Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
199903 American Renaissance

199903 American Renaissance

Ratings: (0)|Views: 41 |Likes:
American Renaissance, March 1999. In Defense of the Racial Spoils System; A Reply to Prof. Weissberg; Cherchez le Juif; O Tempora, O Mores!; Letters from Readers
American Renaissance, March 1999. In Defense of the Racial Spoils System; A Reply to Prof. Weissberg; Cherchez le Juif; O Tempora, O Mores!; Letters from Readers

More info:

Published by: American Renaissance on Dec 20, 2010
Copyright:Traditional Copyright: All rights reserved

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

12/20/2010

pdf

 
American Renaissance - 1 - March 1999
There is not a truth existing which I fear or would wish unknown to the whole world.
Thomas Jefferson
Vol 10, No. 3March 1999
In Defense of the Racial Spoils System
American Renaissance
Today’s corrupt racial sys-tem may be the best we canexpect.
by Robert Weissberg
I
would like to advance a thesis thatall
 AR
readers–myself included–willfind loathsome: Namely, that the ex-isting racial spoils system (affirmativeaction, the double standard in crime,“sensitivity” towards black deficiencies,and everything else) is the best possibledeal we can get under today’s deplor-able circumstances. Perhaps “real-politik” more accurately describes myargument. Black-white coexistence is alittle like having an incurable medicalcondition. Nothing even faintly resem-bling a commendable fix is on the hori-zon, and present corruptions are the bestobtainable. This is a truly disturbingview but, alas, harshly realistic.Let me state the argument starkly. Isuspect few readers will challenge thefacts except for point 6.1. The black-white difference in cog-nitive ability is, at least for the foresee-able future, both large and intractable.The gap’s source–whether genetic orenvironmental–is irrelevant for presentpurposes. Remaining differences in ac-complishment cannot be eliminated bycombating discrimination, racism or anyother nefarious white scheme, regardlessof what blacks and their white allies con-tend. Top-down, hugely expensive re-medial efforts to equalize intelligencehave failed, and effective eugenic solu-tions are not possible in today’s politi-cal and moral climate.2. Economic rewards generally fol-low the contours of intelligence, regard-less of race. This has been establishedempirically
 
and is obvious in daily life.Moreover, unless there is an egalitarianrevolution, this intelligence-incomenexus will probably grow closer. Blacksthemselves may be making mattersworse by promoting Afrocentric educa-tion and insisting on lower competencystandards. The tenacious attachment of most blacks to preferential treatment isa tacit admission of their inability tocompete. Without government interven-tion blacks will secure substantially lesswealth than whites.3. Blacks want the material rewardsof modern society, especially what canbe consumed personally (clothing, elec-tronic appliances, cars), as much as any-one. Without white generosity, blackscannot satisfy this material quest, so,predictably, it now defines the black political agenda in the form of so-called“economic justice.”4. Blacks generally have a well-de-served reputation for hair-triggered col-lective violence. Such mayhem is easilybut unpredictably provoked–a routinetraffic stop can destroy an entire neigh-borhood. While the actual turmoil mayinvolve depraved underclass blacks, itis usually defended by middle-classblack politicians and academics.5. The racial payoff flows from whitefears of massive civil disorder, and takestwo forms. First, supply talented blackswith “manufactured” middle class jobsor, occasionally, court-ordered settle-ments for alleged harm. At the sametime, give those at the bottom govern-ment entitlements, selective law-en-forcement exemption, or flattering sym-bolic rewards. Most whites, even thosedispensing the benefits, understand thatthis is little more than extortion but theysay nothing. Blacks, by contrast, see itall as legitimate “racial fairness.”6. Judged in the context of all politi-cally feasible alternatives in a capital-ist, democratic society, this solutionworks reasonably well. Compared withthe egalitarian crusades in India or Ma-laysia, it is relatively benign. Most im-portant, it has largely kept domesticpeace. We have witnessed a great tri-umph of social engineering though it isseldom recognized: Black violence hasturned inward, and the prudent can avoidit. The 1960s revolutionary rhetoric hasdisappeared, and has been replaced bycrass though nonviolent opportunism.Is this analysis accurate? I believe itis, and much recommends this corruptaccomplishment. Nor is this solutionunique. Cowardly appeasement is not asun-American as it may appear. Is theforced hiring of a semi-literate secretaryunlike bribing building inspectors orpaying mob tribute? Americans havehabitually bought off potential trouble-makers, so what’s new? Think of affir-mative action as personalized, in-your-face tax wastefulness, another item on along list of government boondogglesthat are usually hidden from view. PeterBrimelow once figured that affirmativeaction costs about three percent of GNP–a vast sum, but comparable to a high-risk neighborhood insurance premium.One could even argue that this overstatesthe cost because many of the benefitsactually accrue to whites (affirmativeaction administrators, lawyers, etc.).
The racial payoff comesfrom white fears of mas-sive civil disorder.
Continued on page 3
 
American Renaissance - 2 - March 1999
 Letters from Readers
Sir – “Name Withheld, Roanoke”(February “Letters”) makes an interest-ing point about American egalitarianism,but some correction is called for. WhileLincoln himself was not an egalitarian,his rhetoric about slavery certainly abet-ted the advance of egalitarianism, as wassoon manifested, for instance, in the pro-gressivism of Herbert Croly and TeddyRoosevelt. This amounted to a gradualtransformation of our heritage of con-stitutional freedoms into one of statism,equality and democracy. This culmi-nated in Wilson’s administration withthe 17th, 18th and 19th Amendments.That this same misguided trend contin-ued to “progress” through FDR, the1960s, and up to our own time does notmake it an “historical sleight of hand of current apologists of equality.” Liberals,Progressives and Emersonian relativistshave been “dressing up the pedigree bytracing it back to Lincoln” and beyondfor over 130 years. It has been a long,gradual process. Since, as he acknowl-edged, he was only borne along byevents, Lincoln probably did not intendto encourage such doings. However, itis another aspect of the Lincoln ironythat this is exactly what his rhetoric hasdone.W. Edward Chynoweth, Sanger, Cal.Sir – I have never been able to under-stand why Europeans are as vulnerableas we are to the old racial shakedown.After all, we are at a three-fold disad-vantage: We recently took our countryfrom Indians (and Mexicans), we prac-ticed race slavery, and we have a tradi-tion of immigration. Europeans havenone of those psychological handicaps,yet the two February articles about Brit-ain suggest that our cousins are just asaccomplished at self-loathing as we are.I suppose this says something about theimmutable characteristics of race. Evenwithout slavery thrown in their facesthey are just as easy to con as we are–and even without “400 years of oppres-sion,” their blacks are just as degener-ate as ours are.I don’t think this consistency is nec-essarily all bad. I suspect that just as allwhites have fallen into the pit at aboutthe same time, if one group succeeds indragging itself out the others will fol-low. The divisions within the Frenchright are heart-breaking, but I would betthe Europeans will show us the way.Alan Kerbs, Paintsville, Ky.Sir – In his February article, “Is Therea Superior Race?” Michael Levin is de-feated by his own premises. Prof. Levinstarts with atheism and evolution andends up with nihilism and amorality.This, incidentally, is the common trajec-tory for all the modernist ideologies:Liberalism, Communism, Socialism,Nazism–and
 American Renaissance
.Only the belief that God made us andloves us can give any people their dig-nity back.Andrew Roesell, Springfield, Va.Sir – Because he holds that no oneobjective reality exists, Michael Levinbelieves it is impossible to determinewhat is right and wrong; all values aredetermined only by majority agreement.Furthermore, man, according to him, hasno free will by which to choose his val-ues–they are determined by his racialbiology. That a telephone is better thansmoke signals, that freedom is rightwhile dictatorship is wrong, that produc-tivity is good while sloth is bad, are not,he believes, objective facts based on theobjective standard of man’s life and sur-vival, but are regarded as such only bygroup consensus. With this anti-reality,anti-reason philosophy at its base, it isno wonder
 American Renaissance
be-lieves amity between people of differ-ent races is impossible.Joseph Kellard, Rockville Centre,N.Y.Sir – I am disheartened by the post-age stamp honoring Malcolm X. OnJune 3, 1962, in a speech in Los Ange-les, when informed that 130 civilians haddied in a plane crash, he stated that thedeath of “over 120 white people,” was“a very beautiful thing.” He also toldsyndicated columnist Dorothy Kilgallenthat “there ought to be a Mau Mau inthe U.S.” The Mau Mau butchered in-nocent blacks and whites in Kenya tofurther a Marxist takeover in that nation.Honoring Malcolm X is like honoringAdolph Hitler. Our government shamesitself by this action.David Hammer, Bronx, N.Y.Sir – I’m puzzled by the editorial judgment of AR in running a series of articles on the inner workings of Frenchpolitics. One can’t blame Jared Taylorfor his deep interest in that fine countryand his concern about it’s being tornapart by the cancer of multiculturalism.I simply question whether we need somuch detail on the subject given AR’sstrict limits on space. Let’s give Messrs.Le Pen and Mégret a rest for a spell andturn our attention closer to home.O.M. Ostlund, State College, Penn.Sir – As the executive director of twoorganizations actively campaigningagainst the dispossession of Americansfrom their ancestral home, I am some-what concerned by the large amount of space AR has given to the French andtheir problems. It is beyond me what wecan do about their situation, and the morespace given to them, the less space thereis for us. I feel what is needed is a moredefined, energized focus on what is mostimportant; namely, taking care of ourown country first.Robert Simmons, San Rafael, Cal.
 
American Renaissance - 3 - March 1999
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 $6.00. Subscriptions to Canada (first class) and overseas (surface mail)are $30.00. Overseas airmail subscriptions are $40.00. Back issues are $3.00 each.Foreign subscribers 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 Electronic Mail: AR@amren.com
Continued from page 1
American Renaissance
Jared Taylor, EditorJames P. Lubinskas, Assistant EditorGeorge McDaniel, Web Page EditorThis view of the spoils system as“taxation” or insurance explains its holdon corporate executives (and universityadministrators). Indeed, the systemdraws its most heartfelt support from thewealthy business “establishment,” notMain Street. Since it is imposed univer-sally, compliance causes no competitivedisadvantage. If Ford and GM both em-brace “diversity” it is no different fromcostly but industry-wide safety or pol-lution regulations. Only if foreign com-petitors enjoyed a sizable price advan-tage would the spoils system be chal-lenged. In fact, I would estimate thathealth care expenses far exceed diver-sity costs, so political strategies pru-dently focus on them.Equally critical, political stability faroutweighs costs or inconvenience.Given a choice between slightly higherproduct prices resulting from settlingbogus discrimination lawsuits versus theprospect of disruptive domestic up-heaval, “social responsibility” is far pref-erable. This “sensitivity” also reducesinterest costs since upheaval means “in-stability” and instability makes the USless attractive for foreign capital. Again,it is a matter of hardheaded costs andbenefits.With time the spoils system growsmore bearable. To return to the medicalanalogy, it is as if a person with a heartcondition improved his diet, exercisedregularly, and lost weight as an alterna-tive to risky, expensive surgery. Even-tually, this regimen becomes agreeable.The system has brought about increas-ing sophistication. The Japanese are bla-tant about locating factories in ruralwhite areas, but invisible, ostensiblyrace-neutral tactics are more common.Black “autonomous homeland” aca-demic departments and make-work ad-ministrative positions are university fa-vorites–and they are much cheaper thananti-terrorism measures. Smaller busi-nesses could migrate to Utah or over-seas. If outlays associated with atroubled diverse workforce soar, a com-pany can embrace technology (Mc-Donald’s is supposedly automating ham-burger production). Companies maywell hire a black Human Resources Di-rector but let competent whites make thekey decisions. The list is virtually end-less and, no doubt, these below-the-ra-dar adjustments grow more adroit withtime. The upshot is that blacks are givensubstantial if undeserved anger-reduc-ing benefits but are hardly given the ac-tual levers of industry.Individuals can make similar adjust-ments. On matters of real impact–medi-cine, legal advice–the spoils system isescapable. What airline proudly boastsof diversity among its pilots? If “diver-sity” intrudes into personal life it is sel-dom consequential over the long haul.For example, when my son was assigneda semi-literate black “English teacher,”he was allowed to change classes andthe teacher’s ineptitude encouraged alively parent-child discussion. Attackson “dangerous ideas” about race aremore nuisances than grim censorship–messages get out despite hecklers, andwe learn from past mistakes.At the same time, we must exerciseample consumer choice and prudence.As a citizen I elude “dangerous stereo-types” by staying away from placesmade uninhabitable by our double stan-dard in public order. Residential “whiteflight” is commonplace. Again, as is truein the corporate world, the ease withwhich the problem can be avoided helpsexplain the lack of widespread resis-tance.What about the moral dimension?Surely some principles, such as the ruleof law, transcend costs and benefits?Injustice, after all, is injustice and it isour obligation to resist it. This may betrue, but to be realistic, there are limitsto moral outrage and consequent behav-ior. This is not a nascent Holocaust. Justas one must necessarily tolerate distantThird-World savagery, one must periodi-cally avert one’s glance from corruptionssuffered in the name of “fairness.” Whenall is said and done, other than a tran-sient self-satisfaction, what is to begained by showing that black “scholar-ship” is incoherent political babble?This embarrassing fact has been ob-vious from day one, but so what? Whatgood does it do to explain to blacks thatsubverting the rule of law hinders anddoes not promote black progress? Even-tually, even a deeply moral person mustsay, “I have tried to offer wise counsel,and I myself have behaved morally, buta righteous person in a deficient societycan preach to the deaf for only so long.”Let us not lose sight of the proportions:a grand crusade is not obligatory.Indeed, a moral life remains possible,inasmuch as self-corrupting deceit is notyet required. No racial thought policemakes sure we spy on dissidents or think only “pure” thoughts. Resistance is stillpossible though hardly cost-free. As auniversity teacher, I refuse to assign nox-ious racial propaganda or award unde-served grades. Despite occasional warn-ings, I speak my mind on controversialsubjects. To be sure, such honesty is notalways possible. Necessity does forcemany–for example, high school teach-ers and those in the mass media–to sub-mit to the deceitful civic orthodoxy, andthis is no trivial matter. Yet, I personallydo not feel ashamed of my behavior andothers can also make honorable choices.What about financial costs imposedon innocent whites? Surely this is aproblem, but the robustness of oureconomy suggests no large, undiscov-ered pool of unemployed, talentedwhites. Yes, some whites (and Asians)
One must periodicallyavert one’s glance fromcorruptions suffered inthe name of “fairness.”

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->