now deceased."[Robert
Joynson, "The Burt Business," Times Literary Supplement, 9/4/92.]
Mexico Beyond Reproach
Although the American media make an enormous fuss every time the Immigration
and Naturalization Service mistreats an illegal immigrant, they have very
little to say about the mistreatment of Americans at the hands of Mexicans.
For example, the State Department says it knows of 27 cases in 1991 of
torture or other mistreatment of U.S. citizens by Mexican officials, but
practically no one has heard of this.
Recently there has also been a spate of mysterious "suicides" by Americans
in Mexican jails. In August, William Yost is said to have shot himself
in the head after 36 hours of Mexican police custody. No one seems to be
able to explain how he got his hands on a gun.
Another U.S. citizen, Mario Amada, is said to have hanged himself in
jail. Mr. Amado's brother hired a pathologist to examine the corpse and
learned that Mr. Amado appears to have been beaten so severely just before
he died that he would have been incapable of hanging himself.
In the most gruesome case of all, the body of a man who appears to have
been a U.S. citizen was found in July tied to a tree by his neck and hands,
with one leg amputated and his intestines torn out of his body. Mexican
police gamely called this a suicide as well and would have closed the case
if a group called the Minnesota Lawyers Human Rights Committee had not
protested. This incident, too, has been scarcely reported in America, though
it is easy to imagine how the press would roar if American police found
a dead Mexican in such a state and called it a suicide.
The U.S. government appears to be particularly reluctant to criticize
Mexico at this time because it does not want to jeopardize progress on
the free-trade agreement.[Katherine Ellison, "Mysterious 'Suicides'" Houston
A Nation of Catechumens
For the first time
since the Council of Trent in 1566, the Catholic Church has undertaken
a thorough revision of its catechism. The 676-page document outlines Church
policy on everything from the Trinity to drug trafficking. Most of the
Church's well-known stands on such things as divorce, abortion and homosexuality
are unchanged. However, the Church now directs its members to take the
following position on an issue about which previous catechisms have been
"Better-off nations are obliged to welcome, within their capacities,
the foreigner in search of security and vital resources that he cannot
find in his country of origin. Public authorities will ensure respect of
the natural law that places the guest under the protection of those who
receive him."["Revising Catholicism became a matter of faith, Toronto Globe
and Mail, 11/17/92, p. 1.]
In an unrelated development, in late October, Pope John Paul II asked
American Indians to forgive white people for the 500 years of injustices
that followed the arrival of Columbus. He said that whites must never
stop asking forgiveness from blacks and Indians for the sins of the
Brain Size and Intelligence
J. Philippe Rushton of the University of Ontario is back in the news
on account of his race-related research. In his latest paper, he analyzes
the head sizes of 6,325 U.S. soldiers whose crania were measured so they
could be fitted with helmets. The data accord with Prof. Rushton's findings
to date: Asians have larger heads in relation to body size than whites
do, and whites have
larger heads than blacks. He also found that officers have larger heads
(and therefore larger brains) than enlisted men and that men have proportionately
larger brains than women.
Last summer, the prestigious British journal, Science, not only
rejected Prof. Rushton's findings but published an article by its editor
saying that "unpalatable" and "politically incorrect" research must meet
higher standards than usual. It is remarkable that Science should
admit that political considerations influence what it publishes. It has
since received a flood of letters in support of Prof. Rushton, some of
which it has grudgingly published. "I'm getting an incredible amount of
support," says the professor, who has in the past had to wage his intellectual
battles virtually unaided.[Shelley Page, "Race and Intelligence: the debate
rages," Vancouver Sun, 11/18/92, p. A9.]
Last summer in the Crown Heights section of Brooklyn, blacks rioted
because a Hasidic Jew killed a seven-year-old black boy in a traffic accident.
As part of the anti-Jewish violence, a gang of a dozen or so young blacks
surrounded Yankel Rosenbaum and beat and stabbed him to death. Lemrick
Nelson, age 17, was charged with the murder after police found him with
a bloody knife. He admitted to the killing, and Mr. Rosenbaum identified
him as his attacker before he died. DNA tests showed that the blood on
the knife was probably Mr. Rosenbaum's.
At the trial, Mr. Nelson's lawyer argued that his client had been framed
by corrupt police. The jury of six blacks, four Hispanics and two whites
appear to have believed him. On October 29th, Lemrick Nelson was found
innocent and set free.[Oakland Tribune, Black teenager acquitted in death
of Jewish student, 10/30/92, p. A15.] Following his acquittal, Mr. Nelson
was feted by jurors at a dinner hosted by the defense lawyer.[Eric Briendel,
Race and Riots in New York, WSJ, 11/18/92.]
More Money for Minorities
The Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) has announced
a new plan to help non-whites buy houses. The program, called FannieNeighbors,
will allow applicants to make down payments as small as five percent, will
reduce closing costs, and will waive a number of standard credit requirements.
These benefits will be available to first-time home buyers who live in
Census Bureau districts that are at least 50 percent non-white.[New Fannie
Mae program to boost minority loans, Houston Chronicle, Oct. 20, 1992,
Sensitivity at GWU
On November second, classes were canceled at George Washington University
so thousands of students and faculty could attend a discussion on campus
racism. They heard the university's president, Stephen Trachtenberg, explain
that the children's rhyme, "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words
will never hurt me," is wrong. "The truth," said Mr. Trachtenberg, "is
really the opposite. A broken bone, however painful, can mend and be over
and done with. . . . A really ugly word . . . leaves a wound and then a
scar that endures for years and even decades." (Was Mr. Trachtenberg really
saying that name calling was worse than physical assault?)
Finally, the culprit himself, a senior named Michael Musante, was brought
out for an auto-da-fe. "I feel more ashamed than I ever have in
my brief life," he said; "[H]elp me to learn to grow." Mr. Musante's crime?
Someone reported that he had once, in private, referred to another student
as "that nigger."[Brooks Masters, "GWU seeks unity in wake of racist remark,"
Wash Post, Nov. 3, 1992, p. B1.]
Although the city does not like to publicize the fact for fear of frightening
away tourists, Miami has the highest crime rate in the country. It has
become increasingly common for robbers to attack motorists, either when
they are stopped at traffic lights or when they are getting in or out of
Late in October, Miami had just the sort of crime the tourism industry
most dreads. Renate Morlock, a German tourist, had just gotten into her
car after a meal at McDonald's when robbers grabbed her purse. Although
she did not resist, one of the robbers shot her and she is paralyzed from
the waist down. This sort of thing does not happen in Europe, and Mrs.
Morlock's story was big news in Germany.
One aspect of how the story was covered was probably not reported in Germany.
Mrs. Morlock's husband and two daughters witnessed the attack and got a
good look at the robbers and the car they were driving. This is how the
newspapers described the car: "a run-down 1978-1979 cream or white station
wagon with wood paneling, damage to the left rear door and a hubcap missing
on the left side." The suspects? As has become common in Miami, since any
description of the perpetrators would have to include race, the newspapers
did not describe them at all.[Gail Epstein, "Thief's shot paralyzes tourist,"
Miami Herald, 10/28/92, p. 1B.]
The White Man's Burden
Germans protesting against immigrants are ordinarily portrayed in the
American press as bigoted boors. Only rarely do we learn just what they
are opposing. Under current immigration rules, anyone who shows up in Germany
can claim to be a political refugee. Though fewer than five percent of
people who make the claim are eventually found to be refugees, all are
entitled to a hearing process that can last as long as three years. During
that period, claimants get free housing, education, and health benefits.
On top of that, a family of four gets a stipend of about $10,000 a year.
By contrast, the average eastern German, where the unemployment rate is
17 percent, makes $7,000 a year, out of which he must pay for his own housing.
a newcomer from Sri Lanka, represents everything that the Germans find
intolerable. In Sri Lanka, the average annual income is equal to what "refugees"
to Germany are paid every two weeks. Vijay figures he has it made. "If
I come to Germany and save just half of the money refugees receive, even
if I am forced to go back I will return to Sri Lanka a rich man."[Frank
Viviano, "Why German Resentment of Refugees is So High," Oct. 20, 1992.]
Spike Lee on AIDS
Film director Spike Lee has joined Bill Cosby among the ranks of prominent
blacks who think that whites developped AIDS in order to exterminate blacks.
This is what he wrote in the Nov. 1992 issue of Rolling Stone:
"I'm convinced AIDS is a government-engineered disease. They got one
thing wrong, they never realized it couldn't just be contained to the groups
it was intended to wipe out. So, now it's a national priority. Exactly
like drugs when they escaped the urban centers into white suburbia."[Janet
Braunstein, "Spike's Message Obscured," Detroit Free Press, Nov. 9, 1992,
Genes and Crime
National Research Council has just released a report, "Understanding and
Preventing Violence," in which it recommends investigation into the genetic
causes of violence. It points out that many future criminals are already
markedly anti-social by age eight.
The Dread Hand of Racism
A recent report has found that many things are getting worse for children
in the state of Michigan. In just ten years all the following indices of
youthful misery have gone up: the teen-age birth rate by 22.5 percent,
the teen-age violent death rate by 27.6 percent, and the child poverty
rate by 36.7 percent. In the past decade, the number of children on food
stamps has risen by an astonishing
Richard Lerner, the director of the Institute for Children, Youth and
Families at Michigan State University, was involved in conducting the study.
He points out that blacks suffer from all these ailments more than whites.
A black child is nearly four times more likely to be in poverty than a
white, for example, though he did not elaborate on how much likely a black
teen-ager was to have a baby or to be murdered.
"And why don't kids have equal life chances?" asks Mr. Lerner. He supplies
the answer in one word: "Racism."[Kenneth Cole, "Report: Minority Kids
Shortchanged," Detroit News, Nov. 18, 1992, p. B1.]
Devaluing America's Heritage
Robert Adams has been Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution since
1984, and has been unflagging in his attempts to correct "Eurocentric bias."
He has shut down several exhibits at the Museum of Natural History on the
advice of Helen Maddox, "Queen Mother" of Tu-Wa-Moja, an afrocentric study
group. The Queen Mother explained to him that displays of the primitive
practices of non-whites were "racist." The museum now has "dilemma labels"
on many of the exhibits that are still open, which apologize for biases
Under Mr. Adams, American Indians are likely to get their own museum.
According to the Smithsonian, the museum's theme will be that Indian cultures
have "intrinsic validity and equality with other cultural experiences."
Mr. Adams has also launched plans to dismantle the Arts and Industries
Museum which, in 1881, was the first museum to be founded by the Smithsonian.
If plans go through, the building will be turned into the National African-American
Mr. Adams even has designs on the National Air and Space Museum, which
gets more visitors than virtually any other musuem in the world and is
considered one of the Smithsonian's greatest successes. Apparently its
sin is that it is a tribute to American bravery and ingenuity. Henceforth,
the Smithsonian will take "less of a celebratory approach." Mr. Adams prefers
to examine airplanes as "instruments of destruction," and has planned an
exhibit entitled "From Guernica to Hiroshima."[Matthew Hoffman, "Smithsonian
caretaker a fox guarding the hen house," Detroit News, Oct. 16, 1992, p.
• • • BACK
TO TOP • • •
E T T E R S F R O M R E A D E
Sir – I was worry to learn of the boy in Brooklyn (AR, Dec. 1992)
who got tapeworm because a Hispanic nanny's personal hygiene was so bad
she could not keep traces of her own feces out of the boy's food.
All I can say is "Welcome to the wonderful world of cultural enrichment."
California has already been well enriched in this way. We have
had hundreds of cases of tapeworms attacking the brain and there have even
been a few deaths. In almost all instances the victims have been
recent immigrants from tapeworm infested Latin American countries.
Three years ago, California formally classified tapeworm as a public health
threat, and now follows a strict reporting procedure for all cases.
Leon Hunsinger, Santa Babara, Cal.
Sir – Does AR take a particular pride in knocking the props out
from under every single liberal belief? Although I had never thought
about it very carefully, I had always believed that Head Start did
some lasting good. After all, the media generally refer to it as
a "proven program" that has been starved of funds by mean-spirited Republicans.
In fact, until reading your article, I had never heard the view
that Head Start has no lasting effect, but the studies you mentioned in
the November issue sound convincing.
Is Head Start just one more graven image with feet of clay? I
am saddened by the thought, and perhaps in my sadness lies a clue as to
why the myth will not die. People so badly want to be able to help
others that they ignore evidence that suggests some people cannot be helped.
Susan Grimes, Latrobe, Penn.
Sir – I would like you to know that I very much appreciate American
Renaissance. However, it is all very well to write about what
is happening to our race, but what about doing something for it?
In 1900, 30 percent of the world's population was white, and now the number
is 15 percent. Fewer than 10 percent of the babies born in the world
are now white. If this keeps up, we will lose by default.
I know many people who "can't afford" to have more than one or two children.
They plan to send them to the best colleges so they can become the best
doctors, lawyers, or accountants. But for whom will they be the best
doctors and lawyers, or accountants? Mexicans and Haitians are not
going to pay $100 an hour to have an accountant figure their tax returns.
I am not just speaking idly. My wife and I are expecting our seventh
child within the next few weeks. We teach our children at home ,
so we can be sure of what they are being taught. If any of your readers
have questions about looking after large families (it's a lot easier than
you think) we would be glad to help.
Remember, even if immigration were stopped tomorrow (and we know that
will not happen) there will be little progress unless we have more children
and rear them to think like the Americans of yesteryear.
Marc Mabrito, Spring Branch, Tex.
Sir – On the strength of Thomas Jackson's review in the December issue,
I have brought and read Tomislav Sunic's Against Democracy and Equality.
It is just as fascinating as Mr. Jackson suggests.
According to Dr. Sunic, the works of the New Right's most important
spokesman, Alain de Benoist, have been translated into German, Dutch, Italian,
and Spanish – but not English. Surely, if there are enough
interested readers in Holland to justify translation, there are enough
in Britain and the United States. Perhaps AR could arrange
for translations of at least some of Mr. de Benoist's articles.
Name withheld, Arlington, Va.
Sir – The federal Office of Civil Rights has cleared our school district
(East Allen County Schools) of "racism" charges brought last year by a
group of black parents. The blacks claimed that when district lines
were redrawn in 1987 it increased segregation. The feds found no
evidence for that. Blacks also claimed that schools with large numbers
of blacks were deliberately left in poor repair. The feds found that
those schools had the most repair money spent on them.
Other accusations were that black students were disciplined more often
than whites and that not enough college-prep courses were offered at schools
with large numbers of blacks. The feds found that, yes, blacks were
more likely to be disciplined than whites, but a careful study of each
case found that punishment was fair, appropriate and deserved. Nor
were blacks offered fewer college-prep courses. In short, even the
people from the Office of Civil Rights, who are likely to find "racism"
just about anywhere, decided that every one of the charges was unfounded.
The investigation was embarrassing for our schools, and teachers and
administrators spent a lot of unpaid time answering questions and gathering
records. What has our school superintendent decided to do now that
the charges are shown to be false? He says the accusations show we
need to "improve our image"! He has approved multicultural education
and has started holding cultural diversity workshops!
Florence Haines, For Wayne, Ind.
• • • BACK
TO TOP • • •