INTRODUCTION: [go directly to the Articles] There is a pervasive malaise loose through out the word, or at least in the developed countries, with an odious Orwellian stamp to it: The Politically Correct Mandate. What's that? Simple: everything wrong in the world is due to "Whitey": the Euro, primarily the Euro male. If one points out embarrassing facts about, say, Negroes, he's engaging in "hate speech"- unless the delineater happens to be Negro, then he's wallowing in "Uncle Tom-ism" (which is reprehensible, but not "hate-speech"). Only a Euro can engage in hate-speech: the sickle-cell anemia of the Euro. If others do it, it's "ethnic solidarity": something to be lauded. The 1950s saw the emergence of The Civil Rights Movement. There were manifest injustices that cried out for reform; however, as Edmund Burke pointed out in the 18th century, "Novelty is not reform!" Reform consists in identifying a manifest injustice and correcting it. Denying individuals access to educational facilities supported by taxation solely on the basis of pigmentation is manifestly unjust, hence something in need of reform. A novelty, however, is the imposition of mandates simply because it seems the right thing to do. It is one thing to say, "You may not bar X from attending your tax-supported school, because X is Negro"; however, it is quite another to say, "There aren't enough Negroes at your tax-supported school; therefore, you must lower the standards, so that more Negroes will qualify for admission and degrees." That is novelty. Only it didn't end there: it went from novelty to insanity: "You must abolish all standards, admitting anyone who applies for admission. Period!" This is called "the Open-Admissions Policy" and was hailed as a "great achievement" in The Civil Rights Movement. (That it managed to destroy more than one school - CUNY, which was once called "The Workingman's Harvard" being a prime, but alas not the sole, example - is totally ignored.) This and a gaggle of other "novelties" has resulted in the overflowing of the Sociological Septic Tank I call "The Civil Irresponsibilities Movement." Andrew Hacker (a Negro sociologist and former professor at Cornell University and Queens College), writing in Two Nations: Black and White ..., in 1950 (before the start of the Civil Rights Movement and the Welfare Bonanza), the per cent of births out of wedlock [bastardy] was 16.8% for Negroes, 1.7% for Euros; by 1990, the figures stood at 68.3% for Negroes, 18.5% for Euros. More than 2/3s of Negro births are illlegitimate! [pg. 87] (In the minds of the Politically Correct, calling attention to such facts is "hate-speech"! Whether a statement is True or False is incidental. If the statement deprecates the Minority, it's hate-speech. If it exalts the Minority, it's Politically Correct. If it exalts the Euro, it's hate-speech! [George Orwell, call your office!]) Hacker's statistics don't end there: in 1930, for example, Euros accounted for nearly 80% of the prison inmate population. By 1993, it was 43% or Euros and 45% for Negroes, a 400% divergence from the ratios between the two ethnic groups [pg204]. My purpose in citing these statistics is not to provide data for the K.K.K., but rather to put the blame where is properly belongs: on those muddle-headed, "socially conscious" Euros, who have steered the "U.S.S. Titanic" straight into the iceberg! Was Earl Warren a Negro? "Landslide" Lyndon? Tricky-Dicky? Gerald Ford? ... through Don Juan Clinton? None! Has this novelty worked to the betterment of anyone? Are incompetency, decay and destruction salubrious? It is this obsession with equality which has led us into the Abyss, just as Nietzsche said it would. The fact remains that to the only place where everyone is equal is a CEMETERY!
|
