The Origins of the White
the destiny of Western Man.
by Edwin Clark
The first part of this article described the distinctive characteristics
of the ancient Indo-Europeans, which clearly prefigure those of contemporary
Western Man. Mr. Clark noted there are three central traits of the Aryans
that continue to shape Western Civilization. The first is a sense of an
immutable Cosmic Order, which probably gave rise to the concepts of fate
and universal morality, and also prompted scientific inquiry. The second
is the restless dynamism that resulted in conquest, empire-building, and
the principles of individual liberty. In this concluding section, Mr. Clark
sets forth another fundamental Indo-European trait, and describes how these
ancient characteristics must be put to the service of contemporary European
he third important characteristic is individuality. Indo-Europeans from
their earliest history show signs of greater variation, in both physical
appearance and individual behavior, than most other races. Some physical
anthropologists have noted that there is more variety among Europeans than
among Asiatics and Negroes. Whites exhibit more variation in skin pigmentation,
hair and eye color, height, and facial features than Mongolians or Negroes,
and this physical differentiation is paralleled and perhaps causally related
to their behavioral differentiation as individuals, a trait that is closely
related to their dynamism as a race.
individuation in the sense I am using it is very different from "individualism,"
a modern ideology that may have been encouraged by racial individuation
but is not the same thing. Individualism as an ideology is the belief that
the individual is sovereign, that the individual man is self-sufficient,
exists only for himself and his interests, and has claims against the group
(society, the race, the nation, class, religion, etc.) This ideology is
in fact subversive of group loyalty and especially of racial consciousness
and allegiances, and while people with a high degree of individuality may
find it attractive, they need to remember that they, like every other human
being, exist because of and within a group – the family and the community,
as well as larger groups like nation, cult, class, and race.
Early Aryans, despite their tendency to individuate, were highly conscious
of themselves as a distinct group. Both the Greeks and the Romans looked
upon everyone else as "barbarians," and we have already seen the high degree
of racial consciousness that pertained among the Indo-Aryans. Aryans were
also closely attached to family units, not only the nuclear family but
also the clans in which their society was organized, and clan warfare in
Ireland and Scotland, family-based political factionalism among the Romans,
and conflicts among the many independent city-states of ancient Greece
were notorious as forces that tended to keep these populations divided.
It was groups like race, nationality, clan, community, class, and family
that established the social fabric of early Aryan life, and individualism
in the modern sense of a John Stuart Mill or Ayn Rand – as a belief that
justifies the individual neglecting or betraying his social bonds – did
European man has
an ineradi- cable tendency to individualize himself through a singular
person- ality, achieve- ments, and thoughts.
Nevertheless, the Aryans exhibited a high degree of individuation, and
this is reflected in their mythology as well as in their art. The gods
and heroes of the Greeks and the Norsemen have far more distinctive personalities
than such Egyptian deities as Isis and Osiris, and the stories the Greeks
and Norsemen told about their gods and heroes – the embittered and wrathful
Achilles and the wily Odysseus, the imperious Zeus and the dashing Apollo,
the angry Ares and the comic lame god Hephaestus, the jealous Hera and
the lascivious Aphrodite – are far richer than the thin tales of Egypt
and Babylonia. There is also a greater emotional and narrative range –
adventure, humor, love, revenge, divine punishment, and even tragic failure
– in the Greek myths than in the stories of the Old Testament, which mainly
illustrate man's obedience or disobedience to God and His laws.
With few exceptions, this range is also reflected in the art of the
early Aryans in Europe – in the highly individuated and expressive statuary
of the Greeks, as compared to the colossal but blank-faced images of the
Egyptian pharaohs and Middle Eastern potentates- -as well as in the highly
developed literary and art forms of the later Europeans. European art and
literature, far more than those of other peoples, give us the character,
the individually distinctive human being, full of contradictory impulses
but driven by some more than by others, characters we see in Greek drama,
Homeric epic, Shakespearean plays, and the modern novel. Portraiture as
well as statuary, dwelling on the individual external features to reveal
the internal individual character, reflect much of the same trait, unlike
the art forms of other races. Moreover, only in Western cultures has the
lone hero become an ideal figure – not only the adventurer like Hercules
or Theseus but also the lone explorer, the lone scientist, the lone scholar,
thinker, poet, writer, often battling against daunting odds, persecution,
or neglect. When Europeans invent things, they usually remember and honor
the individuals who did it – the inventors who made the Industrial Revolution
possible and those like Samuel Morse, Alexander Graham Bell, Thomas Edison,
the Wright brothers, and Henry Ford, who created the basic technologies
of modern civilization working alone in their attics and basements.
Even the modern comic book and film and television heroes of popular
culture reveal this inherent Aryan tendency to go it alone, in the Lone
Ranger, Superman and Batman, the heroes created by John Wayne and Gary
Cooper, as do the myths of the American West, whether fictional, in James
Fenimore Cooper's Natty Bumppo, or real in Daniel Boone, David Crockett,
Wild Bill Hickock, and Wyatt Earp. The lone Aryan hero, like Walt Disney's
Davy Crockett, lives by the motto, "Be sure you're right, then go ahead,"
a counsel of individuality, and then proceeds to fight legions of dark-looking
badmen (whose black hats may symbolize non-Aryan origins), Indians, accented
foreigners, or other suspiciously non-Aryan types. His ancestors Siegfried
and Theseus fought and conquered the Nibelungs and the Minotaur of non-Aryan
Crete in the same way.
But the Aryan
hero also pays a price for his heroic individuality. He stands as the perpetual
outsider, whose distinctiveness usually forbids him from enjoying a normal
life with wife and children or living to a ripe old age, and eventually,
in the authentic myths as opposed to TV drama, he is slain, usually by
treachery. The moral of Aryan individuality is that there is no escape
from the laws of the Cosmic Order, even for heroes, whose heroic transcendence
of the norms that bind more mediocre men does not exempt them from the
iron regularities of the universe. Individuality is not for everybody,
an important distinction between the Aryan ideal and that of modern universalist
individualism, and only exceptional beings can excel despite the demands
it imposes on them.
Aryan individuality, then, was supposed to be a supplement to, not an
adversary of, the racial and social bond, and even then it was constrained
by the price that those who developed it to its highest levels would have
to pay. It was never supposed to be the kind of intellectual crutch for
economic greed, social inadequacy, and personal alienation and resentment
that modern individualism is. But the ineradicable tendency of Aryans to
individualize themselves through singular personalities, achievements,
thoughts, and expressions in art and literature no doubt lies at the root
of modern individualism, despite the socially pathological and destructive
forms the ideology has taken, and it is in part because of his innate proclivity
to individuation and individual achievement and creativity that European
Man has given birth to his distinctive and successful civilization.
Describing the contours of ancient history, the great American Egyptologist
James Henry Breasted saw the ancient world in terms of an epochal struggle
between "our ancestors," the Indo-Europeans of Europe, Persia, and India,
on the one hand, and the Semitic peoples of Mesopotamia, Phoenicia, the
Hebrews and Assyrians, and Carthage, on the other.
"The history of the ancient world, as we are now to follow it,
was largely made up of the struggle between this southern Semitic line,
which issued from the southern grasslands, and the northern Indo-European
line, which came forth from the northern grasslands to confront the older
civilizations represented in the southern line. Thus . . . we see the two
great races facing each other across the Mediterranean like two vast armies
stretching from Western Asia westward to the Atlantic. The later wars between
Rome and Carthage represent some of the operations on the Semitic left
wing, while the triumph of Persia over Chaldea is a similar outcome on
the Semitic right wing.
"The result of the long conflict was the complete triumph of our
ancestors (the Indo- European line), who conquered along the center and
both wings and finally, as represented by the Greeks and Romans, gained
unchallenged supremacy throughout the Mediterranean world. This triumph
was accompanied by a long struggle for mastery between the members of the
northern line themselves. Among them the victory moved from the east end
to the west end of the northern line, as first the Persians, then the Greeks,
and finally the Romans gained control of the Mediterranean
and oriental world."1
European man can
survive today only if he begins to recognize that victory through honorable
combat is not enough.
In this passage, Breasted captured the grand sweep of the saga of European
Man and his seemingly victorious, millennial conflict with his rivals.
But what he does not say, and what perhaps was not apparent to him when
he wrote in the early 20th century, was that the conflict is far from over.
The Roman political and military victory was not the end of the story,
because the very success of Roman imperialism made possible and perhaps
inevitable the eventual inundation of their people and culture by those
whom they had conquered. The importation of masses of alien slaves into
Italy, their eventual emancipation, and the massive immigration of foreigners
from the Asiatic parts of the empire meant that the Indo-European racial
and cultural base of Rome would eventually die.
The Roman poet Juvenal's famous line that "the Orontes [the main river
of ancient Syria] empties its garbage into the Tiber" expresses what was
happening (it is noteworthy he did not say the Rhine or the Thames empties
its garbage into the Tiber). Not only the peoples but also the religions
and the political forms of the non-Aryan East crept over the Aryan imperium.
Eventually, then, the non-Aryan rivals and enemies of the Aryans triumphed
through a backdoor attack that is comparable to the backhandedness by which
non-Aryans overcome Aryan heroes in the old myths.
the conquest of virtually the entire planet by Indo-Europeans by the end
of the 19th century, the same fate appears to face modern European Man.
Only the European nations of the United States, Canada, Australia and New
Zealand, and Europe itself face hordes of non-white immigrants who threaten
to engulf us and our civilization. Having conquered them through military
combat and technological and economic progress, we nevertheless face racial
and cultural extinction as the perversion of our strengths into weaknesses
is exploited against us and our rivals seek victory through our back doors.
European Man can survive today only if he begins to recognize that victory
through honorable combat is not enough; he must also be prepared to meet
the challenges on the level of cultural combat, and the only way he can
do so is through recovery of his racial heritage, the roots of who we are
and where we come from as a people.
The Aryan Legacy
Throughout this essay, I have emphasized the ancient, archaic, and prehistoric
expressions of the Indo-European peoples for two reasons. In the first
place, examining the ancient patterns of behavior and thought among Aryans
helps to exclude influences on them from more modern forces that have been
acquired through the historical environment or are perhaps less "natural"
– forces such as Christianity, philosophical and ethical systems, capitalism,
and the modern ideologies of romanticism, individualism, socialism, capitalism,
and liberalism. Secondly, by looking at the patterns of thought and behavior
that seem to have been common to all or most of the early Aryan peoples,
we can find what whites have in common and what distinguishes them from
other races. When Aryans in medieval Ireland exhibit myths and beliefs
very similar to those of ancient India, when Greek poets express ideas
similar to those of Viking sea rovers, we are transcending the extraneous
influences of other cultures and races, those acquired from the social
and historical environment, and the physical environment, and are coming
close to fundamental racial characteristics.
This survey of the ancient Aryans may seem as though it merely recounts
cultural ideas and practices rather than racial characteristics, but as
Jared Taylor noted in his own essay, "there is increasing evidence that
personality traits . . . are under genetic control," and therefore we should
expect to find that the deep cultural beliefs and practices that are common
to members of a particular population that is descended from the same ancestors
derive from genes carried by those ancestors. This claim cannot be proved,
mainly because we obviously cannot conduct genetic analyses of ancient
Aryans, but given what we now know and are increasingly learning about
the role of genetic forces (and therefore race) in shaping personality
(and therefore culture), it seems to follow.
In the light of what we know of the early history of the Aryan peoples,
then, we should be able to distinguish between those traits that are characteristic
of our race and those that are not, between those that contribute or have
contributed to our success as a population and as a people and those that
have been destructive, and between those that continue to serve our identity
and destiny, our consciousness as a people acting in history, and those
that have been distorted or exploited to thwart our identity and destiny.
In his essay, Mr. Taylor identified by my count about 15 distinct traits
that he believes constitute or derive from "a common thread to the modern
characteristics of European man." In the light of what we know of early
Aryan man, some of the characteristics that Mr. Taylor attributes to whites
are valid, some are distortions of valid traits, and some, I believe, are
merely acquisitions deriving from other forces (which is not to say that
they are necessarily undesirable). But what is important is that any trait
that is really a characteristic of whites must have existed long before
modern culture and independently of cultural, historical, or local influences
on white behavior.
Thus, several of the characteristics that Mr. Taylor attributes to whites
appear to have their origin in the archaic, natural impulses of the early
Aryan peoples, but it is highly misleading to say that the modern and especially
American manifestations of these characteristics are distinctively Aryan,
Indo-European, or white. Mr. Taylor is certainly correct that whites exhibit
"an abiding sense of reciprocity, a conviction that others have rights
that must be respected," but the modern expression of this trait in such
institutions as democracy, free speech, and the rule of law are grotesquely
distorted or exaggerated versions of the original and natural impulses.
The "sense of reciprocity" as well as the rule of law are no doubt reflections
of the Aryan concept of Cosmic Order, a view of the universe that holds
that both nature and man behave according to universal, perpetual laws
or regular patterns and in which rights and duties are in balance. But
the concept of Cosmic Order did not imply an egalitarian or homogeneous
social order in which everyone is equal and there are no distinctions between
groups, classes, sexes, races, and nations. Indeed, early Aryan society
was hierarchical, organic, and aristocratic; the natural form of Aryan
government was an aristocratic republic in which distinct classes and social
groups participated and expressed their views and interests freely, and
a high level of political participation was necessary for such dynamic
and restless populations of independent, armed free men as the early Aryans.
The mass democracies and homogenized, produce-and-consume cultures of
modern times may ultimately derive from this Aryan social and political
model, but they deviate from it in important ways. Free speech, for example,
certainly seems to have pertained in the tribal assemblies, and it is doubtful
if the early Aryans were such bluenoses as their Victorian descendants
or such totalitarians as late 20th century academics. But free speech did
not include the right to commit sacrilege, subversion, or obscenity and
was circumscribed by custom and the high courtesy that is universal among
As noted earlier, the Aryan concept of Cosmic Order accounts for the
European mental habits of universalism and objectivity. While these habits
help explain European successes in science, mathematics, philosophy, ethics,
and the rule of law, they also, in a misapplied and degenerate form, suggest
why Europeans have shown a tendency to neglect their own racial interests
and why they find developing their own racial consciousness so difficult.
As Jared Taylor noted in his essay, every other race tends to think in
terms of its own race and group, and "Only whites pretend that pluralism
and displacement are good things and that the measures necessary to ensure
group survival may be immoral." We tend to think that way because we are
naturally prone to transcend subjective and particular interests and to
idealize what is objective and universal. But this misapplication of a
natural and healthy Aryan instinct is not in itself natural but rather
the result of ethical and philosophical confusions that have arisen in
Mr. Taylor is also correct in his remarks about sportsmanship, noblesse
oblige, respect for foes in war, and respect for women, all of which derive
from Aryan ideas about the Cosmic Order and from the warlike and heroic
character of the early Aryans. All these traits reflect the nature of early
Aryan warcraft – the single combat of individual champions, the unwritten
and commonly understood rules of conflict, and acceptance of the terms
of defeat have deep roots in the ways Aryans waged war. The comparative
absence of needless brutality in Western warfare, until the advent of 20th
century democracy, may be thought to derive from Christian ethics, but
long before Christianity pagan conquerors like Alexander the Great and
Julius Caesar showed far less brutality in their warfare than such paladins
of non-Aryan combat as Tamerlane, Genghis Khan, the Assyrians, the Huns,
or even the ancient Hebrews, for whom genocide was a regular practice.
In Aryan society women have always enjoyed more respect, more freedom,
and more individuality than in non-Aryan society, and this probably from
the structure of their society. The relative independence and freedom that
characterized the structured Aryan society would have meant that women
could not simply be captured and enslaved but had to be bargained for or
won, if not as individuals then as the daughters of other competing warriors.
Disrespect for or cruelty to a woman, like discourtesy or injury to a free
man, could result in endless blood feuds. Women and goddesses in Greek
and Norse myths and legends have far more personality and a far more important
social role than in most non-Aryan mythologies. Certainly such practices
as foot-binding, clitoridectomy, and suttee, as well as polygamy and the
harem, are rare or unknown among the early Aryans. (The word "harem" has
entered Western languages because Westerners lack their own word for it.)
But the natural Aryan respect for women does not mean that modern feminism
is consistent with ancient Aryan views of womanhood, and despite the honor
that Aryans have always paid women, they never confused honor with equality
or sameness. The assumption of the Aryan honoring of women is that women
are different from men and require or deserve different treatment. It is
for that very reason that modern feminists, wedded to the illusion of sexual
egalitarianism, despise, ridicule, and try to abolish the expressions of
male chivalry, even though, like most egalitarians, they also like to have
it both ways – to abolish inequality when it offers an impediment but to
insist on it when it serves their interests.
Similarly, respect for animals no doubt derives from the reliance of
the Aryans on hunting and war animals, especially dogs and horses. Horses
play a central role in Aryan myth, and the Indo-Europeans apparently were
the first to domesticate horses and develop their use in war. There are
sacred horses, horse sacrifices, horse gods, and horse burials among the
Indo-European peoples. Similarly, dogs and wolves play a major role in
Aryan myth, from Cerberus the three-headed dog of Hades (one for each social
class perhaps) to the wolves of Odin. The individuation of Aryans may lead
them to personify their animals and invest them with personalities, names,
and special attributes in a way that no other race usually does.
I do not see that such traits as missionary activity, the passion to
improve or change the world, the elimination of hereditary class differences,
competition according to individual ability, or concern for the natural
environment are particularly characteristic of Aryans, however. Some of
these may be desirable traits, though they have obviously gone far beyond
what was really characteristic of early Aryans and what can be useful for
white racial survival. Nevertheless, some of them, like missionary activities
and crusading to change or reform society, may well ultimately derive from
Aryan dynamism and expansionism, while competition according to individual
merit may be a modern form of single combat and a reflection of Aryan individuality.
The modern demand to eliminate hereditary class distinctions may be an
exaggerated but not very healthy version of this instinct.
What is important to understand, however, is that Aryans, because of
their Faustian dynamism and individuality, seem to be especially prone
to misapplications of their most ennobling traits, and when the modern
ideologies of egalitarianism, leveling, feminism, and universalism are
joined to forces like modern capitalism and technology, the danger of losing
contact with and understanding of the natural propensities of our own racial
character and of misunderstanding their limits and proper functions is
Aryans seem to be
especially prone to misap- plications of their most ennobling traits.
I do not think there is any great mystery as to how this perversion
of the Aryan legacy occurred. Aryans eventually constructed societies far
more complex in their economies, technologies, and ideas than any other
race, and the very complexity of their societies tended to confuse and
derail traditional expressions of Aryan impulses. Ambitious leaders, Aryan
or not, have often exploited these complexities, and the confusions that
result, for their own advantage, and the disruptions of wars, revolutions,
depressions, and new technologies and social organizations that periodically
afflict Western society have added to the alienation of modern European
Man from his natural inclinations and ancient heritage.
It ought to be obvious that we cannot expect to restore the warrior
cultures of the early Aryans, their archaic religions and mythologies,
and their social and political customs. But we can work to correct the
misapplications of our talents and traits, to eradicate the confusions
and degenerations of modern mass democracy and culture, and eventually
to restore or create anew a social, political, and cultural order that
incorporates and reflects the healthy and natural instincts of our race.
What we can do is learn from these ancient and noble warriors and their
courage, their irrepressible restlessness and dynamism, and their heroically
relentless realism; from them we can remember who we are and where we come
from, what our most natural inclinations are and how those inclinations
can help us or harm us, and, most of all, how we can make the enduring
characteristics of our race serve us again in our endless quest to meet
the destiny of European Man.
1James Henry Breasted, The Conquest
of Civilization (New York: Literary Guild of America, 1938), 200-202.
Edwin Clark is an Indo-European writer living in Washington, D.C.
• • •
TO TOP • • •
The Cost of Affirmative
Law school admissions as
a case study in racial preferences.
by Warren Edwards
hite Americans pay a high price for affirmative action. Most have no idea
how high the price really is, both to the U.S. as a nation and to hundreds
of thousands – perhaps millions – of individual whites.
Peter Brimelow, writing several years ago in Forbes,1
calculated that affirmative action cost the U.S. $350 billion, or 4 percent
of Gross Domestic Product, for the year 1992. To calculate this figure,
Mr. Brimelow totaled the direct cost of various government enforcement
agencies, and estimated indirect costs in lost productivity, inefficiencies,
extra staffing, etc. in private industry and government. If his figures
are at all accurate (and to my knowledge no one has ever challenged them),
the cost of affirmative action since it first began in the mid-1960's is
now well into the trillions.
This cannot but have hurt America's international competitiveness. As
far back as 1986, Japanese Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone warned that
America had a "low level of competitiveness" because of black and Hispanic
minorities. He was reflecting the opinion of 40 percent of the Japanese
people, who believe that our major economic problem is our high proportion
of minorities. The Japanese, a polite race, generally keep such opinions
to themselves. They aren't good for business either, since American minorities
buy a lot of Japanese products.
Prime Minister Nakasone did not point out how affirmative action only
makes the American disadvantage worse: A national economy handicapped by
large numbers of minorities is handicapped even further when poorly qualified
candidates are hired or promoted strictly because of race.
Affirmative Action in Law School
Racial preferences begin well before Americans start looking for jobs.
An excellent example of the opportunities lost to whites
is described in a recent article in The Mankind Quarterly.2
The author concludes that in 1993, law schools turned away over 5,000,
(perhaps as many as 5,537) white applicants to make room for protected
minorities with lower Law School Aptitude Test (LSAT) scores. That represents
over 10% of the total admissions of approximately 51,200 for that year.
Table 1 shows that of the eight different racial/ethnic classifications,
whites scored highest in average LSAT scores both for applicants and for
admittees. Since the scoring range is only 120-180, the significance of
the differences in scores is greater than it appears. The fourth column
shows the distance from the white mean, in standard deviations (SD), of
the mean scores of non-whites admitted to law school. Readers familiar
with the distributions of IQ scores will note that the 1.27-SD gap between
the black average and the white average is even greater than the one-SD
gap in IQ scores. The gap between whites and Puerto Ricans is greater still,
at 1.35-SD, and even Asians appear to be receiving some degree of preferential
treatment. To repeat, these figures represent substantial gaps in the scores
of students admitted to law school, not just those who took the
|Table 1. Average Scores by Race / Ethnicity
|St. Dev. Gap
What would be the effect of race-blind admissions? It is impossible
to be certain, but Table 2 shows how admissions would have been affected
if decisions had been based only on the LSAT, with a cut-off score of 150.
The number of American Indians admitted would have fallen by 40, or 10.5
percent. Close to half of the blacks and Puerto Ricans scored lower than
150, and would not have been admitted, whereas 5,537 whites who were
rejected scored 150 or higher, and would have qualified for admission.
|Table 2. Admissions Based on Minimum LSAT 150
The combined gains for whites, Asians, and "others" are greater than
the combined losses for the remaining non-white groups because good LSAT
scores are necessary but not sufficient for admission. In 1993,
about 54,000 applicants had LSAT scores of 150 or higher but only 51,000
places were available at law schools. Some high scorers were rejected because
of arrest records, poor grades, or for other reasons. The fact remains
that 2,602 non-whites with scores below 150 were accepted while 5,537 whites
who scored 150 or higher were rejected.
If thousands of whites are affected every year by affirmative action
in the law school admissions process alone, what is the nationwide impact
of such programs? As documented in such books as Illiberal Education,
The Bell Curve, and Paved With Good Intentions, this pattern
of racial discrimination is repeated by virtually all colleges, professional
schools, and large employers. The number of whites affected every year
must be well into the hundreds of thousands. The American majority is sacrificing
the careers, ambitions, and future of many of its members to buy an artificial,
immoral, and ultimately unsuccessful racial harmony.
1Brimelow, Peter, "When Quotas Replace
Merit, Everybody Suffers," Forbes, February, 1993, pp. 80-82.
2Nix, Dennis, "The LSAT and Affirmative
Action in U.S. Law Schools," The Mankind Quarterly, Vol. 21, No.
3 & 4, Spring/Summer, 1996, pp. 335-361.
Warren Edwards is a first year law-student at a mid-western university.
• • •
BACK TO TOP • •
Science tightens the net
but O.J. Simpson got away
(the first time).
reviewed by Thomas Jackson
ow reliable is DNA testing? Can a single drop of blood incriminate a murderer?
How good was the DNA evidence in the O.J. Simpson criminal case? These
are the sorts of questions raised in a recent book written by a former
New York City assistant prosecutor. It is a non-technical volume, padded
with lots of crime details, but along the way it touches briefly on a controversy
about race that for a time kept DNA evidence out of a few courtrooms.
And the Blood
1996, 223 pp.
DNA testing is based on the fact that, except for identical twins, everyone
has a unique set of genes and therefore a unique pattern of the material
from which genes are made – DNA. Even the tiniest bits of the human body
contain DNA. Skin, blood, hair, semen, even saliva can be tested for it.
Thus, a semen sample taken from a rape victim can be compared with the
DNA patterns of a suspect's blood sample to determine the chances that
the semen came from the suspect. If a DNA sample is exposed to the weather
or to contaminants like gasoline or alcohol, it may degrade and become
unusable, but it can never change in such a way as to produce a false identification.
Although all people have unique genes, the aspects in which individuals
differ from each other are governed by just a small amount of genetic material;
99 percent of each person's genome is identical to everyone else's (and
97.5 percent of human genes are identical to those of chimpanzees). DNA
testing must therefore find the spots that are different, and the more
that can be matched the more accurate the identification will be. If the
crime-scene sample is tiny or badly degraded, it may be possible to find
only one DNA location where humans differ from each other, and where
there is a match with the suspect's sample. If every hundred or so people
have that DNA pattern there is a one-in-a-hundred chance that the crime-scene
sample came from the suspect.
If, at any point on a gene there is a mismatch, the samples cannot
have come from the same person. However, as the number of locations that
match increases, the odds against the suspect are multiplied. Two, three,
or four one-in-a-hundred matches mean that only one in 10,000, 1,000,000,
or 100,000,000 people could have the same DNA. New techniques can now be
used to find many matches in very small samples, and it is possible to
make a one-in-ten-billion identification, even though there are only five
billion people on earth. The world population would have to double before
random variation could produce someone with that many matching segments
Numbers like this make DNA testing a very persuasive means of identification.
As Mr. Levy points out, it is so persuasive that between 15 and 20 people
who had been convicted and gone to prison have been released on
the basis of post-trial DNA testing. The tests alone were enough to overturn
a verdict thought to be "beyond a reasonable doubt." For example, there
have been cases in which a rape victim swore she could identify her attacker,
but a DNA test showed that the semen in her underwear could not have been
It is possible to
make a one-in- ten-billion identification, even though there are only five
billion people on earth.
Testing can prove in other ways that justice has not been done. In the
case of the rape and near-murder of the Central Park jogger by a gang of
blacks and Hispanics, at least one semen sample taken from the victim did
not match any of the suspects. The jogger was raped repeatedly, and since
there were 50 to 75 boys in the "wilding" gang that attacked her, some
rapists were never identified or punished.
"Weak" DNA matches are increasingly unlikely because of new techniques,
but can still be important evidence. Mr. Levy notes that in the case of
the World Trade Center bombing, a DNA match of the saliva used to lick
and seal an envelope gave a one-in-50 match with a suspect. This was not
decisive identification but was very useful in combination with other incriminating
One of the most promising uses of DNA is to maintain an inventory of
samples from known violent criminals and sex offenders. This way, if a
criminal leaves behind even a hair or a drop of blood it can be compared
with samples in the DNA bank. Whenever there is a struggle, the victim
should pull some hairs from the assailant or wound him enough to draw blood.
Samples can make the difference between conviction and acquittal. This
is particularly important in rape cases, approximately 50 percent of which
Mr. Levy points out that a suspect can be compelled to give a blood
sample. Even if it is likely that the sample will send him to jail or to
the electric chair, this is not impermissible self-incrimination because
blood is evidence, not testimony. Forcing a man to give blood is no different
from getting a warrant and forcibly searching his home.
The Race Card
DNA testing is very new – it was first used in a criminal trial in 1987
– but it has already been the subject of much needless controversy. Gene
frequencies differ by race, and when crime laboratories announce the likelihood
of a match they offer different odds for different races. A sample from
a suspect may represent a match for one of every 10 million blacks but
for only one in a billion whites. This is another way of saying that the
crime-scene sample was more likely to be from a black, but if the matching
suspect sample is from a white, the odds that he was the perpetrator are
that much higher.
Richard Lewontin of Harvard has spent many years trying to discredit
IQ testing and genetic explanations for differences in IQ. In 1991 he co-authored
an article in Science, in which he argued that broad racial categories
are meaningless, so the numbers usually reported for a match are also meaningless.
A few courts actually disallowed DNA evidence on these grounds. The New
York Times also published several unfavorable articles about DNA testing
that misrepresented the science in ways that Mr. Levy finds unaccountable.
People who wanted to discredit testing on racial and ethnic grounds
argued that DNA matches should be calculated to produce the smallest
likelihood of identification. In other words, if one DNA pattern in a crime-scene
sample were found in one in 50 Sicilians and another pattern in the same
sample were found in one in 100 Koreans (but both were found in only one
in 1,000 or more of every other racial group) then the smallest numbers
should be multiplied together to produce the likelihood of a match. This
technique would have required that every possible suspect be thought of
as an improbable racial mix of each of the ethnicities that happen
most frequently to have each of the DNA combinations found in a
crime-scene sample. This would have weakened the odds against a suspect
by 100 or even 1,000 times, such that prosecutors could claim only a one
in 1,000 match as opposed to a one in 1,000,000 match. Subsequent scientific
findings have confirmed racial differences in DNA patterns, and it is once
again standard courtroom procedure to calculate different odds on the basis
Some people think that O.J. Simpson's acquittal damaged the credibility
of DNA testing. In a chapter devoted to the case, Mr. Levy explains that
the science is so powerful that the defense never attacked it. Instead,
it systematically cast doubt on two other things: the motives of police
officers and the quality of laboratory procedures. It turned Detective
Mark Fuhrman's empty boasting to a screen-writer about how he despised
and mistreated blacks, into motivation for a massive frame-up. It also
turned evidence of a few sloppy procedures at the Los Angeles police laboratory
into the theoretical possibility that all of the incriminating DNA evidence
had been "contaminated."
In fact, some
of the techniques used by the lab do require great care. When samples are
very small, they may be contaminated if the same tweezers are used to pick
them up. However, the idea that many samples of the blood of O.J. Simpson
and his two victims could have been consistently "contaminated" in ways
that implicated Mr. Simpson beggars the imagination. Likewise, the police
could not have framed Mr. Simpson unless a number of key investigators
had spontaneously decided to railroad an innocent man and had stuck to
their frame-up story throughout the trial.
Although Mr. Levy does not say so directly, the facts he presents confirm
the view that the mostly-non-white jury was simply looking for excuses
to acquit. That preposterous theories of contamination and police dishonesty
were all the jurors needed is yet more evidence of the racial solidarity
blacks take for granted.
Although the Simpson case, with its high-priced experts and flashy lawyers,
may have shown that a receptive jury can be distracted from damning DNA
evidence, it has by no means discredited such evidence. As Mr. Levy points
out, it is simply not possible to deny a strong DNA identification. If
the laboratory finds the suspect's semen in a rape victim, he cannot deny
it is his. Instead, he must claim that he and the woman had consensual
sex. Likewise, there is no way for a suspect to claim that the blood on
his shirt did not come from the victim; he must think up some non-incriminating
way to account for its presence.
DNA testing has leapt all the liberal and racial hurdles in its path
and, when properly conducted, should provide unshakable evidence.
• • •
BACK TO TOP • •
O Tempora, O Mores!
Prop. 209 Wins in California
Once again, the citizens of California have shown better sense than
politicians and mediacrats. The voter initiative to ban state-sponsored
race and sex preferences won handily with some 55 percent of the vote.
This was a margin of victory similar to that of the 1994 initiative to
deny schooling and welfare to illegal aliens. Whites, at 60 percent, were
the only racial group to support the measure. Seventy-four percent of blacks
opposed it, as did 70 percent of Hispanics and 55 percent of Asians. This
was a result roughly similar to that of the 1994 initiative, and is a sign
of what whites can expect if they become a minority. Of all religious groups,
only Jews (53 percent) and "others" – probably mostly Muslims – (63 percent)
voted against the measure. (Prop. 209 Poll, San Francisco Chronicle, Nov.
6, 1996, p. A12.)
The campaign against Proposition 209 was an Orwellian tour de force,
arguing that abolishing systematic discrimination meant the beginning of
systematic discrimination. One ad highlighted David Duke's support for
the proposition, reminding viewers of his KKK past. Women were targets
in one particularly desperate commercial. A woman appeared on camera only
to have men tear off her lab coat, stethoscope, hard hat, and policeman's
cap, while male voices shouted, "Take it off. Take it all off." "Want to
be a doctor? Police officer? Hard Hat?" asked the commercial. "Forget it!"
At the end of the ad, the woman is left with torn clothes revealing her
underwear, as a male hand strokes her face appraisingly. Kathy Spillar,
a spokesman for something called Stop Prop. 209, which produced the ad,
cheerfully confirmed that the message was that the end of preferences might
leave women no choice but prostitution: "The suggestion is that a woman
can always sell her body." (Burt Herman, "Ads Target Women," AP, Sacramento,
Nov. 1, 1996.)
Pro-209 forces wanted to run a commercial excerpting Martin Luther King's
"I Have a Dream" speech, in which he looked forward to the day when people
were judged on character rather than color. "Civil rights" leaders went
into a fury, with Jesse Jackson calling the ad "blasphemy." King's widow
said it would misrepresent her husband's life's work which, apparently,
was not about equal treatment for blacks but special preferences. The plagiarist's
estate threatened a copyright infringement suit. Proposition 209 supporters
dropped the ad. (Burt Herman, "GOP Pulls King Clip From Ads," AP, Sacramento,
Oct. 24, 1996) It was weak of them to appeal to the words of a low character
like King and weaker still to back down.
In a bow to judicial power, the initiative will require a judge's approval
to go into effect. Republicans, including California governor Pete Wilson,
started backing the measure only when it became clear it had public support,
but are now squarely behind it. There appears to be a good chance that
equal treatment can withstand a court challenge.
In Kentucky, a ballot initiative received much less national attention
but still caused consternation. The state constitution had old, unenforceable
language requiring that "colored" children be educated separately from
whites. Black state legislators thought this was shameful, and a symbolic
initiative was set up to remove this language. The measure passed, but
was opposed by one third of the voters – more than enough to scandalize
Meanwhile, a number of observers have noted something the country has
been spared by keeping a Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives.
With a Democratic majority, the following blacks would have become chairmen
of the following important committees: Charles Rangel – Ways and Means,
Ron Dellums – National Security, John Conyers – Judiciary, William Clay
– Economics. Black congressmen often establish themselves as district potentates
and are impossible to unseat. They build up seniority and automatically
become chairmen of committees.
During the past year, approximately 1,300,000 people became naturalized
citizens – a new record for a single year. There are allegations that the
Clinton administration pushed very hard for quick naturalizations with
the expectation that new citizens would vote Democratic. Indeed, an October
poll of Hispanics naturalized in California showed that 84 percent supported
President Clinton and only five percent favored Robert Dole – a 17 to one
margin. (Patrick McConnell, New Citizens From Latin America Back Clinton,
Poll Finds, Los Angeles Times, Oct. 23, 1996.)
The INS has been farming out the citizenship test to private companies
in order to speed up naturalizations and some of the testing has been extremely
lax. A whistle-blower who worked for Naturalization Assistance Services
told Congress that many candidates spoke no English and would get irate
if they could find no one in the office who spoke Spanish. Congressman
Mark Souder of Indiana says "Tens of thousands of applicants who do not
speak or understand a word of English, and could not possibly pass a legitimate
English and civics test, are receiving 'pass' certificates." (Carol Rosenberg,
No English No Problem for Would-be Citizens, Miami Herald, Sept. 11, 1996,
In another measure that has increased the number of new citizens in
this election year, the INS has sometimes skipped the standard crime check
that automatically disqualifies rapists, murderers, and other felons. The
FBI estimates that as many as 100,000 criminals may have become citizens.
Previously, the INS was insisting that no more than 100 new Americans were
criminals, but according to New Hampshire Congressman, Bill Zeliff, INS
officials are now conceding that the figure may be as high as 130,000.
One INS clerk claims that the agency simply threw away thousands of fingerprint
files rather than turn them over to the FBI for investigation. (Ruth Larson,
FBI Fears INS Let in 100,000 Criminals, Washington Times, Oct. 24, 1996.)
In November, House Republicans called for an independent counsel to investigate
the naturalization program. The INS promises to revoke the citizenship
of ineligible felons.
The Dominican Republic sends 40,000 or so legal and an unknown number
of illegal immigrants to the United States every year. Practically everyone
in the country has a family member living in America, so the country paid
close attention to welfare reforms that will deny some benefits to non-citizens.
The president of the country, Leonel Fernandez Reyna, grew up in New
York City, where he was educated through high school. In September, he
spoke to the nation about the new American laws:
"Many Dominican families residing in the United States that
have benefited from welfare and food stamps will begin to experience difficulties
once this law is promulgated. . . . If you, young mother, or you, elderly
gentleman, or you, young student, feel the need to adopt the nationality
of the United States in order to confront the vicissitudes of that society
stemming from the end of the welfare era, do not feel tormented by this.
Do it with a peaceful conscience, for you will continue being Dominicans,
and we will welcome you as such when you set foot on the soil of our republic."
Fernando Mateo, who has already become a U.S. citizen, agrees: "Indirectly,
the Republicans are doing us a favor by encouraging us to empower ourselves
by becoming American citizens," he says. He urges Dominicans to retain
their old loyalties but become U.S. citizens for the welfare benefits and
vote for the interests of Dominicans. (Larry Rohter, Fewer Immigrant Benefits
Do Not Faze Dominicans, New York Times, Oct. 12, 1996.)
Robert Steinback is a black columnist for the Miami Herald. In
a recent column, he wrote that the fuss about William Clinton's character
is overblown. "For most jobs – aside from, say, minister – character is
optional." He does suggest that some traits might be disqualifying. "It
would be hard to overlook extreme character flaws – say, misogyny
or virulent racist beliefs." (Robert Steinback, Why Clinton Survives the
Character Issue, Miami Herald, Oct. 22, 1996.)
Blacks Less Likely to be Convicted
The Center for Equal Opportunity, of which Linda Chavez is president,
has released a study showing that blacks are less likely than whites to
be convicted when they are arrested for crimes. In an investigation of
all 56,000 felony cases filed in state courts in the nation's 75 largest
cities in May, 1992, researchers found that blacks were less likely to
be convicted in 12 out of 14 federally designated felony categories. Generally,
the disparities were not large, in the range of three to five percent.
However, on drug trafficking charges, 24 percent of blacks escaped conviction
while only 14 percent of whites did. Whites got off more often than blacks
in only the least serious cases – felony traffic offenses and a miscellaneous
category of crimes that are against neither property nor people.
Most felony cases are settled out of court, but when one actually goes
before a jury, the black acquittal rate skyrockets. Sixty-nine percent
of blacks were acquitted by juries, as opposed to 29 percent for whites.
Since the study focused on crime in big cities, it included those areas
where juries are most likely to be composed largely of blacks. Nationwide,
the acquittal rate at trial is 17 percent, but for black defendants in
the Bronx, for example, it is approximately 50 percent. (Walter Olson,
Is it Really an Injustice System? N.Y. Post, Sept. 30, 1996.)
The all-cops-are-racist school will argue that the results of the study
prove only that police routinely arrest blacks on insufficient evidence
and the justice system wisely sets them free. The study had no way of controlling
for this factor. However, police hate to see a collared man go free, and
are not very likely to make "racist" arrests that will not hold up in court.
Moreover, the great disparity in jury acquittal rates suggests that it
is juries, not the police, who are influenced by race. Whatever the case,
we can be sure that if the numbers showed that whites were being convicted
less often than blacks, the press would consider this proof of racism.
Australians Waking Up
Until the 1970s, Australia allowed only whites to immigrate. Since the
abolition of the "white Australia" policy, there has been little public
criticism of the flood of Asians that is changing the country. Suddenly,
a newly-elected lady legislator, Pauline Hanson, has given voice to the
silent majority. "I believe we are in danger of being swamped by Asians,"
she said in her first speech to Parliament on September 10. "We may have
only 10 to 15 years to turn things around." She also said that aborigines
get far too many government handouts.
Public expression of such sentiments is as much a surprise to Australians
as it is to Americans, and the now-famous Miss Hanson has set the country
on its ear. The people are, of course, behind her. A
recent poll found that 48 percent agree with her on immigrants and aborigines,
38 oppose her, and 12 percent are undecided. It is probably safe to say
that even more agree with her than dare say so. In the face of roars of
disapproval from politicians and editorial writers, Miss Hanson has stuck
to her guns. After Parliament passed a pious resolution decrying "racism,"
she said: "If the members of this house are so confident that they are
echoing the views of mainstream Australia, they should let mainstream Australia
have its say. I call on the government to have a referendum on immigration
and multiculturalism." The government has refrained. Miss Hanson has become
the toast of Australia. (Alan Thornhill, "Bigotry Reappears in Australia,
Associated Press, Canberra, Australia, Oct. 9, 1996. "Australian Referendum
on Immigration? Reuters, Canberra, Nov. 1, 1996.)
This is Research?
It has been well known for years that blacks have higher blood pressure
than whites. Thirty-seven percent of black men have hypertension as opposed
to 25 percent of white men. The figures for women are blacks: 31 percent,
whites: 18 percent.
It is fashionable to claim that "racism" causes this difference, and
in October, the American Journal of Public Health reported a study
that tried to prove it. Researchers asked blacks how much "racism" they
experienced and what they did about it – whether they just submitted to
it, talked about it, or reacted to it. The researchers doubtless hoped
that blacks who suffered lots of "racism" had the highest blood pressure
but that it was lower if they "reacted."
The data were not cooperative. Working class black men who said they
suffered no racial discrimination had higher blood pressure than those
who reported discrimination. Nothing daunted, the researchers decided that
any blacks who reported no discrimination had "internalized oppression"
and were, in fact, suffering from racism worse than anyone. The
study also concluded that complaining about racism lowered blood pressure
for working class women but raised it for working class men. White collar
men showed a different pattern from working-class men.
As one of the researchers, Nancy Krieger, explained in a burst of candor,
"One approach to our results is that to say that they don't intuitively
make sense, and to ignore them." (David Brown, Study: Discrimination May
Cause Hypertension in Blacks, Washington Post, Oct.24, 1996, p. A4.)
What, No Blacks?
A reader has sent us a full-page public service ad from the New York
Times, with the headline, "Not All Great Minds Think Alike." He said
the ad caught his eye because the three photographs of attractive children
– an Asian, and two whites – did not include the usually obligatory black
or Hispanic. When he read the ad he understood why: It was to promote greater
sympathy for children with learning disabilities. (Coordinated Campaign
for Learning Disabilities New York Times, Oct. 11, 1996, p. A24.)
Atlanta Race Wars
The Atlanta public library has become embroiled in a low-level but typical
racial controversy. Suburban whites borrow far more books than urban blacks,
but get much less funding. For example, last year at the downtown Bankhead
branch, patrons checked out only 8,264 items. In suburban Roswell, patrons
checked out more than 50 times as many items but got only twice as much
funding. Blacks who control city government resist giving the white branches
more money. Mitch Skandalakis, chairman of the Fulton County Commission
wishes that race were not an issue in the discussion but says, "Virtually
every issue in Fulton County somehow gets wound up in race." (Carlos Campos,
Race Plays Role in Debate Over Library Funding, Atlanta Journal-Constitution,
Oct. 17, 1996, p. F4.)
Meanwhile, police have arrested the killer of an Indiana National Guardsman
who was shot while providing security during the Atlanta Olympic Games.
John Echols, age 19, killed the man and wounded another as part of a gang
loyalty test. He was acting on orders from his "Crips" gang boss, Micah
Durden. It has not yet been reported whether the order was specifically
to kill whites. (Robin McDonald, Police: Killing Was 'Loyalty Test,' Atlanta
Journal-Constitution, Oct. 15, 1996, p. E1.)
The Pelanomi hospital in Bloemfontein, South Africa, was suffering from
a string of unexplained deaths in its intensive care ward. Almost every
Friday, for a period of months, the patient lying in a certain bed would
be found dead, of no apparent cause. At first doctors thought it coincidence,
then began to worry about some unknown disease. Finally a nurse discovered
the cause. Every week when the black cleaning lady came to do her chores,
she unplugged the life-support equipment by one of the beds and plugged
in her electric floor polisher. After she finished cleaning she plugged
the patient back in, leaving no trace of what had killed him. (Polishing
Off the Patients, Sunday Times (London), June 23, 1996.)
Chagas' disease is the most serious parasitic killer in Latin America,
taking some 45,000 lives every year. It is transmitted by the triatomine
insect, about the size of a tick, which sucks human blood. The disease
can be without symptoms for years, but the carrier can still infect others
through blood transfusions. Hispanic immigrants are bringing the disease
to the United States; an estimated 370,000 are infected.
So far, there
have been only a few deaths from Chagas' disease contracted in this country,
all from transfusions. There is no approved way to screen blood for the
disease. The insect carrier has not yet been sighted here, but there is
no reason it could not thrive in the southern states. Like AIDS, the disease
is thought to attack the immune system, and common symptoms are an enlarged
heart, colon, or esophagus. (Katherine Ellison, Expert Eye Sneaky Bug-borne
Killer, Miami Herald, Oct. 20, 1996, p. 1A.)
Last year, the Nation of Islam promised to give ten percent of the take
from the Million Man March to the Washington, D.C. city government. One
of the ways it raised money was to charge vendors – there were 720 of them
– between $700 and $1,000 to operate during the march. The D.C. government,
anticipating a windfall, cooperated closely with the march, and closed
off 14 blocks of Constitution Avenue for two days so that the vendors could
set up booths.
D.C. will finally get its money – $24,568. Ben Chavis, one of the organizers
of the march, explained why it took so long to hand over: "The truth of
the matter is, is that we had more than $60,000 in bad checks. That was
the crux of the problem." (Barrington Salmon, Chavis Says City Will Get
Million Man March Money, Washington Times, Oct. 16, 1996, p. C5.)
Levi Strauss & Co. has announced donations of $300,000 to "address
the climate of bigotry and hatred that fosters hate crimes." Recipients
include the Center for Democratic Renewal and the National Council of Churches,
which promoted the church-burning hoax, as well as the Simon Wiesenthal
Center, the Leadership Conference Education Fund, and the National Conference
Against Racism. (Levi Strauss Expands Effort to Combat Racism, Wall Street
Journal, Sept. 4, 1996, p. B1.)
In February of 1996, an Oregon black man named Markus St. James gained
much press attention when he reported that the house he shared with a white
girl friend had been ransacked and that racial slurs had been scrawled
on walls and mirrors. The FBI has now arrested Mr. St. James, whom they
say did the ransacking and scrawling himself. (Man Arrested in Attack on
House, The Oregonian (Portland), Oct. 25, 1996, p. B15.)
"Mind Frame of Entitlement"
In 1994, Chicago's most famous woman, black talk show host Oprah Winfrey,
announced that she would finance a program to get 100 poor families off
public aid. Two years and $1.3 million later, only five families have gone
through the self-help training – with indifferent success – and the program
is on hold.
Even the most ardent uplift experts are scratching their heads over
the results. The program was called Families for a Better Life, and was
administered by Chicago's most famous benevolence agency, the Jane Addams
Hull House Association, which heavily loaded the dice in favor of success.
After Miss Winfrey's much ballyhooed announcement, 30,000 people called,
asking to take part. Hull House ended up sending out 4,000 applications
to people who met the criteria for participation: poor people who lived
in public housing. Out of the 1,600 applications they got back, they picked
six women with children and one married couple with children. These people
were thought to have the best possible chances of getting out of
poverty, and were not typical welfare bums. No one had a drug or alcohol
problem, and four of the seven families had a member who had completed
some college. One woman was actually in college when the program started
and another was in nursing school.
The eight-week training program involved intensive doses of such mumbo-jumbo
as "setting directions," "preparing for change," and "taking risks." All
participants got spending money and, if necessary, driving lessons, help
with house-cleaning, and cooking lessons. Two families dropped out.
The progress of the remaining has not been stunning. Four of the five
families were on AFDC when the program started. One is still on it, and
another is getting food stamps. Four of the families had an adult who had
at least a part-time job when the program began. Two now work full-time,
two still work part-time, and the one who started out with no job still
doesn't have one. The women who were attending college and nursing school
are still in school.
Isabel Blanco, who ran the program for Hull House says that no matter
how carefully the candidates were screened they still had "the mind frame
of entitlement." "We had to keep emphasizing that this is not about what
you get. This is about what you do." Even the Chicago Tribune, in
a lengthy account of the program, concluded that poor people lead such
disorganized lives and have been so bred to a hand-out mentality that these
"defy even programs designed to overcome these obstacles." (Louise Kiernan,
Oprah's Poverty Program Stalls, Chicago Tribune, Aug. 27, 1996, p. 1.)
Nat Turner, Role Model
Grolier Inc. publishes a series of books for young people on black history.
One of the titles is Nat Turner: Slave Revolt Leader. In 1831, Turner
led a small-scale slave rebellion, in which about 60 whites were killed,
mostly in their sleep. Here are passages from the book:
"As the General, the Prophet, the leader of the rebellion,
Turner knew that he must strike the first blow and draw first blood. He
struck with a blunt sword, and the master of Travis farm screamed bloody
murder. Will moved in from behind and finished off Travis and his wife
before they were fully awake.
"Downstairs, the other men began to kill the rest of the whites in the
house, one of them being 12 year old Putnam. . . . Soon all in the house
were dead but an infant, momentarily forgotten in its cradle. Remembering
Turner's instruction to 'spare neither age nor sex,' Henry Porter and Will
returned upstairs and killed the child."
Coretta Scott King says this series of books can help the reader
"discover the principles that we will use to guide our lives." (Circular
from Heritage Preservation Association, 1996, no date.)
Meanwhile, Simon & Schuster's children's publishing division has
just released its Winter, 1997 catalogue. Books for blacks are sprinkled
throughout the 50-page catalogue, but there is a five-page section, beginning
on page 5, that is exclusively black. One title is Mississippi Chariot,
which unfolds in the following setting: "In Depression-era Mississippi,
twelve-year-Old Shortnin' Bread Jackson discovers his father may be lynched
for a crime he didn't commit." Power to the People, about the Black
Panther Party, describes its criminal founders, Huey Newton and Bobby Seale,
as "two feisty youngsters." Some titles appear to be realistic inspirational
stories. Forged by Fire is about a black teenager "who has to overcome
a home of addiction and abuse to save his sister and himself."
• • •
BACK TO TOP • •
E T T E R S F R O M R E A D E
Sir – I wish to take issue with your derogatory description
of learning-disabled children in your diatribe against equality in the
September and October issues: "Public education has degenerated into a
preoccupation with incompetents, defectives, and other beneficiaries of
`special' education." Here I think you are guilty of that typically white
failing you yourself describe: the failure to make distinctions.
You do our cause no good when you throw around words like "incompetent"
and "defective." You disregard the actual facts as well as the painful
emotions of the parents and children who struggle with such problems and
try to transcend them. Such children are as much the raw material of our
race as any other and we are obliged to form that new material as best
Richard Culley, Chatham, N. Y.
Sir – A line of demarcation is emerging in AR between Christians
and pagans. Here are a few comments from someone on the Christian side
of the argument.
It is not enough to survey what Indo-Europeans have believed historically,
as Edwin Clark does (Nov. 1996). One must judge whether those beliefs are
true, but Mr. Clark leaves his readers in the dark about this. Each Indo-European
is responsible for what he himself believes, and he does not discharge
that responsibility simply by making an inventory of ancestral lore.
It will not do merely to suggest, as Mr. Clark does ever so gently,
that Christianity goes against the spiritual grain of the Indo-European.
One must offer a substitute and prepare to be interrogated about it by
Christians. Who represents the genius of the anti-Christian mind? Gibbon?
Nietzsche? Spengler? Mencken? (Francis Parker Yockey? William Pierce?)
Let the champion be named and put to the test! Racially conscious Indo-European
Christians will increasingly have to deal with this friendly rivalry, but
dealing with it will always include evangelizing unbelievers. Race is more
important than our enemies would have us believe, but it is not everything.
Those who say it is can count on a challenge.
Tony Flood, New York, N.Y.
Sir – I think Edwin Clark's "Roots of the White Man" beautifully
expands on the ideas in Jared Taylor's "The Ways of Our People." Mr. Taylor
states that concern for the rights and feelings of others is a defining
trait of white peoples while Mr. Clark emphasizes the recognition of an
objective, absolute reality which has enabled the Indo-European to master
his environment. Both characteristics stem from the same source. Whites
recognize the objective fact that others experience more or less the same
feelings they do. Their respect for the truth makes it harder to demonize
enemies and sharpens their empathy.
However, these virtues have become hypertrophied and exploited so that
whites actually listen to thugs and crackpots and feel guilty when they
hear their society called "fascist," "racist," "sexist," and so on. In
effect we have invented and given them the morality with which they assault
us. Anti-Christians appear to regard appeals to compassion with suspicion,
believing Christianity to be part of an alien, corrupting morality that
our ancestors were duped into accepting. However, I am proud of our morality.
It has helped us establish a way of life that is the envy of the world.
We arc losing that way of life partly because of our own corruption and
partly because we have allowed people alien or even hostile to the West
to dictate how charitable we ought to be with our unique resources.
Paul Neff, Cambridge, Mass.
Sir – It was with considerable disappointment that I read
Mr. Clark's essay on the roots of the white man. I have studied mythology
and have concluded from the vast and varied material available that it
is impossible really to know the minds of ancient peoples. Tempting though
it may be to draw firm conclusions about "Aryans" or "fellaheen peoples,"
there is simply too much variety and inconsistency in the record to support
any but the most cautious and tentative generalizations.
Mr. Clark appears to me to have forced the facts to fit his theory.
His distortions are not nearly so great nor, I believe, are his intentions
dishonorable, but is his purpose any different from that of the Afro-centrists
– to create an agreeable and self-aggrandizing "history" for his people,
perhaps even at the expense of verifiable fact?
Name Withheld, New York, N. Y.
Sir – Please don't undermine your credibility with false
commentary on matters you do not understand. In a Nov. 1996 O Tempora item,
"Exporting Money," you write, "Remittances to Mexico are, of course, lost
to the American economy, a fact overlooked by most analysts of immigration."
In fact, every dollar that leaves the U.S. for whatever reason must eventually
come back to the U.S. in exchange for exports or be invested in the American
economy. It is therefore not lost to the American economy. Unless, of course,
the foreign holder destroys his dollars, and you probably agree that even
Mexicans wouldn't do that.
Geb Sommer, Lexington, S.C.
• • •
BACK TO TOP • •