Most Pastors Would Like More Racial Diversity in Their White Congregations

Most Pastors Would Like More Racial Diversity in Their White Congregations

More news stories on Liberal Myths

Helen T. Gray, Kansas City Star (Missouri), March 11, 2011

Most white pastors would like more racially diverse congregations.

But they understand why they aren’t.

“Worship style, preaching style and traditions of leadership usually cause the separation among us,” said the Rev. Bob Hill of Community Christian Church at 46th and Main streets near the Plaza.

“I think the worship style and preaching style are huge factors for both Anglo congregations and African-American congregations,” he said. “They both cherish their traditions and don’t want to let them go.”

That mirrors the views expressed by the African-American ministers.

{snip}

Rock said most white churches are serious about integrating.

“When we are with Christ, it will be a multicultural experience,” he said. “If heaven is multicultural, our churches should be multicultural. Also, our churches should reflect the increasing multiculturalism in our country.”

The Sheffield Family Life Center in the Northeast area could be one of the more multicultural churches in the city.

In 2001, it was 40 percent white, 40 percent African-American and 20 percent Hispanic. Gradually the African-American attendance increased. Today the church is 70 percent African-American.

“We want to keep it integrated,” said the Rev. George Westlake III, senior pastor. “We have been intentional to make sure that we have a mix, including in leadership of African-Americans and Hispanics at all levels.

“I think a lot of predominately white churches that don’t have minorities lack diversity in leadership positions, and the music style does not attract minorities.”

He said Sheffield does a lot of black gospel music, but also music heard in white churches.

Westlake thinks the main reason most churches are not integrated is because their communities are not integrated. The community surrounding Sheffield is about 75 percent nonwhite, mainly African-Americans and Hispanics, he said.

{snip}

Demographics also are a factor, said the Rev. Gail Greenwell of St. Michael and All Angels Episcopal Church in Mission.

“Our church has a desire for diversity, but the neighborhoods we pull from are mostly white,” she said. “God has created incredible diversity and our communities should reflect that as much as we can,” she said.

The Rev. Keith Herron of Holmeswood Baptist Church, 9700 Holmes Road, said there is a mix of races in his congregation but to a lesser percentage than that of minorities in the area. He said some white churches may not be aware of latent racism in their congregations.

“That is subtly evident when someone ‘other than us’ comes to visit, and our true beliefs or ugly thoughts surface,” Herron said. “The visitor recognizes the signs, however, and knows there are some in the church who would rather they not widen their welcome with a true spirit of God’s inclusion.”

{snip}

Also, Community Christian and the predominantly African-American Swope Parkway United Christian Church share fellowship, meals and education forums several times a year, and take turns hosting Juneteenth celebrations.

{snip}

Original article

(Posted on March 15, 2011)

Japanese Don’t Loot – Orderly Disaster Reaction in Line With Deep Cultural Roots

Japanese Don’t Loot

More news stories on Japan

Jared Taylor, Special to AR News, March 14, 2011

The media are cautiously beginning to note that the earthquake/tsunami in Japan has not resulted in a single reported case of looting or even disorderly behavior. Dazed residents have gone back to smashed houses to salvage what they can, but no one worries about thieves. Thousands of homeless line up quietly and politely as they wait for emergency food and water.

The contrast with what happened after the Haiti earthquake last January or Hurricane Katrina in 2005 could not be more stark. In both cases, there was an almost immediate descent into savagery, with police officers joining in the looting. In New Orleans, evacuation centers became nightmares of violence and lawlessness, and the National Guard had to carry weapons on relief missions. In Haiti, tent cities for the quake victims became scenes of mass rape.

The next news story for today quotes two American “experts” on why the Japanese are so well behaved. Gregory Pflugfelder of Columbia University says it is because, unlike Americans, Japanese are not individualistic and care about the group. Merry White of Boston University says Americans loot and riot because of frustration over “alienation and class gaps.”

Wrong. Incapable, as usual, of considering race, they cannot see that the greatest advantage the Japanese have is that they are not black. It is impossible—and I mean impossible—to imagine any black population anywhere in the world behaving like the Japanese.

It is not just blacks. What if a catastrophe struck in Mexico or Indonesia or India or Egypt or Colombia? There would be widespread looting. Native relief agencies would make huge profits selling donated supplies rather than giving them away. Americans or Europeans who showed up with trucks of food would be mobbed. Human vileness would make the calamity vastly worse for the survivors.

Prof. White says the real question is why Americans loot, not why the Japanese don’t. Wrong again. Virtually all people loot if the forces of order are knocked out, and it has nothing to do with “individualism” or “alienation and class gaps.” That is their nature.

The “experts” are also wrong to talk about “Americans” as if there were only one kind. Everyone knows that if the lights go out there will be trouble in Detroit but not in Portland, and everyone knows why: Detroit is black and Portland is white. There would be trouble in Los Angeles, too. After the verdict in the Rodney King beating case, just as many Hispanics as blacks rioted.

Would an all-white population behave exactly like the Japanese? There might be a bit of looting and profiteering, but not much. Most whites would help their neighbors, stand in line, wait their turn. And they would probably deal harshly with looters.

Before they accepted millions of non-white immigrants, Northern Europeans would have behaved much like the Japanese. Swedes, Scots, Dutchmen, Germans, Danes—wherever they are still undiluted by immigrants they can be counted on to show courage, restraint, and dignity.

But again, these peoples are exceptions. They are exceptions for reasons that are largely genetic but also cultural. Whites and north Asians have high average IQs, but also what could be called an “average personality” that is less psychopathic, more disciplined, more public spirited. We see this in every aspect of the societies they build, not just in how they respond to tragedy. Their societies have little crime, illegitimacy, littering, or graffiti. They have high levels of public order, trust, and courtesy.

Only a few populations are capable of building such societies, and they are vastly superior to all others. That, of course, is why so many people from failed societies want to immigrate, but when they come in sufficient numbers they destroy what they came to find.

Things would have been far different in Japan if the country had admitted large numbers of, say, Malays or Pakistanis. So far, Japan has wisely limited Third-World immigration, and can face a catastrophe with the conviction that all Japanese are united both in suffering and in the struggle to rebuild. Japan is far better prepared to face calamity than America or Europe because Japan has had the wisdom to remain Japanese.

japanese

Japanese stand in line in front of a convenience store.

(Posted on March 14, 2011)

 

Orderly Disaster Reaction in Line With Deep Cultural Roots

CNN, March 12, 2011

The layer of human turmoil—looting and scuffles for food or services—that often comes in the wake of disaster seems noticeably absent in Japan.

“Looting simply does not take place in Japan. I’m not even sure if there’s a word for it that is as clear in its implications as when we hear ‘looting,’” said Gregory Pflugfelder, director of the Donald Keene Center of Japanese Culture at Columbia University.

{snip}

To Merry White, an anthropology professor at Boston University who studies Japanese culture , the real question is why looting and disorder exist in American society. She attributes it largely to social alienation and class gaps.

“There IS some alienation and indeed some class gaps in Japan too but violence, and taking what belongs to others, are simply not culturally approved or supported,” White said in an e-mail.

{snip}

The orderly lines that formed when the subway reopened around midnight also made an impression on Pflugfelder.

“Such social order and discipline are so enforced in ordinary times that I think it’s very easy for Japanese to kind of continue in the manner that they’re accustomed to, even under an emergency.”

The communitarian spirit at the foundation of Japanese culture seems to function even more efficiently under the stress of disaster, he said.

The natural American inclination is to operate independently.

“So you do everything you can to protect your own interests with the understanding that, in a rather free-market way, everybody else is going to do the same. And that order will come out of this sort of invisible hand.

“And Japanese don’t function that way. Order is seen as coming from the group and from the community as a sort of evening out of various individual needs.”

{snip}

Original article

Local Politicians Cracking Down on Illegal Aliens

Local Politicians Cracking Down on Illegal Aliens

by Jeff Davis

Ever so slowly our dying republic is attempting to change course to avoid disaster. ABC News reports: “…While new legislation in the Texas House of Representatives would make it a state crime to hire undocumented workers, it excludes those employed in single-family households…”

In other words, the Texas law has a loophole that will allow the upper class to keep their servants. I suppose that will make it easier to pass. Hopefully, the next round of laws will close that loophole. White parents should be raising their own kids and mowing their own lawns, not sacrificing the nation’s future for the sake of having cheap Latino servants.

The article notes “The bill, introduced by state GOP Rep. Debbie Riddle, is the first of its kind in the country. It’s unique in that while it appeases those who want more stringent immigration laws, it doesn’t subject Texas households to the rule that would mainly apply to businesses and large employers. Critics of the bill say it’s hypocritical. Supporters charge it’s needed in a state where the Hispanic population continues to climb swiftly. …the bill reflects a wider push toward implementing tougher anti-immigration laws at the state level. More than 100 immigration-related bills are pending in the Texas legislature alone, including those that would give state and local police officers the authority to enforce federal immigration laws, make English the official language and prevent undocumented students from getting in-state tuition and scholarships.”

We never could afford to hand out First World benefits to Third World invaders. After piling up massive debt, many states are finally turning against the illegal aliens, who are bankrupting them.

Back to ABC: “States across the country, including Georgia and Oklahoma, where the legislatures debated immigration bills this week, have been mulling controversial Arizona-style immigration laws.Thirty-seven states are considering tougher immigration bills, with multiple bills pending in some states.”

Here’s the scoop: it is finally beginning to penetrate the thick, greedy skulls of the wealthy men in expensive suits who actually run this country that things cannot continue as they are, and that something has to be done to at least slow the rate of America’s decline, or else their power and their money might be seriously threatened as the situation slips out of control.

It is also finally dawning on the Republican party that illegal immigration means the end of their party. Attempts to build a White-Latino voting block by George W. Bush and John McCain have miserably failed with conservative Whites solidly against any more Latino immigration or Amnesties.

Most White people have finally realized that the illegal alien problem needs to be resolved soon and actual mass deportations must be started. The Tea Party seems to have the best game plan: Fire the old compromising Republicans and elect people in the primaries who aren’t back-stabbing crooks.

Meteorites Show Evidence of Extra-Terrestrial Life

Meteorites Show Evidence of Extra-Terrestrial Life

by Ian Mosley

Fox News reports: “We are not alone in the universe — and alien life forms may have a lot more in common with life on Earth than we had previously thought. That’s the stunning conclusion one NASA scientist has come to, releasing his groundbreaking revelations in a new study in the March edition of the Journal of Cosmology. Dr. Richard B. Hoover, an astrobiologist with NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, has traveled to remote areas in Antarctica, Siberia, and Alaska, amongst others, for over ten years now, collecting and studying meteorites. He gave FoxNews.com early access to the out-of-this-world research, published late Friday evening in the March edition of the Journal of Cosmology. In it, Hoover describes the latest findings in his study of an extremely rare class of meteorites, called CI1 carbonaceous chondrites. Only nine such meteorites are known to exist on Earth. …Hoover is convinced that his findings reveal fossil evidence of bacterial life within such meteorites, the remains of living organisms from their parent bodies — comets, moons and other astral bodies. By extension, the findings suggest we are not alone in the universe, he said.”

There has been no shortage of UFO sightings. Assuming there are more advanced societies out there, the big question is “Why have they not contacted us?” Well, for one thing, we currently have an African as president of the United States. If anything, it looks like evolution is about to start going backwards. Race-mixing is tolerated and even promoted on the Jewish media.

Most likely these other worlds are documenting the decline of civilization on this planet and they prefer to watch from a safe distance rather than get anywhere near us.

Fox goes on: “In what he calls a very simple process, Dr. Hoover fractured the meteorite stones under a sterile environment before examining the freshly broken surface with the standard tools of the scientist: a scanning-electron microscope and a field emission electron-scanning microscope, which allowed him to search the stone’s surface for evidence of fossilized remains. He found the fossilized remains of micro-organisms not so different from ordinary ones found underfoot — here on earth, that is.”

Perhaps the aliens are making bets on who will survive to dominate this planet. The White race seems like a long shot right now. Maybe they’re betting the Jews will succeed in destroying Whites by brainwashing our people to race-mix. Maybe then, the Asians will get the upper hand. It would be nice if the space Aliens gave us a warning about the Jews, then again the Bible tells us in John 8:44 that the Jews are “the children of satan.” If we aren’t willing to listen to that very clear, extra-terrestrial warning, why should the little gray aliens bother warning us?

Post-Anglo America Might Vote For Big Government, But Couldn’t Afford It. What then?

Population Paradoxes—

A Post-Anglo America Might Vote

For Big Government, But Couldn’t

Afford It.

What then?

By Steve Sailer

What passes for policy debate in America has become so stultified that even the fundamental flaw of contemporary Republican policies has gone virtually unnoticed both by their Republican advocates and by their Democratic critics. It’s easy to point out where Republican policies have failed, but the more frightening prospect might be where they’ve succeeded.

Consider the state of Texas, where the GOP’s low-tax, low-wage, low-regulation strategy has worked roughly as intended in recent decades, creating many new jobs.

This drives Democrat economist Paul Krugman nuts. So, he’s constantly on the lookout for evidence of growing dysfunction in Texas. And it’s not hard to find. But if Krugman tried to be honest about the chief reason for this, his head might explode.

But just because Krugman can’t be candid about what Texas portends doesn’t mean that the rest of us are better off ignoring reality.

On February 27, 2011, Krugman wrote in Leaving Children Behind in the New York Times:

“Texas likes to portray itself as a model of small government, and indeed it is.”

But, think of the children!

“And in low-tax, low-spending Texas, the kids are not all right. The high school graduation rate, at just 61.3 percent, puts Texas 43rd out of 50 in state rankings. Nationally, the state ranks fifth in child poverty; it leads in the percentage of children without health insurance. And only 78 percent of Texas children are in excellent or very good health, significantly below the national average.”

Now, you know and I know the main reason why Texas ranks poorly in these measures: ethnic demographics. As Daniel Patrick Moynihan would have slyly implied, Texas’s foremost problem is that it’s a long way from the Canadian border.

Blogger Iowahawk pointed out for the benefit of people who are unfamiliar with this dynamic:

“As a son of Iowa, I’m no stranger to bragging about my home state’s ranking on various standardized test. Like Wisconsin we Iowans usually rank near the top of the heap on average ACT/SAT scores. We are usually joined there by Minnesota, Nebraska, and the various Dakotas; Vermont, Maine, New Hampshire

“… beginning to see a pattern? Perhaps because a state’s ‘average ACT/SAT’ is, for all intents and purposes, a proxy for the percent of white people who live there. In fact, the lion’s share of state-to-state variance in test scores is accounted for by differences in ethnic composition. Minority students – regardless of state residence – tend to score lower than white students on standardized test, and the higher the proportion of minority students in a state the lower its overall test scores tend to be.” [Longhorns 17, Badgers 1, Iowahawk, March 2, 2011] [Links added by VDARE.com]

When it comes to the effectiveness of public schools, however, Texas appears to perform well above average. According to the federal government’s National Assessment of Educational Progress exams, all three major ethnicities in Texas score well above their respective national norms.

Unfortunately, how well the schools are run doesn’t really that make much of a difference in the big picture. Because non-Asian minorities make up a much larger share of Texas’s population than in the rest of the country, Texas does poorly overall.

A remarkably frank blog item on the Houston Chronicle website on February 24, 2011, three days before Krugman’s column, summed up Texas:

“Looking at population projections for Texas, demographer Steve Murdock concludes: ‘It’s basically over for Anglos.’ Two of every three Texas children are now non-Anglo and the trend line will become even more pronounced in the future, said Murdock, former U.S. Census Bureau director and now director of the Hobby Center for the Study of Texas at Rice University.”[Texas demographer: ‘It’s basically over for Anglos’, Houston Chronicle Texas Politics Blog, February 24, 2011]

Was Krugman intentionally misleading his readers? Or is the Nobel Laureate merely as ignorant as this column makes him appear?

Krugman pulled a fast one by making an obvious apples-to-oranges comparison. And he pretty much got away with it, except for IowaHawk’s fisking, because Americans are intellectually enfeebled by Political Correctness.

People like to say to themselves, “You don’t have to be like that horrible Sailer person and come out and mention the data out loud in public. You can still avoid being a dupe of political manipulators like Krugman by just quietly remembering the facts about race in your head and not mentioning them out loud.”

And, for some people, that might even be true. But for most, if you can’t say it, you can’t remember it. So, a Krugman can 99% get away with this kind of self-serving distortion because the Rules of Political Correctness make it costly for Americans to learn and to remember reality.

Krugman goes on:

“… you have to wonder — and many business people in Texas do — how the state can prosper in the long run with a future work force blighted by childhood poverty, poor health and lack of education.”

Indeed.

The Houston Chronicle explained more frankly in Texas demographer: ‘It’s basically over for Anglos’:

“The state’s future looks bleak assuming the current trend line does not change because education and income levels for Hispanics lag considerably behind Anglos, [Murdock] said.”

Non-Hispanic whites fell from 43 percent of Texas’s children in 2000 to 34 percent in 2010. And that’s not an encouraging trend:

“Unless the trend line changes, 30 percent of the state’s labor force will not have even a high school diploma by 2040, he said. And the average household income will be about $6,500 lower than it was in 2000. That figure is not inflation adjusted so it will be worse than what it sounds.

“‘It’s a terrible situation that you are in. I am worried,’ Murdock said.”

One thing to keep in mind that makes the situation a little less catastrophic is that American-born Latinos do better on English-language achievement tests than do foreign-born ones.

The last time the NAEP asked students whether they were born here or abroad was in 1992. On that test, the gap between foreign-born Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites was 114 percent as large as the notoriously deleterious white-black gap. On the other hand, the gap between whites and American-born Hispanics was 67 percent as big as the white-black difference. Hence, restricting immigration more could allow for some improvement in Hispanic performance.

Unfortunately, however, there’s little evidence that the white-Hispanic gap keeps narrowing after the second generation. Indeed, it might even start widening again. The 2008 book Generations Of Exclusion by sociologists Vilma Ortiz [Email her]and Edward E. Telles [Email him ]of UCLA’s Chicano Studies Research Center found that fourth-generation Mexican-Americans (i.e., people whose grandparents were born in America) in San Antonio and Los Angeles averaged fewer years of schooling than second-generation Mexican-Americans.

But, the crucial point that’s not well understood by anybody: these dire demographic trends in Texas represent the best-case scenario for Republican policies. Economic success, especially of the low wage, anti-union variety as in Texas, encourages massive demographic change.

On February 17, 2011, James C. McKinley reported in the New York Times in Population ‘Tipping Point’ in Texas, as Hispanics Get Closer to Parity With Whites:

“A phenomenal surge in Hispanics has fueled the population growth in Texas, which gained more people over the last decade than any other state, according to United States Census Bureau figures released on Thursday.”

Hispanics grew 42 percent in Texas over the last decade versus only 5 percent among whites.

This isn’t just from proximity to the Mexican border. Politics and economics played a role as well. Purple New Mexico grew barely half as fast in total population as red Texas.

Conversely, on the Canadian border, purple New Hampshire grew 7 percent from 2000-2009 in total population, while blue Vermont, with all its environmental regulations and its Socialist senator (Bernie Sanders), grew just 2 percent. Ironically but inevitably, because Vermont’s economy is restricted and somnolent, liberal economics help make Vermont ever more the whitest state in the country.

Immigration from foreign countries and migration from other states plays a major role in demographic trends, but it’s also clear that the Hispanic birth rate (especially the illegal immigrant birthrate) within a state is much more sensitive to economic and political changes than the white or U.S. citizen birth rate. For example, the Hispanic birth rate exploded in California in the half dozen years following the 1986 amnesty.

Similarly, the blogger Audacious Epigone points out how the number of Hispanic births in Arizona over the last decade followed the contours of the Housing Bubble, rising from 34,000 in 2000 to 46,000 in 2007, then dropping back toward 34,000 again in 2010. The rise and fall in the number of births to white women in Arizona was less than half as large.

Of course, demographic change has electoral implications. As Harold Meyerson [Send him mail] gloats once again in an op-ed column in the Washington Post

“Don’t look now, but Texas is turning blue.

Not today, to be sure, nor tomorrow. But to read the newly released census data on the Lone Star State is to understand that Texas, the linchpin of any Republican electoral college majority, is turning Latino and, unless the Republicans change their spots, Democratic. “[GOP's anti-immigrant stance could turn Texas into a blue state, March 2, 2011]

As usual, the leftist Meyerson advises the GOP to open the borders. Would Harold Meyerson give intentionally bad advice to his political enemies? (See “It’s Basically Over For Anglos” In Texas. Or Have They Not Yet Begun To Fight?, By Peter Brimelow, February 27, 2011). Or is he calling for naïve Republicans to throw him in the briar patch?

You’ll notice that Meyerson’s assumptions are the electoral analog of Krugman’s self-serving ignorance on education. In truth, the parties’ views on immigration have only marginal influence relative to sheer demographics— just as the effect on test scores of different levels of public school spending across states is swamped by demographic disparities.

And yet, there’s one more irony: Democrats like Krugman and Meyerson will likely finally realize when they reach their extreme old age that their success in electing a new people to give the Democrats a permanent lock on power didn’t work out too well.

Why? Because their “new people” don’t create enough wealth to pay enough taxes or borrow enough money to pay for the liberal spending policies of their dreams. You need Iowans for that. Instead, a heavily Hispanic population may only be able to afford a limited Texas-style government.

But of course a heavily Hispanic population won’t vote for limited government as long as it can be persuaded that there are other people to plunder.  For that matter, how many Spanish-speaking countries have limited governments anyway?

As Peter Brimelow keeps saying, this is all going to end in tears.

[Steve Sailer (email him) is movie critic for The American Conservative. His website www.iSteve.blogspot.com features his daily blog. His new book, AMERICA’S HALF-BLOOD PRINCE: BARACK OBAMA’S "STORY OF RACE AND INHERITANCE", is available here.]

David Broder, Rodney King, And “We Whites”.

David Broder, Rodney King, And “We Whites”.

By A.W. Morgan

When Washington Post columnist David Broder died on Ash Wednesday at the age of 81, the flood of accolades was predictable. Still, it is an accomplishment to elicit a warm statement from the president of the United States when you die.

The New York Times obituary was typical:

“Mr. Broder, whose last column was published on Feb. 6, was often called the dean of the Washington press corps and just as often described as a reporter’s reporter, a shoe-leather guy who always got on one more airplane, knocked on one more door, made one more phone call. He would travel more than 100,000 miles a year to write more than a quarter-million words. In short, he composed first drafts of history for an awful lot of history.

“Mr. Broder’s profile was national: his column was syndicated, and he made more guest appearances on ‘Meet the Press’ than any other journalist. His writing life spanned 11 White House administrations, beginning with Dwight D. Eisenhower’s second term, and his career as an observer of Congress was longer than Senator Edward M. Kennedy’s tenure as a member of it. Indeed, he covered Mr. Kennedy from before his first election in 1962 through his struggle with cancer and death.”

[David Broder, Political Journalist and Pundit, Dies at 81, By Bruce Weber, March 9, 2011. VDARE.com note: Links are added to all quotes.]

Broder didn’t win that Pulitzer because he was a great stylist. Slogging through his column was akin to choking down a bowl of lukewarm oatmeal—healthy, yes; tasty no. And he was a boringly conventional liberal, if a fair and kind one, as Tom Bethell wrote in his short remembrance at The American Spectator.

Nowhere was Broder’s conventional liberalism more apparent than in the memorial column, Now the ‘character question’ has been written in fire, which the Washington Post Writers Group syndicate (contact them) sent out after his death with the following note:

“EDITORS—Of the many hundreds of David Broder’s columns that we could cite in tribute, this one from May 1992 stands out because it shows his fundamental honesty as he confronts his own—and the country’s—failings when its comes to healing the scars of slavery and racism. “

So, of the bazillion or so words that Broder wrote in a half-century of political pontificating, the chosen column, originally published on May 5, 1992 in the wake of the Rodney King riots, was the one in which he supposedly admits his own racism. The modern liberal is thus defined.

Funny thing is, in the column Broder doesn’t seem to “confront” his failings—but instead subtly congratulates himself for overcoming them and then finds them in others, namely everyone else.

That defines modern liberalism too.

Let‘s unpack a few of the highlights. Broder wrote:

“When I watched, as you did, the sickening pictures of the beating of Rodney King and the burning of Los Angeles, my mind went back to the seemingly different world of Marburg 2—the corridor at Johns Hopkins Hospital where I spent some time last month.

“My first roommate—the day and night after surgery—was a young black man, angry, hostile, cursing the nurses who remonstrated with him about his noisy outbursts. I know nothing of his background—he was on Marburg 2 for only one night because of a shortage of beds. But he seemed the epitome of the young men who have grown up in fatherless homes, devoid of hope, totally centered on themselves and the moment, heedless of the consequences of the drugs they use and sell, the guns they are quick to fire—terrorizing their neighbors as they act out the frustrations of their unchanneled, undisciplined lives.

“When I saw the looting and burning in Los Angeles, I saw his face.”

But Broder didn’t wear out any shoe leather to determine that the tapes of the King beating had been edited. Nor, apparently, did he run down King’s rap sheet, which was as long as a half dozen of Broder’s columns.

Yet the riots did, after all, cause $1 billion in damage and 53 people died. And you might remember Reginald Denny, the white man pulled from his truck by black rioters and beaten to a pulp.

Broder claimed that his hospital unit was a microcosm of the experience he had in Army basic training some 40 years earlier. No black or white, no recognition of racial differences. Everyone was equal:

“It was an artificially created society of some two dozen men, black and white, almost all of whom had been thrown together by the common experience of prostate surgery. It was a perfect democracy of equals, all striving for the single goal of recovery. Our role and status outside the hospital were irrelevant; and so, amazingly, was our race. Seniority prevailed. “

Thus did Broder “confront his failing”:

“At no time between Fort Jackson and Marburg 2, I realized, could I recall a situation where I was not acutely conscious of the race of the person I was dealing with, whether it was George Wallace or Harold Washington. One evening in the hospital, I told a new patient, facing surgery in the morning, ‘You must be an actor, a preacher or a teacher; you have one of the most beautiful faces I have ever seen.’ As it turned out, he was a retired school administrator from Westchester County, N.Y., and over the next week, we became friends.

“But I realized with astonishment that it had been 40 years since I had expressed a feeling so spontaneously to a black person—so pervasive and encompassing and overwhelming is the race-consciousness our society. Los Angeles and Simi Valley demonstrated how adept we have become, we whites, in shutting out our recognition of the essential humanity of all peoples, in consigning those of other races to their own worlds and living within our own.”

One wonders what Broder expected of “we whites.” Should we all move to Anacostia, the worst neighborhood in Washington, D.C.? Did Broder?

And how, precisely, is holding down a job, paying taxes, abiding by the law and living peacefully among one’s own kind amount to “shutting out” anyone or denying their “essential humanity”?

No normal human being thinks along these lines. But liberals are anything but normal. They are the real “race-conscious” people.  And that is because, as Walker Percy noted in his novel The Thanatos Syndrome, they deny what is obvious—that whites and blacks are different:

“One of life’s little mysteries: an old-style Southern white and an old-style Southern black are more at ease talking to each other, even though one may be unjust to the other, than Ted Kennedy talking to Jesse Jackson—who are overly cordial, nervous as cats in their cordiality, and glad to be rid of each other.

“In the first case—the old-style white and the old-style black—each knows exactly where he stands with the other. Each can handle the other, the first because he is in control, the second because he uses his wits. They both know this and can even enjoy each other.

“In the second case—Ted Kennedy and Jesse Jackson—each is walking on eggshells. What to say next in this rarified atmosphere of perfect liberal agreement? What if one should violate the fragile liberal canon, let drop a racist remark, an anti-Irish Catholic slur? What if Jesse Jackson should mention Hymie? The world might end. They are glad to get it over with. What a relief! Whew!

This precisely describes Broder and his ilk. One can imagine how nervous Broder was trying to write the first lines of his column and not come off sounding like, well, George Wallace—or at least the old George Wallace.

Broder wrote of his view from the hospital window at 6 a.m. He saw black people going to work. This, he concluded, after quoting Jesse Jackson, showed that blacks have character even if they are poor.

“These people I’ve been watching from my window prove their character every day, just by getting out of bed and driving through the dark to do the jobs for which this society offers damn little in return. Their character is evident in their daily labors.

“You’ll hear no prattle from them about maintaining ‘a zone of privacy’ for themselves, as you heard from Bill Clinton, and still less will you find them ducking the jobs that need to be done, as George Bush [i.e. George I, then still president] tends to do.

“What has Bush done in this nation in three years as president that shows character? Sign on to a modest deficit-reduction deal and then denounce it? Ease regulations on business? Stigmatize and fight a modest civil rights bill before signing it?”

At least, from Broder’s perspective, Bush did the right thing in prosecuting the Los Angeles cops who clobbered King for “violating his civil rights”—double jeopardy that wasn’t double jeopardy only because of a technicality. They were convicted—unlike all but one of Denny’s assailants, released because of a hung jury. Presumably, Broder approved.

The last paragraph of Broder’s column showed that, whatever his virtues, he was obsessed with atoning for America’s “original sin”:

“There is no more important test of character for an American president than what he does to heal the scars that slavery and racism have left on this society. That is the curse that is killing us, and everything else is secondary. The last president who acted on that conviction was Lyndon Johnson, who left office almost a quarter-century ago, when Los Angeles was last in flames. We cannot wait another 25 years for such a president. We just can’t.”

Almost 20 years has elapsed since Broder penned this nonsense. We now have Obama in the White House. And, far from healing this country’s racial problems, he is exacerbating them.

He says white people are “bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

He says the white cop who arrested Henry Louis Gates “acted stupidly.”

His Justice Department dropped the case against the New Black Panther thugs who perpetrated what a civil rights lawyer called the worst case of voter intimidation he had ever witnessed. He apparently agrees with Attorney General Eric Holder, who said calling what happened in Philadelphia voter intimidation “demeans my people.”

But whose people would that be? And what happened to Obama’s post-racial vision?

Did Broder ask himself these questions—or any others about the feral black criminals killing whites with impunity, given his expressed concern about “shutting out our recognition of the essential humanity of all peoples, in consigning those of other races to their own worlds and living within our own”?

We can’t know. But we can surmise one thing. In “confronting” his “failings” in 1992, Broder’s guilt arose not from being white, or his own failure to help “heal the scars that slavery and racism have left on this society” etc. etc. Rather, he felt guilt about recognizing the truth he laid out in the first paragraph of his column: many young black men are dangerous and violent.

He had to conjure something to explain away what his eyes told him.

So he did. The problem in Los Angeles and other cities isn’t black criminals. It’s “we whites.”

A.W. Morgan [Email him] is fully recovered from prolonged contact with the Beltway Right. HHe now lives in America.

The House We Live In

The House We Live In

 

Anyone who wants to know how we got to the point of all this Diversity nonsense and multicultural madness, and where it came from, should watch this short film called The House I Live In. Starring Frank Sinatra, it came out in 1945, and was created “to oppose anti-Semitism and racial prejudice.” It was awarded both a Golden Globe and an Academy Award in 1946.

The plot’s pretty simple. Sinatra, playing himself, heads outside for a cigarette break in the middle of a recording session, where he happens upon a gang of about a dozen young boys chasing and cornering another kid, getting ready to pummel him. Sinatra intervenes, asking what the trouble is. The ruffians explain that they want to beat the kid up because they don’t like his religion. One tells Sinatra “he’s a dirty -” but Frank cuts him off before he can finish the sentence.

Frank then has a talk with the boys, and shows them how wrong they are. Does he tell them that, while religion is important, going around beating up people with a different religion is not appropriate behavior? Nah, Frank cuts right to the chase. He tells them:

“Look, fellas, religion makes no difference. Except maybe to a Nazi, or somebody that’s stupid.”

Christians like to complain about “modern day” Hollywood denigrating and downplaying Christianity, while insisting that back in the good old days Hollywood respected Christianity. But even back in 1945 Hollywood was giving Oscars to a movie that says that anyone who thinks Christianity is better than other religions is either a Nazi, or stupid.

Sinatra then goes on to explain that we’re all Americans, no matter what we believe, and “prejudice” and “intolerance” are wrong, because even though we all may not see eye to eye on religion, we’ve got to stick together to fight “the Japs.” And, yes, he says “Japs”, repeatedly. The kids then stare wide eyed as Frank breaks into an expurgated rendition of the title song.

The film is based on the song of the same name, The House I Live In. It’s all about America being a multiracial, multicultural Disneyland. But the songwriter was livid that the movie makers cut the verse that explicitly refers to blacks out of the movie. He even got tossed out of a theater for protesting the excision. But the people that made the movie knew that America wasn’t quite ready for a movie promoting that much Diversity just yet. No matter; they had plenty of time, and now they push not only racial integration, but miscegenation non-stop. And it goes without saying that if they were making the movie today, they would no doubt still leave in the line comparing evangelicals to Nazis for thinking religion is important, but they would take out the stuff about “Japs.”

Nowadays, of course, the message of the movie is considered mainstream. Who doesn’t love “tolerance” and “diversity” these days? But back then, the idea that race and religion were meaningless trivialities was only being pushed by radicals, Jews, and Communists. Forced racial integration was considered to be a Communist plot, largely because it was a Communist plot. And if you think I exaggerate, just consult some history books. Christians and conservatives of today love to pretend as if they’ve always stood for and promoted interracial marriage, integrated schools, integrated churches, Civil Rights laws, etc., and that Martin Luther King was the embodiment of Christian conservatism. But nothing could be further from the truth. Conservative evangelical churches in the era between WW 2 and the 1970s railed against racial integration, and opposed all efforts to mix the races. Probably not five white preachers out of a thousand would’ve conducted an interracial marriage in 1964. Conservatives and Christians weren’t “marching with Dr. King”; the non-blacks marching with MLK were Quakers, liberal apostate “Christians”, commies, beatniks, and, overwhelmingly, Jews. (One of the rare exceptions was Billy Graham, and he certainly didn’t take a prominent position in the Civil Rights crusade, because he knew it would kill his ministry. But he did invite King to pray at a New York City revival, and insisted on integrated seating at all his revival meetings. He was widely denounced by conservative Christians for these actions.) Again, just check the history books if you doubt that modern day shibboleths on race were considered far out, dangerous radicalism by Americans up until quite recently, and that the people pushing such things were generally Communists.

But if you don’t have time to read some history books, just watch the credits for this Academy Award winning movie. It’s like a Who’s Who of Hollywood Communism and radicalism. Sinatra was just their front man.

Let’s start with the man who wrote the lyrics to the song on which the movie is based. In the movie he’s credited as “Lewis Allan”, but don’t pay any attention to that. His real name was Abel Meeropol. He also wrote Strange Fruit, the song about lynching in the South which Billie Holiday made famous, and which TIME magazine called the most important song of the 20th century. Holiday claimed she wrote it in her autobiography, but that was a lie. And who was Abel Meeropol? Our good friend Max Blumenthal tells us that he was “a Jewish school teacher”, but there’s a bit more to it than that. Quite a bit more. Remember Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, the nice Jewish couple executed for giving our atomic secrets to the Soviet Union? Well, after they were executed, Abel Meeropol adopted their kids. Was that because he took pity on a couple orphans? Possibly. It might also have to do with the fact that the “Jewish school teacher” was an “ardent Communist” himself. Funny how Blumenthal forgot to mention that little fact…

OK, so we’ve seen that the lyricist for the song which inspired the movie was some strange fruit, indeed. What about others? Well, Earl Robinson wrote the music for the song. You remember Earl Robinson, right? He was one of the notorious Hollywood Ten, who were blacklisted for refusing to tell Congress whether or not they had ever been members of the Communist Party. Of course, every single one of the Hollywood Ten either was or had been a member of the Communist Party. Most still were. Robinson also wrote the music for other songs, like Ballad For Americans, an anthem all about how race and religion don’t matter. It was performed at the Communist Party national convention of 1940. (They also played it the GOP convention that year, which oughta tell you something.) Robinson also wrote Black and White, a celebration of the Brown vs. Board of Education travesty of jurisprudence. You’ve probably heard a watered down version of Black and White – Three Dog Night had a #1 hit with their less blatantly political form of the song in 1972.

OK, so the guy who wrote the words to the song that inspired the movie was an America hating Communist. And the guy who wrote the music was another Communist. Anyone else? Well, there’s also the guy who wrote the screenplay for the movie. His name was Albert Maltz, surprise, surprise, and he, too, “was a man on the rise both inside and outside of the Communist Party.”

Yes, The House I Live In, and its message, was a Communist production through and through. And make no mistake. The message of the movie wasn’t that people shouldn’t go around beating up Jews. We have no problem with that message; we oppose violence against anyone. But that wasn’t the message of the movie. The message was that religion and race are meaningless trivialities, and anyone who disagrees is either “a Nazi” or “stupid.”

In 1945, that was a radical Communist idea. Now, it’s a mainstream view parroted by nearly everyone.