Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page

Free Speech - August 1995 - Volume I, Number 8

The Long March

by Ian P. McKinney

SINCE THE LAST ELECTION that heralded the so-called "Republican revolution" we hear a lot of talk announcing that liberalism is dead, or at least on its last legs. That is what well-known conservatives like Rush Limbaugh and others would have us all believe. Yes, listeners, all we have to do is support Newt Gingrich and, of course, keep on buying those Rush beer steins, and hopefully, according to the plan, when Bill Clinton is voted out of office in 1996 and after we elect a good conservative president, then all our worries will be over.

Does anyone actually think that an election or two will reverse well over fifty years of liberal and alien subversion of our government and institutions, the moral decay, the decline of the public school system, the out-of-control immigration, the explosion of non-White crime, or any of the other consequences of "diversity"? The present Republican politicians usually do not even directly address these issues. It would not matter if the Republicans were to be elected in large numbers for the next fifty years: these problems would obviously continue to grow worse. Unfortunately, we've allowed ourselves to be convinced that liberalism consists of mostly economic issues: taxes, welfare, deficit spending, etc. The fact of the matter is that liberalism, at its core, has little to do with economics.

The economic issues that are constantly discussed in conservative circles are only *by-products of liberalism. The foundation and wellspring of liberalism is the fraudulent doctrine of universal human equality. This doctrine states, in short, that a person is nothing more than a victim of his environment, born into the world as a blank slate. Everything that he will become, every impulse and instinct, every talent or flaw, every like or dislike, and even his intelligence, is solely the product of external forces and life experiences.

For example, those who believe in the doctrine of human equality state that there is no danger to our nation from the millions of low-intelligence, crime-prone, and violent people now immigrating to and reproducing in our cities at astronomical rates. All that we have to do, they say, is to make sure that these millions are guided into some do-gooding government program, like "Head Start" or "Midnight Basketball," and they will all eventually become engineers, doctors, and other kinds of productive contributors to our country. And what do *conservatives say? No midnight basketball for them. But they really aren't too different from the liberals. They say: Give these non-Whites a good education, economic opportunity, and prayer in the schools; and soon the Jamaican drug gang members will be indistinguishable from Beaver Cleaver. Modern-day conservatives and liberals both accept the liberal ideas of equality and of the overriding importance of the individual's environment.

If individuals are born with equal potential, and what they eventually become is determined solely by their environment, then certainly it follows that the races are also equal. If someone was to remove an infant from the jungles of Africa and place that child into the home of a typical White family here in America, then according to the theory of equality we should expect that the Black child's intelligence and abilities would be no different than those of a typical White child raised under similar conditions. If that African baby had been placed in Beethoven's crib and raised identically to him, then that child would have eventually written the Ninth Symphony. Had that African child been placed in William Shockley's crib he would have invented the transistor. My examples may be exaggerated, but that really is the essence of the modern religion of equalitarianism, which is espoused by Clinton, Gingrich, and every other politician who wants to be elected. It is a false religion, with Communist roots, and with no scientific basis whatever.

I have mentioned the Tanser Study on a previous *American Dissident Voices program. This study was conducted as part of the doctoral thesis of Dr. H. A. Tanser who was Superintendent of Schools in Chatham, Ontario, in 1939. For approximately 100 years, Chatham had been the home of Blacks who had escaped slavery via the so-called "Underground Railroad" of the 19th century, and their descendants. The study's goal was to show that these Blacks, living in equal social conditions with Whites and attending the same schools for about a century, would have developed IQs comparable to the Whites. The numerous other studies conducted up until that time, it was claimed, showed lower IQs for Blacks because American Blacks had been segregated and discriminated against for their entire lives. Chatham was an exception to that. The findings of the Tanser study revealed quite the opposite of those expectations, however. There was an approximate 15 point deficit in the average Black IQ test score when compared with the average White score: the same difference which existed and still exists between Black and White scores in Alabama or Louisiana.

The previously mentioned study is only one of many dozens conducted over the years by various private, public, and military researchers. They are unanimous in their findings. The IQ gap is unquestionably real. Read *The Bell Curve, available from National Vanguard Books, for an objective summary of the data. The theory of human equality has been scientifically demonstrated again and again to be false. The interesting question is: Why do we find so many fanatical advocates of this thoroughly discredited theory in the academy, in the media, and in government?

Another issue on which modern Republicans agree with Bill Clinton is that of the wonderful benefits of Third World immigration. The equality doctrine states that the race of an immigrant is of no consequence. Gingrich and Limbaugh and company state that all that is necessary is for the immigrants to be imbued with the American culture, whatever that is, and after a sufficient period of acclimatization, they would be functionally identical to native-born White Americans. The Republican "revolution" has zero chance of reversing or even slowing the browning of America.

If intelligence varies to such degrees among racial groups, then it is logical to believe other less tangible psychological characteristics also vary by race. I am referring to characteristics that enable a racial group to collectively create and sustain such a unique civilization composed of the body of art, learning, politics, social organization, etc.: the mental characteristics comprising the natural abilities and tendencies that exist within that racial group. It is a synthesis of intelligence and racial "personality" that is the root of culture.

Why does one group of people develop an advanced society, while others remain at a savage level? Why do some races seem incapable of developing or maintaining an advanced society even when exposed to -- and in cases actively aided by -- more advanced civilizations, while others are able to quickly adapt outside ideas and technologies and then go on to develop them in their own unique ways? Those are good questions, but do not expect a rational answer from a liberal. Their answer will be that it's "racism" and "bigotry" on the part of Whites and in some cases Asians for the inability of Black Africa, for example, to move much beyond the Stone Age. The glaring failure to develop in Africa causes severe consternation among liberals, and their shrill calls for more foreign aid, more exchange students, more "uplift" programs, more "democracy," ad infinitum, are simply desperate efforts to cover for the total intellectual bankruptcy of the equality doctrine. For an equalitarian to face the fact that an endless supply of money and assistance will not bring any lasting improvement to a place like Africa would destroy his belief system and would require a massive philosophical reassessment.

The deteriorating social conditions that are occurring in the United States and the rest of the White world are the direct results of an insane immigration policy and the tremendous birthrate of the non-Whites already here. Both of these have their roots in the doctrine of equality. How did this doctrine become the state religion of the new rulers of America? Our ancestors 100 years ago certainly never believed in such nonsense. What happened? To answer that question, we must travel back those 100 years and examine the career of one Franz Boas, whom the liberal intellectual establishment regards with almost religious reverence. Boas was an academic with Communist sympathies, and was actually cited by the United States Congress for over 40 different Communist affiliations.

Communist strategy in the United States during the early part of this century included what they called "the long march through the institutions." This meant that Communists and sympathizers would infiltrate and gain positions of influence in as many important American organizations as possible; including churches, clubs, social organizations, service groups, government departments, the legal profession, and especially schools and colleges. In the event of a Communist revolution, party members and sympathizers would already have their fingers on enough levers of power to help the revolution along and to govern once it took place. In the event that a violent revolution did not take place, the "long march through the institutions" would be an alternate road to power. The Communists and those behind Communism, as we all know, took that alternate road in this country. Once in positions of influence, they were able to help each other, sway the minds of students and others under them, and crush their disorganized and surprised opposition, especially in the academy where they still rule today. Boas was one of the most skilled practitioners of these skills.

Boas was born in Germany in 1858 of radical socialist Jewish parents. His fame rests on his contributions to the field of anthropology, the study of the origins and development of man and human societies. His education included no study of anthropology; and how he got his Ph.D. is something of a mystery, but nonetheless he went on to obtain a professorship at Columbia University and subsequently created what is known today as social or cultural anthropology. Cultural anthropology, in contrast to physical anthropology, holds that external environmental forces determine human development almost to the exclusion of biology and genetics. Boas, who died in 1942, spent his life energetically promoting the equality doctrine.

Over a period of several decades, the pupils of Boas were given the air of authority that goes with doctoral degrees, and were placed into positions of responsibility in anthropology departments of leading universities around the nation. These Boas disciples received the concerted backing of the press, radio, and TV (which were also by this time in the hands of America's enemies). These media served as a platform to freely espouse their "great" opinions on various issues. At the same time, the critics of the "Boas School" were to a large degree silenced.

A prominent Boas student, Professor Melville Herksovits, stated, "The four decades of the tenure of his professorship at Columbia gave a continuity to his teaching that permitted him to develop students who eventually made up the greater part of the significant professional core of American anthropologists, and who came to man and direct most of the major departments of anthropology in the United States. In their turn they trained the students who, with increases in general interest in the subject... have continued in the tradition in which their teachers were trained."

Thirty years ago America's pre-eminent physical anthropologist, the late Carleton Coon, minced no words in describing the chicanery of the cultural anthropologists: "More serious are the activities of the academic debunkers and soft-peddlers who operate inside anthropology itself. Basing their ideas on the concept of the brotherhood of man, certain writers, who are mostly social anthropologists, consider it immoral to study race, and produce book after book exposing it as a `myth'... and [saying] we should pretend that race does not exist. These writers are not physical anthropologists, but the public does not know the difference." So while the liberal anthropologists continually lecture the public on racial matters through an endless stream of books and articles, the fact is that they have no real credentials for such pronouncements. Those with such credentials -- the physical anthropologists -- are seldom given a media forum.

I do not want to leave the impression that physical anthropology was somehow eliminated or absorbed by cultural anthropology. At the present time the debate still rages between the two schools. Despite decades of equality propaganda, some scholars are still intellectually honest, you see, though the TV-watching and newspaper-reading public almost never hears from them. Who were and are these cultural anthropologists that have been propagandizing the public with the equality doctrine? Therein lies the truly revealing aspect of the matter. The most prominent among the Boas devotees are as follows: Ashley Montagu (Jewish, despite the name), Raymond Pearl, Melville Herskovitz, Herbert Seligman, Otto Klineberg, Gene Weltfish, Amram Scheinfeld, Ruth Benedict, L.C. Dunn, Isador Chein, and Margaret Mead. It is very noteworthy that a very high proportion of the Boas illuminaries were foreign born, and in almost every case Jewish. The two women mentioned, Mead and Benedict, were reportedly a lesbian couple. Does Jewishness prove Communist or subversive motives by itself? No, but when one considers the Communist connections of Boas himself, and the fact that Ruth Benedict, Gene Weltfish, Melville Herskovitz, and especially Ashley Montagu, had all been connected with Communist activities, and when one also considers the long history of Jewish domination of the Communist movement, it certainly would cause one to view the whole group with extreme suspicion. It would be reasonable to suspect that these individuals might not have America's best interests at heart.

The history of Boas and the equality doctrine is an interesting illustration in itself of the dangers inherent in the presence of alien influences within even a relatively homogeneous nation, which is what America was back during the era of Boas' domination of Columbia University's anthropology department. Being non-political, as scholars generally were, the physical anthropologists were simply unaccustomed to dealing with an alien group within their midst possessed of both a fervent political agenda and a powerful ethnic nationalism, who were bent upon twisting scholarship into a propaganda tool. Combine the collaboration of the partisan media with the willingness of the "Boas School" to distort and falsify science, and we see the operation in its essence and as it still functions today. It is a sobering example of the kind of subversion that has taken place in so many areas of American society.

Certainly the subversion continues today and has deeply damaged our society. We have fallen so far that the Republican party, viewed by many well-meaning White Americans as the nation's salvation, is saturated with the equality philosophy. The examples are numerous.

The victory of Proposition 187 in California was a result of the total frustration of Californians with the totally ineffectual efforts of the federal government to stop illegal immigration. The initiative, which has now technically become law though Jewish lawyer Mark Silverman has vowed it will be "litigated for years" and the will of California's people has been stifled, would simply prevent illegal aliens from obtaining public welfare, public medical assistance, and access to public schools, and would increase the penalties for the counterfeiting of documents used by illegals to obtain employment. When it began to look like the proposition was going to win, we saw two of the most prominent "conservative" gurus, Jack Kemp and William Bennett, travelling to California and making public statements attacking the provision as "exclusionary" and "undemocratic." Another example is the recent broadcast statement of the House Speaker, Newt Gingrich, in which he proclaimed that we must accept an "integrated society." Actually the evidence of Newt Gingrich's liberalism goes much deeper than a few public statements.

Recently, Speaker Gingrich wrote the introduction to the book *Creating a New Civilization by Jewish authors Alvin and Heidi Toffler. Mr. Toffler has written several popular books over the years projecting his vision for the future of society; two of the most well known being *Future Shock and *The Third Wave. Contained within the pages of their most recent book is the advocacy of, among other things, both homosexual and polygamous marriages, convenience abortion, and various kinds of "New Age" claptrap. Also singled-out for praise in several instances in this book is the liberal Democratic Vice President, Al Gore, Jr.

Throughout the book they repeatedly make much use of standard Communist phraseology, and the Tofflers are reported to hold a sincere reverence for Karl Marx himself. Furthermore, targets attacked by them include traditional families, patriotism, and national sovereignty, and they refer to a homogeneous population as a "curse." They even go as far as to boldly claim that the principles held by our founding fathers, and embodied in the Constitution, are "oppressive and dangerous to our welfare." In other words, the Tofflers are espousing the same old liberal, anti-American, "one world" garbage that has been propagated by our enemies for the past sixty years or more. And Newt Gingrich, the standard-bearer for the Republican Party, wrote a glowing introduction to their book. If you cannot reason from these facts -- if you still believe that the Republicans really oppose the liberal program -- then there is indeed no hope for you.

In reading the Toffler's book, we find repeated calls for "diversity" in nearly every chapter, and warnings that our only hope is to promote and foster "diversity" in every aspect of American society. In addition to this we find the declaration, in so many words, that we *cannot stop Third World immigration.

The long and short of the Toffler's recommended vision for America is a society consisting of atomized and disconnected individuals of every race, unified as members of a giant computer network harmoniously exchanging their thoughts and ideas, and out of all this will emerge a "new civilization" in the land that was once America. It is just a repackaging of all the old liberal hallucinations of the past: "the brotherhood of man," "the unity of mankind," "one-world," "the new world order," "equality" and on and on in the same old tired vein. Like trendy leftists everywhere these days, the Tofflers do pay obeisance to "market forces" but then the economic structure was never really the reason behind our enemies' calls for revolution anyway.

As the Tofflers and their sycophants -- both Republican and Democrat -- call for increased "diversity" as the remedy for our ills, more and more White Americans are coming to the realization that "diversity" is the cause of our problems rather than the cure. As ever-increasing numbers of our people, especially in urban areas, are finding it necessary to live behind electronic surveillance systems, armed security guards, and barred windows -- all aimed at keeping "diversity" at bay -- they will come to understand that in order for our nation to survive, diversity is something to be prevented, not promoted.

A creative, conquering spirit still lies suppressed within the consciousness of our people. That spirit has sustained us since the beginning of our existence. It will emerge again.

Instead of conquering a vast wilderness or exploring uncharted regions of territory or knowledge, we must come to realize that the present struggle is an intellectual and spiritual one "within ourselves. In order to have any chance of survival we must purge from our minds the popular superstitions and fetishes popularized by the media. We must reject the do-gooding hallucination of "brotherhood," the self-hate that has been so cleverly injected into so many of our people, and of course, the destructive alien doctrine of liberalism and its parent, equalitarianism, regardless of whether we hear them from conservatives or liberals, Republicans or Democrats.

After that battle has been won, the job of straightening out North America and our people's homelands around the world will be comparatively easy. That is why the enemies of America are so terrified that you might wake up.

A cassette recording of this broadcast is available for $12.95 including postage from:
National Vanguard Books
P.O. Box 330
Hillsboro, WV 24946

Free Speech Directory || National Alliance Main Page