200404 American Renaissance

American Renaissance - 1 - April 2004

Front row: Perry Lorenz, Gordon Baum, Donald Templer. Second row: RaymondWolters, Roger McGrath, Samuel Francis, Sam Dickson. Back row: Paul Fromm,

Jared Taylor, Jack Loggenberg, Philip du Toit. Missing: Joe Sobran, Lou Callabro.

Continued on page 3

There is not a truth existing which I fear or would wish unknown to the whole world. — Thomas Jefferson

Vol. 15 No. 4 April 2004

Racial Heresies for the 21st Century

American Renaissance

2004 conference draws arecord turnout.

by Ian Jobling

More than 260people gath-ered at the

Hyatt Dulles hotel innorthern Virginia overthe weekend of Feb.20-22 for the 2004American Renaissanceconference. Guestscame from all parts ofthe United States, aswell as Canada, Brit-ain, France, and evenSouth Africa and Aus-tralia to make it thebest-attended AR con-ference ever. From begin-ning to end, there was an in-vigorating sense of solidar-ity and conviviality, as AR celebrated thetenth anniversary of its first meeting inAtlanta, Georgia. As one participant putit, “it’s great to be among the livingagain.”

The conference began on Fridayevening with a cocktail reception andwelcoming remarks by the AR staff.Jared Taylor provoked much hilarity bychallenging the spy from the SouthernPoverty Law Center or the Anti-Defa-mation League who always attends ARconferences to reveal himself. “Why doyou sneak around like a thief?” he asked.“We know you’re here, so I’m giving youan opportunity to do something honor-able and manly, and identify yourself.”The spy remained silent.

Afterwards, conference guests social-ized late into the evening, enjoying thecamaraderie that marked the entireweekend.

On Saturday morning, syndicatedcolumnist Samuel Francis began with

an analysis of white resistance to racialconsciousness. He reported that many ofhis correspondents say there can be nosignificant racial differences in behav-ior because the genomes of differentraces differ by only a fraction of a per-

cent. Others argue that racial differencesare meaningless because all people havea common African origin. One of hisreaders claimed we are all black becausewe came from Africa; Dr. Francis com-mented that this was like claiming weare all fish because we once came fromthe ocean.

Some of Dr. Francis’s readers quoteGalatians 3:28: “There is neither Jew norGreek, there is neither bond nor free,there is neither male nor female: for yeare all one in Christ Jesus.” Dr. Francisremarked that people who like this pas-sage do not seem to realize it could beused to undermine the case for the stateof Israel and even defend homosexualmarriage.

Some readers do not believe a whiterace even exists, that we are instead adiverse collection of Frenchmen, Poles,Lithuanians, and so on. It is a mysteryto Dr. Francis why national identities areacceptable, but a racial identity is not.

Another commonargument is thatwhites should denythemselves racialconsciousness be-cause it leads to theunique wickednessof the Holocaustand slavery. Dr.Francis noted thatin the long sweep ofhistory that in-cludes Mongol andMuslim attacks onEurope, it is onlyvery recently that

whites started killingmore non-whites than theother way around.

Conservatives often say they areafraid where racial consciousness wouldlead, imagining slaughter and slaveryrather than immigration reform. “All youhave to do is ring the bell, and conser-vatives salivate the way the leftiststrained them,” he said, noting that thehistory of egalitarianism is much blood-ier than that of inegalitarianism. Thesearguments are so flimsy they must surelybe a cover for “irrational and emotionalfixations,” he said. They show thatwhites “are willing to grasp at any strawto deny the reality of our problems.”(The full text of Dr. Francis’s remarkscan be read at www. amren.com.)

Paul Fromm, president of the CanadaFirst Immigration Reform Committeeand the Canadian Association for FreeExpression, announced that his two over-riding concerns were immigration andfree speech because in Canada there istoo much of one and too little of the

As one participant put it,“It’s great to be among

the living again.”


Letters from ReadersSir — I refer to conditions in post-

colonial Africa as described in the re-view of Paul Theroux’s Dark Star Sa-fari: Overland from Cairo to Cape Town(Dec. 2003). Unfortunately, parts ofAustralia seem to be going the same way.

Roughly 50 percent of Australia’sNorthern Territory, an area roughly thesize of Texas, has been handed over tothe 50,000 Aborigines who live there.This should have put them on easy street

but many, if not most, are going back-wards. What had been hard-workingcattle stations are now often devoid ofstock. The people are poor, and unem-ployment rates of 90 percent are not un-common. Literacy levels are well behindthe rest of the country, and crime ratesare climbing.

During the 1990s, the homicide ratein the Territory went over 16 per 100,000people. For a short time this was sharplyreduced because of mandatory sentenc-ing legislation under which anyone con-victed three times automatically went to

prison, regardless of the seriousness ofthe crime. Virtually all those incarcer-ated under this policy were Aborigines,so there were the usual complaints aboutracism. The government took a lot ofcriticism about this, and things came toa head when an Aboriginal imprisonedunder the policy committed suicide.

There was a change in governmentand the legislation was repealed. Withintwo years the homicide rate in the Terri-tory more than tripled. At the same time,the homicide rate for Australian girlsunder 10 years of age rose by 110 per-cent—a sickening example of how “anti-racist” measures backfire.

R. Hughes, Strathfield, NSW, Austra-lia

Sir — I was surprised your articleson competitive altruism (Oct. and Nov.2003) did not cite the potlatch feastscelebrated by the Indians of northwest-ern coastal America. The AmericanHeritage Dictionary defines a potlachfeast as “a ceremonial feast . . . at theend of which the host gives valuablematerial goods to the guests who belongto other kin groups . . . to show he canafford to do so.” The US governmentfinally stepped in because the over-com-petitive potlach Indians were “giving”themselves into penury.

Kenneth Schmidt, Muskegon, Mich.

Sir — Your sexism is outrageous!How dare you claim careers are “unnec-essary” for educated, smart white women( “Fruits of an Unfettered Mind,” previ-ous issue). Furthermore, no one shouldhave children he doesn’t want. Anyonewho has to be pressured or encouragedto be a parent will not be a good one.

We don’t owe society children. Andlastly, men are just as responsible forchild rearing and housekeeping aswomen. I don’t buy your nonsense thatwomen are inherently better at child rear-ing—that’s just an excuse to hold themback. If they are, why do so many womenturn to Benjamin Spock and JohnRosemond for help?

Anonymous, Atlanta, Ga.

Sir — While living in Mexico Cityfrom 1994 to early 1997, I was some-times taken for a native speaker of Span-ish. I learned it living in Madrid. I trav-eled all over the country, and met peoplefrom the bottom to the top of Mexicansociety.

I would like to see all illegal aliensdeported and our borders closed bywhatever means necessary. Mexico,however, is a special case. It is unstable,and if it did not have the escape valve ofemigration to and remittances from theUS, it would explode into chaos andanarchy from which we could not insu-late ourselves—something far worsethan the problems we have now. Unfor-tunately, we are stuck with Mexico.

A strongly-regulated guest workerprogram, just for Mexicans, coupledwith deportation of all other illegals andstrict border controls is the only combi-nation that will work.

Thomas Oleson, Gig Harbor, Wash.

Sir — I greatly enjoyed last month’sarticle about Hispanic family values. Theonly criticism I have is that the writershould have made it clear which Hispan-ics he was writing about from a racialpoint of view. Some Hispanics are, ofcourse, white.

Some of the problems Hispanics haveare clearly rooted in biology. High ratesof alcoholism are found among thosegroups that are essentially Native Ameri-can. Some non-European groups areunable to metabolize alcohol as Euro-peans do, and alcohol is essentially apoison to them. Spaniards and Argen-tines, on the other hand, do not sufferfrom particularly high rates of alcohol-ism.

Frank Pucillo, Davie, Fla.


American Renaissance is published monthly by theNew Century Foundation. NCF is governed by section501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code; contributionsto it are tax deductible.

Subscriptions to American Renaissance are $24.00 per year. First-class postage isan additional $8.00. Subscriptions to Canada (first class) are $36.00. Subscriptionsoutside Canada and the U.S. (air mail) are $40.00. Back issues are $3.00 each. Foreignsubscribers should send U.S. dollars or equivalent in convertible bank notes.

Please make checks payable to: American Renaissance, P.O. Box 527, Oakton, VA22124. ISSN No. 1086-9905, Telephone: (703) 716-0900, Facsimile: (703) 716-0932,Web Page Address: www.AmRen.com

Continued from page 1

American RenaissanceJared Taylor, Editor

Stephen Webster, Assistant EditorIan Jobling, Associate Editor

George McDaniel, Web Page Editor

other. Almost 12 percent of Canada’spopulation is from the Third World, andif immigration and fertility rates stayconstant, Canada will lose its white ma-jority about the same time as the UnitedStates, in the middle of this century.Canada accepts about 235,000 immi-grants every year, or almost twice asmany per capita as the United States.Eighty-five percent are from the ThirdWorld, and this has brought profounddemographic change: Toronto, for ex-ample, was one percent non-white in1961, but is more than 60 percent non-white today.

It can be dangerous to criticize thisprocess. Mr. Fromm pointed to the caseof Brad Love, who was sentenced underhate speech laws to 18 months in prisonfor writing rude letters to politiciansabout immigration.

Politicians and the media insist thatCanada has always been multicultural,but until recently, there was no ques-tion that Canada was a country for Eu-ropeans. Robert Borden, prime ministerfrom 1911-1920 said bluntly that it wasa white man’s country. Canada’s tradi-tional flag, the Red Ensign, bears thecoats of arms of the British, French, andother European pioneers. The maple leafflag, which Mr. Fromm likened to amodern corporate logo, was adopted in1965.

The current immigration minister hassaid she does not see herself as a gate-keeper, but as a facilitator and socialworker. Asylum seekers automaticallyget welfare until their cases are heard,and Canada grants asylum to womenwith abusive husbands, and homosexu-als from macho cultures. Forty-five per-cent of these immigrants cannot speak

English or French, which means theyprobably cannot be employed.

Mr. Fromm also suggested Orientalimmigrants are forming a fifth columnin Canada and reducing Canadians’ con-trol over their country. They already owna great deal of real estate, and they arein the process of buying Air Canada.

University of Delaware history pro-fessor Raymond Wolters marked the50th anniversary year of Brown v Boardof Education by noting that American

schools have gone from desegregationto forced integration and then back todesegregation. Although the Con-stitution’s 14th Amendment was writtenby men who plainly supported schoolsegregation, NAACP attorneys managedto convince the Supreme Court throughhistorical and legal deception that theequal protection clause required deseg-regation. Still, the Brown decision didnot require forcible integration; it merelyprohibited schools from refusing admis-sion to students because of race. Little

changed after Brown. Most schools re-mained overwhelmingly white or blackbecause Americans preferred it that way.

This did not satisfy civil rights activ-ists, who thought segregation harmedblack students. So, in 1968, the Courtheld that Brown required school districtsthat had discriminated in the past to cor-rect this by promoting integration. Bus-ing did not have the intended effect:Black academic performance failed toimprove, and whites never acceptedschool assignment by race. Districts thatrequired integration lost an average of50 percent of their students to whiteflight. In the 1990s, the Rehnquist courtreturned to the original understanding ofBrown, and schools once again reflectneighborhood segregation.

Prof. Wolters also described the roleof academics in school integration. In-tellectuals are overwhelmingly on theleft, and their writing “combines righ-teous indignation with emotional com-mitment.” They reward mediocre schol-ars who praise integration, and punishexcellent scholars who criticize it.

The NAACP hired several historiansto argue that the 14th Amendment re-quired desgregation. They duly preparedpapers to support this claim, even thoughthe evidence was against it. Three havesince admitted their fraud, concedingthat they let politics distort their perspec-tive, but this has in no way hurt theircareers.

Psychologist Kenneth Clark providedthe social rationale for the Brown casewith his notorious doll studies thatclaimed to show blacks suffered psycho-logical damage from segregation. Thesestudies were later discredited—if any-thing, they showed integration damagedblacks—but they played a large role inwinning the Brown case, and Clark en-joyed an extremely successful academiccareer. Kenneth Coleman, a sociologistwho produced thorough and sound workdemonstrating that integration loweredthe quality of white education withoutraising that of blacks, suffered a longperiod of academic isolation, and somecolleagues even likened him to a Nazi.

The next address was by Philip duToit, president of the Zimbabwe Victims’Coalition. He has just published a bookabout South Africa’s “land restitution,”and argues that agriculture is headed forcollapse because blacks are incapable ofmodern farming. He described the greatsuffering that has followed the transferof power to blacks in South Africa and

Not fit to name a school after.


Zimbabwe. Blacks have killed 1,600white farmers in South Africa since blackrule began in 1994, making farming inSouth Africa the most dangerous peace-time occupation in the world. The kill-ings have scared many whites off theirfarms; in ten years their numbers havedropped from 56,000 to 35,000. Squat-ters steal from them and kill their cattle,but the incompetent South African po-lice catch only an estimated 10 percentof career criminals. Commercial farm-ers also must pay high taxes. Dr. du Toitshowed a film about the farm killings,in which one expert claimed this could

be the beginning of full-scale genocide.At the same time, the black governmentnow practices such ruthless preferencesit is practically impossible for whites toget scholarships, and job prospects areincreasingly dim. Now that the schoolsare black-run, many black 8th-graderscannot read.

In Zimbabwe, the eviction of 4,000farmers has brought disaster. More than150,000 black farm workers have losttheir jobs, and the economy is on therocks. Mr. du Toit ended his speech witha call for more international cooperationamong whites.

Jack Loggenberg of the TransvaalAgricultural Union continued the discus-sion of South Africa. The goals of hisorganization are to protect the willingseller-willing buyer principle of propertyexchange, to ensure the maintenance ofSouth Africa’s food and fiber production,and to ensure that commercial farmersare able to live without fear of theft andviolence.

Mr. Loggenberg spoke not only aboutthe physical, but the psychological as-pects of the current campaign against

South African whites, which is meant todestroy their sense of peoplehood.Blacks in authority call whites “colo-nialists,” “invaders,” and “land-grab-bers,” discredit their heroes, and teardown their monuments. Cities, towns,streets, and buildings once named forwhites are now renamed for black “free-dom fighters.” White children must at-tend integrated schools that actively tryto stamp out any aspect of European cul-ture or achievement, and that havepushed out Christianity in favor of somevague universal religion. Mr. Loggen-berg also stressed the importance ofworld-wide white solidarity.

Author and history professor RogerMcGrath described the decline of thewhite hero in American culture. Beforethe 1960s, Americans revered statesmenand warriors like Washington, Jefferson,Jackson, and Teddy Roosevelt, and ex-aggerated their virtues; now these menare criminals. Washington owned slaves;Jefferson slept with them; Jackson up-rooted Indians; Roosevelt proclaimedwhite superiority. Just as in South Af-rica, the names of white icons are com-ing down. Prof. McGrath gave the ex-ample of a majority-black elementaryschool in New Orleans, that changed itsname from Washington because Wash-ington owned slaves. Noting the school’sterrible student performance, he said itmay be just as well that it no longer bearsWashington’s name.

Lincoln has survived as a hero be-cause he liberated the slaves, and cul-tural Marxists downplay his convictionof Negro inferiority and opposition tointegration. The left loves Lincoln be-cause he destroyed Southern culture,increased the power of the federal gov-ernment, and created “the secular reli-gion of egalitarianism.”

Prof. McGrath spoke admiringly ofthe masculine virtues of the great Ameri-can statesmen who are now so despised.He praised Washington’s military acu-men and Andrew Jackson’s bravery induels. He spoke reverently of World WarII heroes, like Audie Murphy and ColinKelly, and deplored the fact that they arenot even mentioned in today’s historybooks. Strength and courage in whitemen are today called “militarism” and“fascism.” “It is difficult not to con-clude,” he said, “that authors and pub-lishers fear portraying white men in aheroic light, because such portrayals justmight inspire boys today to behave in amanner admired by their ancestors.”

There followed three brief presenta-tions by activists. Perry Lorenz de-scribed his campaign for the FortCollins, Colorado school board, in whichhe pointed out it was unrealistic to ex-pect schools to close the achievementgap between white and black studentsbecause of innate differences. There wasthe predictable outcry, but he still wonover 20 percent of the vote. GordonBaum, CEO of the Council of Conser-vative Citizens, noted that today’s youngpeople are much more racially consciousthan their parents. He says the Confed-erate flag is increasingly popular amongyoung men. Lou Calabro, president ofthe European/American Issues Forum,described a photo exhibit called “Euro-pean Americans Among Us” that he hadput on at the San Francisco Public Li-brary to encourage pride in whiteachievement.

The cocktail reception before the Sat-urday evening banquet was serenaded bythe dance band, The Nitehawks. Confer-ence guests were pleasantly surprised byJared Taylor’s solid clarinet and saxo-phone performances in swing classicslike “Song of India” and “American Pa-trol.”

After the banquet on Saturday night,columnist and author Joseph Sobranspoke on “The Alien State.” He saidAmerica is going through a “statist revo-lution” on the pretext that it must passregulations to protect us. “If you thinkthe state wants to protect us,” he said,“look at Waco!” Regulations serve onlyto control our lives, and one of the pri-mary vehicles of such control is “minor-ity rights.” The state uses its mandate toprotect minorities to limit our freedomof association and to control the way wespeak and think. “The term ‘minority’ isnot a matter of numbers,” he said. “It’s amoral claim.” The government has be-come so obnoxiously intrusive that aconspiratorial view of the world is justi-fied: “It isn’t crazy to be paranoid aboutthe government,” he said. “What’s crazyis to trust it.” The state’s attitude towardsminorities is driven by a philosophy of“alienism,” or the prejudice that the ab-normal is always to be preferred to thenormal. He elaborated on homosexualand Jewish activism as examples of thistrend.

Jared Taylor began the Sundaymorning session on a note of optimism.He said the common view was thatwhites have no right to pursue racial in-terests but saw many signs of white re-

AR editor Jared Taylor plays thesaxophone before the banquet.


volt. He saw nascent racial conscious-ness in the widespread indignation overthe Bush amnesty proposal. Americanssay they oppose it because it rewardslaw-breakers, but deep-down there is aracial fear that America will becomeMexico if we let in too many Hispanics.

There are much clearer signs of ra-cial awakening in Europe, where thereare strong nationalist political parties.The Swiss People’s Party, whose cam-paign posters showed dark hands tear-ing up a Swiss flag, is now the mostpopular in the country. Russian politicsis solidly nationalist: not only is VladimirPutin’s party nationalist by Americanstandards, but the number two and num-ber three parties are even more so.

Events in Holland are particularlyheartening. Holland has had one of themost liberal immigration policies in Eu-rope, but in January, parliament issuedan all-party report saying that the attemptto create an integrated multi-ethnic so-ciety had failed. The Dutch were de-lighted when the government recentlyannounced it would deport 26,000 bo-gus asylum seekers. The city ofRotterdam will no longer issue residencepermits to anyone who doesn’t speakDutch, and will build no more cheaphousing. These measures are openly de-scribed as designed to keep out immi-grants. Denmark, recently discussed atlength in the Dec. 2003 American Re-naissance, is another encouraging ex-ample.

Political progress is more rapid in Eu-rope because of proportional represen-tation, which makes it easier for smallparties to gain influence. Mr. Taylor alsosaw a “virtuous cycle” developing inEurope. When one country closes itsdoors to immigrants or expels them, theytry to get in elsewhere, which promptsother countries to restrict immigration.(Mr. Taylor’s address can be read onlineat www.amren.com.)

Psychologist Donald Templer fol-lowed with a scathing and hilarious at-tack on the blindness of his profession.He has been fascinated by group differ-ences ever since he was a child, and thisinterest has shaped his academic career.He says denying group differences inability is costly because it puts unquali-fied blacks in positions of authority.Whites are twenty times more likely thanblacks to have IQs of 130 or above, andthese are the people who should be de-cision-makers.

“There are too many psychologists

who poison the minds of their students,”said Prof. Templer. By refusing to ac-knowledge innate intelligence differ-ences, psychologists encourage whiteguilt that weakens a psychologist’s ca-pacity to deal with the social problemsthat blacks pose. Also, it is absurd toblame test bias for low IQ scores. “Ifblacks score low on an intelligence test,”said Prof. Templer, “I would say thatconstitutes powerful evidence for itsvalidity.” Many psychologists enjoy giv-ing racial sensitivity training, but itwould be much more useful if theytreated white guilt. Many psychologistsrecommend psychological therapy forblack prisoners, but Prof. Templer dis-agrees: “They need 60 hours a week ofwork therapy. That would give them lesstime for manufacturing alcohol andweapons, trafficking drugs, and givingeach other AIDS.”

Prof. Templer was just as scathingabout the grievances of blacks againstwhites. Many claim high incarcerationrates are genocide because they preventblacks from havingchildren. In Prof.Templer’s view, “thereduced procreation ofcriminals of all colorsis a beneficial side ef-fect of incarceration. .. . If imprisoningcriminals is genocide,then I am for geno-cide.” If Americansare serious about de-terring crime, theyshould farm criminalsout to Third World and Communistcountries “that have real prisons and realpunishment.”

Sam Dickson concluded the confer-ence with “A Secular Benediction,” inwhich he lambasted the “silly right.” Theconservatives currently in power “ma-jor in the minors and minor in the ma-jors,” devoting their energy to insignifi-cant problems and ignoring things ofvital importance. The Bush administra-tion did not breathe a word of protest atthe Supreme Court’s decisions on racialpreferences last year, and its amnestyplan would only make the immigrationcrisis worse. There has also been littleprotest against the Supreme Court’s limi-tations on political advertisements,which diminish the power of minoritypolitical movements. The only issue onwhich the silly right has taken a strongconservative stand is homosexual mar-

riage, a trivial problem compared to thenon-white invasion.

Americans have been duped by thesilly right into thinking America mustpolice the Middle East. The costs of war,together with the forces of decay withinAmerica could precipitate a disaster, butsuch a disaster might doom multi-racialism and globalism and set Americaon a sounder course. Mr. Dickson alsodisagreed with libertarians who thinklimiting government will solve our prob-lems. Solutions will require the exten-sive and vigorous use of governmentpowers.

Mr. Dickson concluded by urgingwhites to greater solidarity. Although headmired individualism when he wasyounger, he has since come to see it as aweakness. A healthy person is groundedin the broader life of his people andaware of its history. When an entirepeople faces problems, they cannot bedealt with individually but must be facedcollectively. As an example, he proposedthat “if more whites contributed a little

bit of money to organizations like AR,they wouldn’t have to spend a lot ofmoney on private schools.”

The conference adjourned with manyparticipants expressing the wish that theevent be held every year. The next day,there was an article about the meetingin the Washington Times, and the Indo-nesian newspaper Suara Pembaruancovered the conference for the secondtime in a row. An independent film crewfrom Boston that is making a documen-tary on immigration reform filmed thetalks and interviewed many people in theaudience.

We are deeply grateful to all our read-ers who attended the conference, andwho made it such a success. We lookforward to seeing you again when wehold the next conference in 2006.

Participants from the southern contingentenjoy the banquet.

ΩΩΩΩΩ


What the Non-Racial Right ThinksPatrick Buchanan’s Amer-ican Cause conference.

by Jared Taylor

By interesting coincidence,Patrick Buchanan held hismost recent meeting on

immigration just a few days afterthe AR conference. Since the mid-1990s, his tax-exempt AmericanCause has put on events that arebilled as “bring[ing] the bright-est minds together to explore theideas that make America a greatnation” (see AR, Nov. 2002 for areport on an earlier meeting). Thisyear, under the theme of “Export-ing Jobs, Importing Workers,” thebrightest minds were trying tothink of ways to save the countryfrom destruction.

This was an interesting contrast to theAR conference: an energetic gatheringof “mainstream” immigration controlgroups that never talk about race. It isinstructive to take the temperature of thenon-racial right on immigration, and ifthis group is any indication, the tempera-ture is rising.

Protectionism

Protectionism was a very strong sub-theme at this conference. Jock Nash,who is a trade negotiation lawyer for theMilliken textile company, made nobones about the need to manage tradeto America’s advantage. He pointed outthat in February, the United States lostmanufacturing jobs for the 43rd monthin a row, and others argued that if thiscontinues, we will eventually be buyingeven our weapons from China. When itcomes to trade, “we don’t want a levelplaying field,” he said. “We want a homecourt advantage.” He said Americashould always come first: “I don’t carewhat happens in Mexico or Sri Lankaor Cambodia. America first, our friendsnext, and everyone else, get in line.”

Speaker after speaker echoed thistheme. Pat Choate, who was RossPerot’s running mate in 1996, said theonly way to balance our trade with Chinawas to refuse to let in any more imports.Richard McCormack, editor of Manu-

facturing & Technology News said theEuropeans have straightforward quotason Chinese imports and we should, too.

There was less agreement on how tokeep American companies from payingpeople in India and China next to noth-

ing to do computer programming, webpage design, mechanical drawings, andeven X-ray diagnosis and architecturaldesign over the Internet. Some panelistscould not see how this could be stopped,but William Hawkins, an economist atthe US Business and Industry Counciland the author of Importing Revolution(reviewed in AR, Aug. 1995), said wagespaid to workers outside the countryshould not qualify as business expensesfor tax purposes. Mr. Choate proposedan “equalization tax” on such wages thatwould bring them up to the level paid toAmericans.

It is all very well to fiddle with tariffsand taxes, but no one pointed out that,

aside from natural resources, the wealthof a country depends on the productiv-ity of its people. America will continueto be wealthy only if its people continueto be good at inventing things, makingthings, and offering first-rate services.It takes smart people to do that. As Ri-chard Lynn has shown in IQ and the

Wealth of Nations, rich countries get thatway because their people are intelligent.Trade policy will make no difference ifthe United States keeps importing pro-lific Third-Worlders who cannot betrained for high-productivity jobs.

If, at the same time, it keeps tax-ing the competent to subsidize reck-less procreation by incompetents, itspopulation will eventually be nogood at anything. If we ever dete-riorate to the point where the aver-age American is no more intelligentor hard-working than the averageFilipino, we will have the same av-erage income—and deserve it.Whether we import them or breedthem ourselves, untrainable dullardswill be poor, untrainable dullards,and drag the rest of us down withthem.

There was much hand-wringingabout China at this conference, but noone pointed out that it has already passedstiff laws that prohibit criminals anddefectives from having children (theywill no doubt be the next groups to begranted asylum in the US and Canada).As soon as the cost of embryo selectiongoes down, the Chinese will have noscruples about using it, and if they buildup to an average IQ of 115 while we dropinto the 80s, they will dominate us inevery way.

As Mark Twain used to say, nothingastonishes people more than to tell themthe truth. It would have been great funto astonish the American Cause, but noone who has ever spoken at an AR con-ference was invited to speak.

Immigration

When it comes to the question of im-porting workers, the panelists agreed: ithas to stop. Because this conference wasabout the economic effects of immigra-tion, little was said about the culturalconsequences of immigration, much lessthe racial impact, but there were still in-teresting differences in emphasis.

The one area of agreement was thatThird-World immigration most hurtsblue-collar workers. Some speakers,such as Roy Beck of Numbers USA,turned this into an appeal even HillaryClinton might respond to: He called ourimmigration policies “a war against

Whether we importthem or breed them

ourselves, untrainabledullards will be

poor, untrainabledullards.

“If it’s from China, send it back.”


workers, a war against blacks, a waragainst Hispanics.” He argued thatblacks have been repeatedly knocked offthe ladder of success by repeated wavesof immigrants desperate for work. At amore general level, he said a society likeours that is replacing well-paid factoryjobs with low-paid service jobs has “animmoral system,” and that “clean-handworkers” like the participants at the con-ference had a responsibility to fellowcitizens who have no more than a high-school education.

John Templeton, a science journalistand the only black at the conference,pushed this argument specifically forblacks: Blue-collar brothers have tocompete with low-rent Mexicans. How-ever, he was much more interested inwhat whites are up to, larding his talkwith plenty of references to segregationand “racism.” He seems to think the H1Bvisa program, which lets employersbring in foreigners to do specializedwork, has been a great way for SiliconValley companies to avoid hiring blacks!Every year, he publishes somethingcalled the “Silicon Ceiling Report,” inwhich he complains about how fewblacks have good jobs in the computerindustry. He did concede that as compa-nies send jobs overseas “white men havebecome commodities, too.” In answer toa question as to why Jesse Jackson andAl Sharpton do not talk about low-wageMexicans taking away jobs from blacks,he said that “their funding sources won’tlet them.” Judging from Mr. Templeton’sown emphasis, there may simply be morefun and profit in complaining about richwhite people rather than poor Hispan-ics.

K.B. Forbes, Executive Director ofthe Council of United Latinos, had an-other ethnic perspective. He describedhimself as the “token Hispanic” at theconference, but is half-Irish and half-Chilean, and looks European. He takesseriously Mr. Beck’s view that massiveimmigration really is “a war on blacks,a war on Hispanics,” and is trying to per-suade Hispanics that immigration willonly drive down their wages. He insistedthat many Hispanics are against the Bushamnesty—45 percent, which is not farbehind the 55 percent for the country asa whole. He tries to publicize cases likethat of the Salvadoran car mechanic whowas happy making $10.00 an hour, butwas fired when two illegal Koreansshowed up, willing to work for $4.50 anhour each. He conceded that, so far, there

is not much sign of Hispanic resistanceto immigration, but claimed that manyHispanics are completely “red, white andblue” and that Hispanic opposition toimmigration is a “sleeping giant” begin-ning to stir. He seemed entirely sincere—he got a good round of applause whenhe said all illegals must be rounded up

and deported immediately—and if hecan get Hispanics more interested inhigher pay than ethnic solidarity, goodfor him.

On the question of what to do aboutillegals, some of the speakers were firmand some were squishy, but all were onthe right side. Steven Camarota, whospoke for the reasonably high-profileCenter for Immigration Studies, hadsomething of a technical approach. Hepointed out that the Bureau of Immigra-tion and Customs Enforcement (ICE) al-ready has a backlog of six million cases,and would be paralyzed by the 10 mil-lion or so applications a Bush amnestywould bring. He is not in favor of out-right deportation of illegals, arguing thatif employer sanctions really do dry upthe job supply, illegals will go home ontheir own. He also opposes putting sol-diers on the border because they arebound to shoot somebody. Since “wemake public policy by pathetic anec-dote,” he said, a few dead Mexicanscould discredit the whole idea of firmborder control. No one pointed out thatthe threat of being shot would be enoughto close the border. It might take a fewshootings for the threat to be taken seri-ously, but that would pretty much solvethe problem.

(Mr. Camarota did make the excel-lent point that immigrants are not goingto save Social Security. Most of themearn low wages, pay few taxes, and con-

sume social services. Also, what SocialSecurity really needs is an increase inthe ratio of workers to retired people,but many immigrants bring in their agedparents, who never paid a dime in taxes,and they will, themselves, grow old andgo on Social Security.)

T.J. Bonner, the head of the borderpatrol agents union, had a similar per-spective on illegals. He thinks it ishopeless to try to stop them all at theborder and then pay no attention oncethey get in. He said if the country re-ally wanted to solve the problem onlyby patrolling the border, it would needone million agents, rather than the cur-rent 11,000. He said all police depart-ments must treat illegal entry as thecrime that it is, and that we must pros-ecute employers who hire illegals. Hesaid the best way for companies toavoid hiring them is to look hard at His-panics who don’t speak English, butthey can’t do that because that wouldbe “discrimination.”

The Bush amnesty proposal has madehis job harder. Apprehensions in somesectors rose 30 percent after the an-nouncement, and Mr. Bonner said somewho are caught immediately ask, “Howdo I sign up for the new amnesty?” Hedoesn’t want soldiers on the border be-cause he says they don’t have the righttraining.

Pat Choate was the squishiest onMexico. He said that because it is ourneighbor it is “special,” and we shoulddo everything possible to raise its stan-dard of living. We should build facto-ries there rather than in India or China(or Pennsylvania?) even if the profits arelower, so as to give Mexicans good jobs.Dan Stein of the Federation of Ameri-can Immigration Reform (FAIR) got agood round of applause when he retortedthat the only way to handle Mexico is toseal the border.

Three-term congressman from Colo-rado Tom Tancredo was the keynotespeaker. He is a very important figurewho has almost single-handedly made anational political issue out of immigra-tion, so it is worth examining his remarksin detail. He laughed at the Bush am-nesty proposal, calling it “dead on ar-rival.” He said that in his five years inCongress he has never seen so vigorousa popular reaction against a proposal. Allhis Republican and even some Demo-cratic colleagues say they are swampedwith mail from outraged constituents. AtRepublican leadership retreats, he used

Hispanics don’t want them here either?


to be the only congressman who wouldtalk about immigration, but at the mostrecent retreat he said he didn’t have tosay anything; 15 or 20 others were yell-ing about the amnesty.

He told about one Southern congress-

man who is a gynecologist and still hasa practice. He got a big laugh when heimitated a thick Southern accent, andquoted his colleague: “I have done aninformal poll of my patients and havefound that amnesty is about as popularas genital herpes.”

Mr. Tancredo said he cannot under-stand how Mr. Bush thought his planwould win Hispanic votes. “The verynext day, the Democrats did what theyalways do, they outbid us, and said weshould give them instant green cards.”Mr. Tancredo believes immigration “isa dagger pointed at our hearts,” that theinflux, both legal and illegal, combinedwith multiculturalism, threatens the iden-tity of the country. He said instructionin school is anti-American, and that ourchildren “should know a little moreabout Western Civilization than thatColumbus came to America and de-stroyed paradise.” He called the Mexi-can government a “co-conspirator” in thethreat to America, and talked about aMexican official who explained to himthat “it’s not two countries; it’s just aregion.”

He said almost no one in Congressstands for anything except being re-elected. When people accuse him of“having an agenda,” he says of coursehe has an agenda, and that no one shouldbe in Congress who doesn’t have one.He said it has been “a wonderful experi-ence” to be a politician with a real pur-pose, who works for what he truly be-lieves is best for the country. He said heused to be sympathetic when colleaguestold him they admired what he says butcan’t do the same, but now he has no

patience. “Either you care about yourcountry or you don’t,” he says. Mr.Tancredo is all for putting soldiers onthe border. He is thinking about runningfor the Senate, and says he will campaignfor two things: a moratorium on all im-

migration, and no amnesty, ever.The tenor of the immigration

debate would change completelyif there were just a few moremembers of Congress who tookMr. Tancredo’s positions andpushed them as hard as he does.He was an ebullient, effectivespeaker, and began and endedwith a standing ovation. He isalso quite approachable. Hespent 20 minutes after his talk,chatting and laughing with ad-mirers, and gives an impression

of sincere bonhomie. He had usedSamuel Huntington’s expression “clashof civilizations” in his talk, so I asked ifhe meant there was a civilizational clashbetween Mexico and the United States.He gave me a quizzical look and saidno. The clash of civilizations was be-tween Islam and the West, but if Americais disunited because of ethnic identifi-cation it will not be able to respond tothe challenge.

Patrick Buchanan spoke last, andstruck an optimistic note. This is “thedarkest hour before the dawn,” he said,adding that “the people are with us, andthe politicians are beginning tolisten.” He regretted that 12 or14 years ago, when he was run-ning for president, the mood ofthe country was not what it istoday. He was glad to see thatthe Bush amnesty appears to bedead. He said the by-electionstwo years from now may be agood chance to put up third-party candidates against sittingcongressmen who refuse to un-derstand immigration. He con-cluded with a confident predic-tion that “the people who love this coun-try for what it is will prevail over thosewho think it’s just a place to makemoney.”

He was not the only speaker to saythe mood in the country is changing. DanStein predicted that “we are about to seea tsunami” of opposition to immigration,and said it “will be about the hottest topicin politics once we get gay marriagetaken care of.” Several others spoke ofCongress finally taking notice.

The audience—at about 150, it was

perhaps a record for an American Causemeeting—likewise seemed upbeat andenergetic. As is always the case at meet-ings of this kind, it was to the right ofthe speakers. Every firm sentiment gotapplause, and one man kept shouting“lock and load, lock and load.” A half-dozen participants introduced them-selves to me as AR readers, and manyothers gladly accepted introductory cop-ies of the magazine. There is no doubtthat more and more Americans are see-ing the light; perhaps as Mr. Buchanansaid, the dawn is not far off.

What are we to make of the non-ra-cial immigration-control movement? Itsleaders are certainly well meaning, andthey are able to carry their message toaudiences that cover their ears when wetalk about race. There is no doubt thatsome people find an economic or cul-tural argument more palatable. Norshould we sneer at Roy Beck’s pitch toliberals about how immigration hurtsblacks and Hispanics. If he can interestHillary Clinton in helping blacks bykeeping out immigrants, God bless him.His is a very useful lobbying organiza-tion that makes it easy for people to stayin touch with their congressmen and thatreports on every member’s vote on ev-ery bill that touches on immigration.

Is there really as much anti-immigrantsentiment among Hispanics as K.B.Forbes claims? If there is, it is probably

based on the contempt many Cubans andSouth Americans feel for Mexican prunepickers, but why not harness it if it is there?

We should never lose sight of the factthat anyone who opposes immigration—for good reasons, bad reasons, or no rea-son at all—is our ally. To oppose immi-gration is, in effect, to oppose the dis-placement of whites by non-whites. Dis-placement is the greatest threat today toour race, and we must support and en-courage anyone who works against it,

Jobs heading south: Mexican maquilladora.

They head north.


whatever his motives. It may be thatwhen real immigration reform passes, itwill be sold to Congress as a loving ges-ture to our black and Hispanic brothersand sisters. That would still be a greatachievement.

We, of course, have no reason to shiftour emphasis. The immigration-controlmovement is full of people who, them-selves, never talk about race but arehappy for others to, and whose commit-ment is fueled by the knowledge that

Science Strikes BackVincent Sarich and Frank Miele, Race: The Reality of Human Differences, Westview Press,

2004, 287 pp., $27.50.

there is far more at stake than blue-col-lar jobs. Our ranks are growing steadily,and ultimately, only a fully-formed con-sciousness of race will save our civili-zation. In the meantime, let us applaudthe efforts of the mainstream right.

An antidote to fashionablenonsense about race.

reviewed by Thomas Jackson

Sociologists, anthropologists, andtelevision commentators tell usthat race is biologically meaning-

less, that the physical differences be-tween Danes and Pygmies are insignifi-cant evolutionary accidents. Race, weare told, is an artificial concept whitepeople invented only a few hundredyears ago to justify colonization and sla-very. If we free ourselves from this de-lusion, we can all march hand in handinto a future free of “racism.”

Everything about this view of race is

obviously wrong, but since so few of thepeople who know better are willing tosay so, this nonsense is beginning totighten its grip on the popular mind. Nowa book has finally appeared that blowsto bits every one of these tendentious ar-guments. Race is a long overdue correc-tive that deserves wide circulation.

An Instinct to Distinguish

Authors Vincent Sarich, emeritus pro-fessor of anthropology at Berkeley andFrank Miele, senior editor of Skeptic

program ever put into practice. TheSanscrit word for “caste,” varna, alsomeans “color.”

Arabs launched the earliest slavingmissions across the Sahara, and quickly

noted racial differences.The Baghdad historianAbu-al-Hasan Masu’di(d. 956) offered a de-tailed and accurate phy-sical description ofblacks, to which he add-ed that they had longpenises and were givento merriment. He attrib-uted their cheerfulnessto “defective brains.”

The jurist Sa’id al-Andalusi (1029-1070)wrote that blacks “lackself-control and steadi-

ness of mind and are over-come by fickleness, foolishness and ig-norance.” He called them “rabble” “sav-ages,” “scum,” and barely human. Hedidn’t care much for the people to thenorth either, of whom he wrote:

“Their temperaments are thereforefrigid, their humors raw, their belliesgross, their color pale, their hair long andlank. Thus they lack keenness of under-standing and clarity of intelligence, andare overcome by ignorance and dullness,lack of discernment, and stupidity. Suchare the Slavs, the Bulgars, and theirneighbors.”

The 13th century Persian writer Nasiral-Din Tusi thought blacks were animalsthat walk on two legs: “Many have ob-served that the ape is more teachable andmore intelligent than the Zanj [blacks].”He, too, found them carefree and highlysexed. The greatest of all Arab histori-ans, Ibn Khaldun (1332 - 1406), wrote:“The only people who accept slavery arethe negroes, owing to their low degreeof humanity and their proximity to theanimal stage.”

Among the Arabs, people of any racecould be enslaved, but blacks were as-

Sesostris III wanted blacks out.

He didn’t like them either.

ΩΩΩΩΩ

magazine, take aim first at the notion thatit was 16th and 17th century Europeanswho first noticed race and race differ-ences. As the authors point out, humansappear to share with dogs, baboons,wolves, and killerwhales an instinctiveability to distinguishtheir own group fromoutsiders. Three-yearold children sort peopleby race without beingtaught to. Therefore, ev-ery human populationthat ever had contactwith foreigners seems tohave noticed racial dif-ferences, and most didnot like funny-lookingstrangers.

Egyptian tomb paint-ings clearly differentiatefour racial groups: Egyptians, AsiaticSemites, Caucasians, and sub-SaharanAfricans. Nor are these simple depic-tions of physical characteristics to whichthe Egyptians were indifferent. TheTwelfth Dynasty Pharaoh Sesostris III(c. 1887 - 1849 BC) wrote that blackswere dishonorable cowards, “poor andfaint-hearted.” He even erected a steleat the southern boundary of Lower Egyptwhich still reads: “No negro shall crossthis boundary by water or by land, byship or with his flocks, save for the pur-pose of trade or to make purchases insome post.”

The Indo-European conquerors ofIndia were light-skinned people who de-spised their dark-skinned subjects. Theauthors note that Ancient Vedic textsdescribing the wars of 1500 to 900 BCrecord how the Aryans “stormed the an-cient cities of the hated broad-nosedDasas, the dark-skinned worshippers ofthe phallus.” The word Dasa originallymeant “enemy,” then came to mean“dark-faced,” and finally “slave.” Theinvaders established the caste system,the most elaborate anti-miscegenation


sociated with the most degrading servi-tude. White slaves were called mamluk,which means “owned.” Black slaveswere ’abd, which eventually came tomean any black, slave or free. In TheArabian Nights, blacks are almost al-ways shown as slaves or doing menialjobs, and they have prodigious sexualappetites. No ancient group that encoun-tered blacks seems to have liked them.Romans made fun of them, calling them“sima” or monkey-like.

Greek and Roman art works that de-pict blacks and whites together some-times show blacks with larger penises,often erect. Herodotus noted the physi-cal characteristics of blacks, especiallytheir “wooly” hair, and Hippocratesspeculated that generations of exposureto the sun had burned them black. Theancients realized that racial characteris-tics were permanent. Jeremiah, for ex-ample, asks rhetorically, “Can the Ethio-pian change his skin, or the leopard hisspots?”

Prof. Sarich and Mr. Miele note thatthe Chinese made fun of Caucasians,whom they thought odd-looking, but donot mention that Japanese did the same,inventing a series of “barbarian” wordsto describe them, such as “red-hairedbarbarian” and “blue-eyed barbarian.”

One of the book’s most interesting ex-amples of the universal human instinctto characterize people comes from theKalahari Bushmen. Their DNA is nowknown to class them with other sub-Sa-haran Africans, but for many years, an-thropologists thought they were relatedto Asians because of their yellowishcolor, hooded eyes, and other traits. TheBushmen distinguish themselves notonly from whites but also from neigh-boring blacks. They have one word foredible animals and another for inedibleanimals—which includes all other hu-

man groups. They use zhu or “human”exclusively for themselves. That is, theydid until they met Asian anthropologists,whom they immediately called zhu be-cause they thought they looked likeBushmen.

The Age of Exploration did not leadwhites to any new racial categorizationsto justify “oppression.” Instead, Euro-peans resisted emerging racial theoriesthat emphasized qualitative differencesbetween the races. Some scholars, forexample, wondered if the newly-discov-ered people of the New World were pre-Adamite, that is, primitives who pre-dated the creation of man. A serious de-bate within the Catholic church about thenature of American Indians concludedwith a 1537 decree by Pope Paul III,officially declaring them fully humanand endowed with souls. A finding thatthey were pre-Adamites would havemade it easy to justify slavery or exter-mination. Civil authorities also declinedto accept the view that indigenous

peoples were qualitatively differ-ent from Europeans and thereforeworthy of oppression.

Likewise, the monogenesis/polygenesis debates of the 18thand 19th centuries could have of-fered support for slavery but wererejected. Polygenists argued thatthe races were so different theycould not have evolved fromAdam during the 4,000 or so yearsrecorded in the Bible. A theory ofseparate origins or creations forthe different races might have jus-tified slavery, but Americans pre-

ferred the Biblical account of commoncreation and descent.

So much for the silly notion that noone noticed race until white men triedto cook up excuses for colonization andslavery. Europeans and Americans re-acted to race as all people do.

Furthermore, as the authors point out,it was almost universally accepted wellinto the 20th century not only that racewas real but that races were unequal. Forexample, the 1911 edition of the Ency-clopaedia Britannica explains that “themental constitution of the negro is verysimilar to that of a child, normally good-natured and cheerful, but subject to sud-den fits of emotion and passion duringwhich he is capable of performing actsof singular atrocity . . . .” and adds that,“after puberty sexual matters take thefirst place in the negro’s life andthoughts.”

It was largely the rise of the FranzBoaz school of anthropology that suc-cessfully substituted “culture” for biol-ogy as the primary force that differenti-ates human groups. The authors pointout that the early Boaz school was com-posed of people who felt estranged fromestablished American traditions andwanted to undermine them. Boaz him-self and many of his early followers wereJews who felt their Jewishness keenly.Israel Ehrenberg, for example, who re-baptized himself as Ashley Montagu,wrote, “If you’re brought up as a Jew,you know that all non-Jews are anti-Semitic . . . .”

Prof. Sarich and Mr. Miele note thatsome of Boaz’s most famous gentile fol-lowers were also at odds with American

society: Margaret Mead was bisexualand Ruth Benedict was lesbian. Thus,“the Boazians shared an out-group sen-sibility, a commitment to a commonviewpoint and a program to dominate theinstitutional structure of anthropology.”They succeeded brilliantly, with consid-erable help from the revulsion for Hitlerand Nazism that swept America after thewar.

Race also goes into subsequent de-bates about the nature of man, in par-ticular the high-profile skirmishes be-tween Montagu and Carleton Coon, bestknown for painstaking anthropologicalwork that led him to believe that the racesevolved independently and representeddifferent levels of evolution. A biologi-cal understanding of human nature fellcompletely out of favor until it was re-vived in the 1960s and later, by suchpeople as Arthur Jensen, PhilippeRushton, Richard Lynn, Richard Herrn-stein and Charles Murray.

Race Science Today

It is a curious irony that althoughmany people claim to disbelieve in race,society goes on taking it for granted. AsProf. Sarich and Mr. Miele point out, noone has trouble telling one race fromanother, and even in court cases, inwhich anything can be bitterly contested,no one has ever argued that race is anillusion or is meaningless. In fact, de-spite decades of litigation over race,

Among the zhu.

The race-is-a-myth argu-ment is not only wrongbut hugely damaging.


courts do not even have a definition forrace or a standard for determining it.They accept the common sense view thatrace is evident to everyone.

Furthermore, this particular “illusion”is proving to have very concrete uses.Police can now easily test DNA samples

to determine the race and even the ra-cial mix of a criminal. In Britain, the Fo-rensic Science Service uses DNA forwhat it calls photofitting, that is to say,to come up with the best estimate of theappearance of a criminal who has leftbehind a drop of blood or a bit of skin.The British even look for such things asthe genetic markers associated with redhair.

Race is likewise important in medi-cine. Blacks, because of increasinglywell-understood physiological reasons,do not get nearly as much benefit fromstandard hypertension drugs as whites,and studies are now underway to developdrugs specifically for them. Eskimos didnot respond to early drugs for tubercu-losis because, unlike other racial groups,they metabolized the medicine before itcould act. Biological reality is beatingback ideologues who argue that race hasno medical importance. Prof. Sarich andMr. Miele also describe clear racial dif-ferences in athletic ability, relyingheavily on Jon Entine’s book on race andsports (reviewed in AR, Feb. 2000).

Three of the nine chapters in Racerecount the twists and turns along thescientific trail that led to an understand-ing of when the various lineages of manbranched off from each other. This isinteresting history, but not germane.Much more significant is what follows:an explanation of the scientific founda-tions of race.

Practically every discussion of raceand biology begins with Richard Lewon-

tin’s famous observation that if all hu-man genetic variation is given a valueof 100, 85 percent of this variation isfound within races, and only 15 percentmore variation is found when differentraces are added to the mix. This was,indeed, a surprising finding, but does not

mean, as Prof. Lewontinslyly implied, that whitesare more similar to Asians,say, than to other whites.Nor does it justify Prof.Lewontin’s conclusion, thatrace is an empty category.What it means is that the 15percent that differentiatesraces is a very important 15percent.

The late Glayde Whit-ney used to point out thathumans and macaque mon-keys have similar genomes.If the total genetic diversity

of humans plus macaques were given anindex of 100 percent, more than half ofthat diversity would be found in thepopulation of Belfast alone. This doesnot mean that Irishmen are more similarto macaques than to each other, only thatthere is significant genetic variationwithin distinct populations (AR, March1997).

Prof. Sarich and Mr. Miele draw auseful parallel between humans anddogs. Breeds of dogs differ not only inappearance but in temperament and in-telligence. Yet, it is almost impossibleto tell Great Dane DNA from PekineseDNA. The huge differences between thebreeds are accounted for by tiny geneticdifferences barely detectable with mod-ern analysis. As with human races, smallgenetic differences account for very im-portant physical differences.

The authors note that observationsabout differences in dog breeds are notcontroversial but observations abouthumans are. Only after much difficultydid one research team that had publishedabout dogs manage to publish aboutpeople. This was a study of behavior ofnewborns that found interesting racialdifferences even though the births werein the same hospital from women whoreceived the same pre-natal care. Chi-nese newborns went to sleep in more orless any position in which they were putdown, while whites turned their headsto a more comfortable position. Whitenewborns cried more easily than Chineseand were are harder to console. The moststriking difference, however, was in what

is called “defensive reaction.” This in-volves putting a cloth over a baby’s noseand forcing it to breathe through itsmouth. White and black babies immedi-ately turned their heads or tried to pushthe cloth away, whereas Chinese babieslay quietly breathing through theirmouths. Navajo newborns have sincebeen found to behave like Chinese new-borns, which is not surprising given theirlineage.

In nature, any animals that were asdifferent as human races would be dif-ferent species. Although the evidencenow suggests races diverged only 50,000years ago, their external physical differ-ences are very great. Animals that lookas different as Arabs and Bantus do notmate. There are species of gazelle thatare so similar they can be distinguishedonly by experts; they share the samegrazing grounds, but do not mix.

Comparisons with monkeys under-score the significance of human races.A series of measurements on skullsyields an index of difference from onepopulation to another. By this measure,human races are as different from eachother as are different species of chim-panzee. In fact, a comparison of the mostwidely divergent human groups, such asNorwegians and Australian Aboriginesfinds physical differences as great as

those between chimpanzees and goril-las.

Prof. Sarich and Mr. Miele do not failto note the importance of these findings:

“The amount of variation that tookapproximately one million years toevolve in chimpanzees took only 50,000years to evolve in humans. This muchshorter time for the evolution of com-paratively larger racial differences mustmean that these differences are more(not less) significant, and that adapta-tion, not chance, is the only mechanismcapable of explaining this.” (italics inthe original)

Dog breeds vary tremendously . . .

. . . but are genetically almostindistinguishable.


They continue: “The shorter the pe-riod of time required to produce a givenamount of morphological difference, themore selectively/adaptively/functionallyimportant those differences become.”

“Human races are very stronglymarked morphologically; human racesare very young; so much variation de-veloping in so short a period of timeimplies, indeed almost certainly re-

quires, functionality; there is no goodreason to think that behavior shouldsomehow be exempt from this patternof functional variability.”

What this means is that the rapiditywith which human groups divergedstrongly suggests the divergence was notrandom genetic drift due to isolation butwas adaptation to real evolutionary pres-sure. Populations do not become as dif-ferent as Eskimos and Watusis by acci-dent; they are different because the dif-ferences are significant and help themsurvive. And, as Race points out, physi-cal differences as striking as these arenot likely to arise without equally strik-ing behavioral differences.

Intelligence is, of course, one of themost crucial race differences, and Prof.Sarich and Mr. Miele are not afraid totake it up. They review the findings ofracial differences in brain size, notingthat it has a 0.4 correlation with testedintelligence. They point out that indi-viduals can vary in brain size by as muchas 400 cc—the size of a chimpanzeebrain. There are races that differ in av-erage brain size by 300 cc, and showcorresponding differences in averageintelligence.

Some have argued that there cannotbe racial differences in intelligence be-cause it is a crucial aspect of humanityto which all groups would have devotedequal evolutionary effort. This is silly.The authors point out that in terms of

metabolic cost, brain tissue is very ex-pensive, so brains would have grownonly as a result of tradeoffs with matu-ration time, size of the birth canal, di-version of blood supply away from otherorgans, and a host of other factors. Itwould have been astonishing if all thesetradeoffs had turned out identically inpopulations that show so many otherdifferences. Evolution in brain size—and intelligence—has been very rapid,and was possible only because there isso much variation in these traits. Thereis variation not just between individualsbut between races.

Any thorough racial comparison of IQruns up against the finding that sub-Sa-haran Africans have an average of 75. Isthe continent really populated by the re-tarded? Prof. Sarich and Mr. Miele pointout that in white populations, an IQ thislow is usually only one of several seri-ous defects that leave a person incapableof leading a normal life. However,among Africans, IQs of 70 or even lowerare simply the result of normal distribu-tion, and can be found among peoplewho are otherwise normal.

An IQ of 75 is, as Race points out,the mental equivalent of a 12-year-old.Twelve-year-olds can drive cars andsome can even fix them. Twelve-year-olds can do arithmetic and follow rea-sonably complex instructions. What theycannot do is run a modern society. Asthe authors point out, an intelligent popu-lation can tolerate a certain number oflow-IQ people, but once they reach acertain proportion, the quality and tex-ture of life change completely. This iswhat we find in many Third-World coun-tries and in those parts of the UnitedStates where blacks or Hispanics aredominant.

Three Choices

Prof. Sarich and Mr. Miele point outthat race is not only a valid category forgrouping differing populations; it is afocus of loyalty. They note that peopleof all races prefer the company of peoplelike themselves, vote for co-racialists,and are more generous with people oftheir own group. What, then, are we tomake of race once it is accepted as a sig-nificant biological and social reality?

Race offers three choices: merit-ocracy, continued leveling through racepreferences, and separation into ethno-states. The authors support meritocracy:They want an end to all legal and ad-

ministrative consideration of race, withemployers and colleges free to make de-cisions strictly on merit. Presumably theysupport repeal of all anti-discriminationlaws, which would leave businesses freeto choose their customers and home-owners their neighbors. This book saysnothing about immigration, but a merito-cratic approach presumably means re-strictions based (only) on ability.

What about ethnostates? Prof. Sarichand Mr. Miele recognize that they pro-vide the best sense of community andoffer a social fabric in which people arewilling to be taxed to support fellow citi-zens. They even realize that they are theonly way to maintain real, world-widediversity. They list several objections—that separating out the less able racesleaves them poor, that a homogenous so-ciety is less adaptable to changing con-ditions, that maintaining homogeneityrequires social controls, and that ethno-states are more likely to make war oneach other—none of which is very sig-nificant.

It is unfortunate for the less able racesif separation leaves them less well off,but is it any less unfortunate for the moreable races to be saddled with low-IQ,high crime populations to support? Norace has a right to charity from another.Likewise, it would be hard to think ofchallenges the Japanese or the Iceland-ers are unable to face because of homo-geneity. How would large numbers ofMexicans or Filipinos better preparethem for changing conditions? At thesame time, homogeneous societies needfewer internal controls than diverse so-cieties because the government need notpolice the inevitable inter-ethnic con-flicts. The controls are at the border, anddo not effect citizens. As for the likeli-hood of war, diversity within borderscauses much more bloodshed than ho-

. . . as dissimilar as chimps and gorillas.Some human groups are physically . . .


mogeneity. A UN study of the years 1989to 1992 found 82 conflicts that resultedin 1,000 or more deaths. Of this num-ber, no fewer than 79 involved ethnic orreligious antagonists, and took place

What’s their average IQ?

within the borders ofsingle nations. Only threewere cross-border con-flicts.

Prof. Sarich and Mr.Miele are remarkable tohave considered separa-tion as an option at all,much less to have listedits advantages and disad-vantages. Most commen-tators do not even con-sider it an option, or re-ject it out of hand. Ofcourse, separation is notmerely a logically pos-sible reaction to the real-

ity of race; it is the necessary reaction ifwhites are to survive as a distinct peoplewith a culture of their own.

The race-is-a-myth argument is notonly wrong but hugely damaging. It pro-motes the fantasy that no population

should resist replacement by another,since it is really being replaced by itself.It suggests that miscegenation is a myth,so no one need be concerned aboutwhom their children marry. In practicalterms, these misconceptions hurt whitesfar more than anyone else. It is almostexclusively whites who are being re-placed by aliens, and it is whites whoare failing to reproduce themselves andwhose numbers are most dangerouslythinned by miscegenation. The most sig-nificant and insidious effect of the cur-rent foolishness about race is to encour-age whites to resign themselves to dis-possession and oblivion.

This book is a very important contri-bution to the study of race. It covers thescience in accessible language, and pre-sents unfashionable data without flinch-ing. It is an invaluable resource for thedefense of our race against ignoranceand indifference.

O Tempora, O Mores!

ΩΩΩΩΩ

Out With the White Chil-dren

Last fall, for the first time, non-whitesoutnumbered whites in Florida’s publicschools. Whites were just 49.75 percentof the state’s 2.6 million public schoolstudents, followed by blacks at 23.88percent, Hispanics at 21.7 percent, andAsians at 2.04 percent. Students who saythey are multiracial outnumberedAsians, at 2.34 percent. Florida is theseventh state to see its public school stu-dent body go majority non-white, afterHawaii (80 percent non-white), NewMexico (66 percent), California (65 per-cent), Texas (59 percent), Mississippi(53 percent), and Louisiana (51 percent).Public schools in the District of Colum-bia are 95 percent non-white. Hispan-ics, whose enrollment increased by morethan 500,000 since 1977, are drivingwhites out; now one in six white studentsin Florida attends private school. [LetitiaStein, Minorities Reach Majority in StateSchools, St. Petersburg Times, Feb. 27,2004, p. 1A.]

Out With the White MenWhen he ran for Brooklyn Borough

President in 2002, Marty Markowitzpromised that if he were elected, hewould remove the portraits of “the old

white guys”—like George Washing-ton—that hung in the Brooklyn BoroughHall. “There’s not one picture of a per-son of color, not one kid, not one Latinoin Borough Hall,” he said. Mr. Mark-owitz has kept his promise. Although helet Washington stay, he replaced everyother portrait with works by contempo-rary black artists. “We are always cel-ebrating the diversity of Brooklyn,” heexplains.

One celebration of diversity is an un-flattering image of the Pope, mockinghim for his apology for the church’s rolein the slave trade. Another, called “SweetThing,” features a voluptuous womanwith “inviting hips [and] enticingthighs.” Danny Simmons, the black manin charge of the new paintings, says artlike “Sweet Thing” “goes a long waytoward making Borough Hall more in-clusive.” [Gersh Kuntzman, BrooklynFinally Shows Its True Colors in Bor-ough Hall, New York Post, Feb. 12,2004, p. 31.]

No Sauce for the GanderIn February, the College Republicans

at Roger Williams College in Bristol,Rhode Island, caused a furor when theirpresident, Jason Mattera, announced a$250 whites-only scholarship. Mr.Mattera, who is Puerto Rican, got a

$5,000 scholarship from the HispanicCollege Fund that gave him, he says, “aninherent advantage over my whitepeers.” He thinks scholarships shouldreward merit, not race, and offered thewhites-only scholarship as a protest. Theschool administration denounced Mr.Mattera, as did state and national GOPleaders. [Jennifer Syles, Whites-OnlyScholarship Generates Controversy,CNN, Feb. 20, 2004.]

There was, of course, no outragewhen the Goizueta Foundation, (estab-lished by Robert Goizueta, the lateformer president of Coca-Cola) awardeda $500,000 grant to Reinhardt College,a small liberal-arts college in north Geor-gia, for Hispanics-only scholarships.[$500 Mil Dolares en Becas Para La-tinos ($500,000 in Grants for Latinos),Atlanta Latino, Jan. 29 – Feb. 4, 2004,p. 12.]

Nashville NextNashville, Tennessee, will soon get

400 Somali Bantu, its share of the 13,000sponsored by the US Office of RefugeeResettlement (ORR). ORR and WorldRelief, an agency the feds hired to helpsettle the newcomers, held a conferencein Nashville in January to teach peoplewhat to expect from primitives who havenever seen electricity or indoor plumb-


ing. ORR plans similar sessions in otherUS cities. [Anita Wadwhani, Conferenceto Guide Social Workers as Bantu Refu-gees Arrive in Midstate, The Tennessean(Nashville), Jan. 11, 2004.]

Nashville is already dealing with awave of Hispanics, who are “sociallyisolated” because they are poor and can’tspeak English. As usual, the local paperssay this is the fault of native Nashvillianswho must “learn about and appreciatethe traditions of the foreign born.” Theyshould also pay for a new bureaucracyto “pull together all the existing servicesfor immigrants and then identify unmetneeds.” [Making Nashville a More Di-versity-Friendly City, City Paper (Nash-ville), Jan. 12, 2004, p. 3.]

Nashvillians are also supposed tolearn Spanish. Ken Darby is personnelmanager for Commercial Painting,which has a 20-percent Hispanic work-force. He offers English courses for theMexicans, but also tried to get Ameri-cans to study Spanish. He ran into a bar-rier of healthy sentiment. “It didn’t seemto work,” says the poor, baffled Mr.Darby. “Americans have a more narrow-minded attitude of, ‘This is America andwe speak English so they should speakEnglish.’” [Jared Porter, ProLinguaWorks to Break Down Language Barri-ers on the Job, Green Hills News (Ten-nessee), Feb. 5, 2004, p. 22.]

Color TVDespite recent efforts to shake up its

prime-time lineup, cable news channelMSNBC continues to lag well behindrivals CNN and Fox News. Needless tosay, some people claim the problem istoo many news shows with white hostsand white guests that ignore the nation’s90 million non-whites. “A significantportion of the American population sim-

ply is not tuning in because there’s noth-ing of interest for them there,” says SamRiddle, of Al Sharpton’s National Ac-tion Network. Curtis Symonds, a blackprogramming consultant, says program-mers need “to take the blinders off and

realize there’s a huge crossover inmulticultural audiences.” [With NewChief on Board, MSNBC Needs an Iden-tity, Reuters/Hollywood Reporter, Feb.23, 2004.]

More Color TVThe cable network Showtime is work-

ing on a new reality program. In MakeMe Cool, modeled on Queer Eye for theStraight Guy, a gang of blacks will givea “desperately dweebie” white guy a“hipness makeover.” The joke versionof the title among those developing theprogram is Black Eye for the White Guy.“There’s something in the culture rightnow that there are parts of black culturethat everyone wants to aspire to,” saysShowtime executive producer JayBlumenfield. “We want to explore that.We want to face racial stereotypes headon and say, ‘What is this? Why is this?’”Explaining why the network had chosenwhites, Mr. Blumenfield said, “The firstpeople will be uncool, and the easiestway to express that is they’ll be white.”The program will not just change the waywhites look; “this is about immersingthem in a whole new culture.” [PhilKloer, Black Eye for the White Guy? At-lanta Journal-Consititution, Feb. 20,2004.]

City of FoolsIn December 2003, federal immigra-

tion agents arrested a dozen or so illegalaliens in Portland, Maine. In January, ata meeting at Portland’s city hall, assis-tant US Attorney for Maine HalseyFrank had to justify the arrests to an an-gry crowd of immigrants, social activ-ists, and politicians—including themayor. The locals accused the feds ofracial profiling because they caughtsome of the illegals outside social ser-vice agencies and other places that at-tract non-whites. Mr. Frank’s explana-tion that the federal government has anobligation to enforce immigration lawswas poorly received.

“To us, this is clear violation of civilrights,” complained Winston McGill ofthe Portland NAACP. “We do feel thiswas based on color.” Ben Guiliani, presi-dent of El Centro Latino, denied the gov-ernment had probable cause to questionpeople and make arrests. “I can tell youthe border patrol is not raiding Irish pubsin Boston,” he said. “Probable cause iswhat? Being brown?” Others said im-

migrants were afraid to leave their homesfor fear of border patrol agents. The Rev.Mutima Peter of the International Chris-tian Fellowship Church said the arrestswere like the police-state brutality thatled many immigrants to leave home inthe first place. Mayor Nathan Smith saidthe city will continue to enforce a localordinance that forbids city officials andpolice officers from questioning aperson’s immigrant status. [Justin Ellis,City Reaches Out to Immigrants, Port-land Press Herald, Jan. 7, 2004.]

Rx: QuotasThe Institute of Medicine, a division

of the National Academy of Sciences,says not enough non-whites are enter-ing medicine. Only two percent of reg-istered nurses, 3.4 percent of psycholo-gists, and 3.5 percent of doctors are His-panic, and only five percent of doctorsand dentists are black. There are hardlyany American Indian doctors, thoughnearly 20 percent of medical schoolgraduates are Asian. The Institute ofMedicine says medical schools shouldslant their admissions towards non-whites, and put more non-whites on ad-missions committees. They also wantCongress to pay for “diversity” pro-grams, and for state and local govern-ments to reimburse tuition, and forgivestudent loans for non-white medical stu-dents. [Minorities Few in Health Fields,AP, Feb. 6, 2004.]

Suffer the Little ChildrenCongolese are superstitious. Fighters

on all sides in the five-year-old civil warbelieve that eating their enemies givesthem special powers. Now, fear of childwitches is sweeping the country. Parentsaccuse children of witchcraft when cropsfail, if they lose jobs, or anything elsegoes wrong. A child may also be accusedof being a witch if he playfully speaksto an animal or a tree, or just has a night-mare. Medicine men make suspectedwitches vomit out the evil spirits by forc-ing them to swallow gasoline, bitterherbs, and even small fish. One familytried to purify an 11-year-old girl bypouring acid over her and trying to makeher drink it. They thought she had be-witched her half brother and made himsick.

If the exorcism fails and the problemisn’t solved, families turn the childrenout. UNICEF says more than 40,000


children wander the streets of Kinshasa,and at least 60 percent of them are ac-cused witches. Many fall in with streetgangs that steal and scrounge for food.Girls as young as five work as prosti-tutes. Some of the older children are vio-

lent. Recently a gang of children am-bushed and killed four policemen armedwith automatic rifles. [C.J. Maloney,Suffer the Children, The Independent(Southern California), Feb. 19, 2004, p.20. Sudarsan Raghavan, Congo ChildrenSuffering Accusations of Witchcraft,Philadelphia Inquirer, Nov. 3, 2003.]

Gate CrashersBorder patrols in both the US and

Canada have noticed an increase in hu-man smuggling across the border, andare trying to stop it. On February 22,authorities nabbed 11 South Koreanswho hoped to walk across the Alberta-Montana border. Six were women. Ko-rean women are known to pay from$6,000 to $10,000 to smugglers, andoften end up working as prostitutes topay off the debt. Many Korean illegalsenter from Canada because they can getthere without a visa. Better enforcementalong the Western border means smug-glers have to look for less well-guardedcrossings in the Canadian interior. [LindaSlobodian, Human Smuggling RingSmashed at US-Alberta Border, CalgaryHerald, Feb. 24, 2004.]

Ethnicity in BritainWhen the British government con-

ducted the national census in 2001, theEnglish, Scots and Welsh could not in-dicate their “national” identities in thesame way as Indians, Bangladeshis, Af-ricans, and the Irish, and were identifiedonly as “white.” The Office of NationalStatistics received much criticism for

this; “There’s a growing interest in howpeople perceive themselves nationally”says a spokesman. Now, when Britonsfill out government forms, surveys andjob applications, they can describe them-selves as “white English” or “Afro-Car-

ibbean Scottish.”Whites may find the new

classifications a double-edged sword. They maypromote national con-sciousness, but governmentrace-minders will also usethem to stamp out “racism”among whites. Employersin Britain must “promoteracial equality,” so a Scot-tish company employingonly Scots could be violat-ing race relations laws. In

2002, rugby commentator Mark Souster,who is English, sued the BBC for dis-crimination after he was replaced asBBC Scotland rugby correspondent bya Scot. [John Elliot and David Robert-son, English, Scots and Welsh are nowOfficially Ethnic, Sunday Times (Lon-don), Jan. 11, 2004, p. 7.]

English in DeclineAccording to British language expert

David Graddol, English is unlikely tobecome the global language after all. Hepredicts a multilingual future, with En-glish “first among equals” but no longerdominant. After Chinese, English is thesecond-most-spoken language, but hethinks Hindi-Urdu and Arabic will sur-pass it by 2050, as the percentage ofnative English speakers drops from its1950 high of nine percent to five per-cent. As the prominence of English de-clines, he says, “Monolingual speakersof any variety of English—American orBritish—will experience increasing dif-ficulty in employment and political life,and are likely to become bewildered bymany aspects of society and culturearound them.” Already 20 percent ofpeople in the United States speak a lan-guage other than English at home. [En-glish Language Unlikely to be Domi-nant, Expert Says, AP, Feb. 27, 2004.]

Faith in BritainAlthough three fourths of Britain’s 60

million people claim to be Christian,only 916,000 attend weekly Church ofEngland services. By contrast, 930,000of 1.8 million British Muslims go to

mosque at least once a week. This marksthe first time Muslim attendance hasoutstripped Anglican. Muslim leaderssay the numbers mean Muslims shouldnow share some of the Church ofEngland’s privileges as an establishedreligion. These include tax breaks andthe right of senior bishops to sit in Par-liament. [Nicholas Hallen and Christo-pher Morgan, Muslim Piety OutstripsAnglican, Sunday Times (London), Jan.25, 2004, p. 1.]

Islam already gets preferential treat-ment from British radio and television,according to Lord Dubs, the retiringhead of Britain’s Broadcasting StandardsCommission (BSC). “In portraying Mus-lims,” he says, “they have held back, theyhave censored themselves, they aretimid. I have seen them pour scorn onChristianity more than on other religions.Christianity is an easier and more accept-able target—followed, to a lesser extent,by Jews and Hindus.” Lord Dubs alsosays the BSC itself has been biased infavor of Muslims.

The Right Rev. Richard Holloway,also a BSC member, notes that some-

one once said “Jesus f****** Christ” ona program aired on Britain’s Channel 4.He says the program would not havebeen broadcast with a slur against theprophet Muhammed. “There is muchmore sensitivity to disturbing Islam,” heexplains. “It is partly because the Mus-lim community does not have a tradi-tion of humour about religion.” [Nicho-las Hallen, TV Chiefs Favor Muslims,Says Watchdog, Sunday Times (Lon-don), Dec. 28, 2003.]

Congolese child witches.

St. Paul’s: soon to be a mosque?


Sounds Good to UsVernon Robinson is a black man run-

ning for the Republican nomination inthe 5th Congressional District of NorthCarolina. He is an Air Force Academygraduate, has an MBA, has been a busi-ness professor, and was elected twice tothe Winston-Salem city council. Accord-ing to his campaign literature:

“Mr. Robinson is pro-life, pro-gun,and pro-Ten Commandments. He’s ledthe fight against wasteful spending, ra-cial quotas, and special rights for homo-sexuals. And he’s led the charge to cre-ate jobs by eliminating excessive taxa-tion, regulation, litigation, and illegal im-migration.”

Among his enemies are what he calls“the race hustling poverty pimps likeJesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.” Heboasts that the local paper calls him the“black Jesse Helms,” and indeed Sen.Helms has endorsed him, as have Rep.Tom Tancredo and Pat Buchanan. Hesounds better than a lot of whites. [Cam-paign Flyer, Robinson for Congress.]

Dividing LinesOn any given morning, as many as

300 mostly Mexican and Guatemalanmen line up along Center Street in Jupi-ter, Florida, waiting for someone to stopand offer them jobs. Most are illegals,who will work for $5 to $10 an hour.The men live in squalid apartments onthe south side of Center Street, some-times as many as 10 to a one-bedroomapartment. Whites live on the north sideof Center Street in upscale houses, andmany aren’t happy with their new neigh-bors.

“My kids don’t ride their bikes onCenter Street anymore, and they don’ttake the school bus,” says SherrieStevenson. “There are so many of thosemen, and it’s dark when the bus comesin the morning. It’s too scary.”

According to Jupiter police, the men

are often guilty of minor nuisancecrimes. “The main problems,” says Of-ficer Freddy Almodovar, “are that theday laborers block the sidewalks, leavetrash around, sometimes they catcallgirls.” Because they live in small apart-ments, they produce a lot of trash, makenoise, and urinate in public “becausesomebody else is in the bathroom.” Headmits this is unpleasant for nearbyhomeowners, but adds, “some of thosesame people with the nice houses comehere to get guys to cut their lawns. Youcan’t have it both ways.”

Assistant town manager Andy Luca-sik says Jupiter needs a lot of low-wagelabor, but has almost no low-incomehousing. “We have a large number ofgated communities that have a greatneed for landscaping. We have golfcourses and construction projects,” heexplains. “They all use workers like

sance” and “Jared Taylor” bring up anad for a book called Homeland: Into aWorld of Hate. Clearly, this ad was ad-vocacy against Jared Taylor and ARreaders.

Google replied with a cheery “HelloIan,” explaining that “it has been deter-mined by the AdWords editorial staffthat the American Renaissance websitecontains content that portrays imagesof particular groups of individuals,some of which are negative.” “As abusiness,” my correspondent continued,“Google must make decisions aboutwhere we draw the line in regards tothe advertising we accept, both from alegal and company values perspective.”He assured me that “Google believesstrongly in freedom of speech.” Further-more, only our ads were affected: nor-mal search results for “American Re-naissance” were not filtered. Googlepromised to review the ad for Home-land, but it is still running.

What Google said about the normalsearch results was not entirely true.There is no filtering in the Americanversion of Google. However, AR is oneof many websites the French and Ger-man versions of Google will not list.Google is not to blame for these exclu-sions: Under the “anti-racism” laws ofboth these countries (see AR, Mar.2001), it could be illegal for Google tolist our site.

— Ian Jobling

Google’s Double Standard

On Dec. 29, AR started a “spon-sored links” ad campaign topromote AR when people did

Google searches on terms like “race andIQ,” “race and intelligence,” “blackcrime,” etc. The results of a search onthese expressions would include a smallad for the American Renaissance con-ference, with a link to our site. The cam-paign was useful: in three weeks, ourad came up 35,142 times, and 192people clicked on it and came to oursite. We paid five cents for every click.

On Jan. 21, Google stopped our cam-paign, saying our website contained“language that advocates against an in-dividual, group, or organization.”Google also told us it did not allow any-one to buy “sponsored links” for theterms “race and IQ,” “innate race dif-ferences,” “anti-white,” “racialism,”and others, also on the grounds that thislanguage advocated against an indi-vidual, group, or organization. They letour ads run for three weeks only be-cause they hadn’t gotten around to look-ing at them.

I asked Google to explain its deci-sion, pointing out that many websitesthat advocate against an individual,group, or organization buy sponsoredlinks. Conservative websites that advo-cate against liberals and liberal websitesthat advocate against conservatives buysponsored links. Besides, I noted,Google searches on “American Renais-

ΩΩΩΩΩ

those who live in those apartment com-plexes.” The city is thinking about anordinance to limit the number of peoplewho may live in an apartment, but fearsthis could force the men out on the street.As for loitering, the city may build a “la-bor bazaar” on city property where mencould look for work.

The laborers say that would be finewith them, but they worry about the pro-posed housing ordinance. “They haven’tcome to check our apartments, but somepeople are saying we might get de-ported,” says Jose, 48, an illegal fromGuatemala. “I’ll tell you this, the peoplearound here need us. If they hire anAmerican to do these jobs it will costthem $200 per day, and we’ll do it for$80 or even $60.” [John Lantigua, Sub-urbanites, Day Laborers at Odds in Ju-piter, Palm Beach Post, Feb. 16, 2004,p. 1A.]

ΩΩΩΩΩ

Documents

200404 American Renaissance