The Dangers of Diversity

The Dangers of Diversity, Part I-III



“What does it mean to be ‘White in America’?

We are going to explore this in a long essay for another Web site, but have no problem in stating the thesis: racial violence against white people is hardly a cause for concern nor justification for coverage by the media, for it is just another example of the privilege of being white; white people shouldn’t worry about the changing demographics in America, for the joyous day when white people are just another minority group is the moment when a peaceful Utopia will occur.

In summation, white people have no voice in their continued dispossession that they have the privilege of funding, and have the honor of bearing the brunt of the primary racial assaults (Black-on-white attacks being the most prolific) transpiring in this nation that the media admittedly will not cover.”

What actually happens when races mix.

by Jared Taylor

Diversity has joined apple pie, motherhood, and the flag as a symbol of America. Many politicians cannot get through a stump speech without praising American diversity, and corporate CEOs boast of their diverse workforces. The idea that diversity is one of our country’s great strengths — even its greatest strength — now goes essentially unchallenged. And yet, even the most cursory examination of diversity’s effects on the United States shows that it is a terrible source of division and conflict, and that it brings no compensating advantages. How can anything so obviously untrue have gained mythic status?

When people praise diversity they may have different things in mind — diversity of language, religion, erotic orientation, culture — but diversity’s most important ingredient is race. A university could have 10 percent of its student body from ten different European countries, but it could not claim to be “diverse” because all the students would be white.

What we are supposed to want for America.

This country’s most agonizing conflicts revolve around race, and whatever they may claim to believe about integration, most Americans prefer not to cross racial lines (see “Integration Has Failed,” AR, February and March 2008). It is not hard to understand why. All that is required is a look at what happens when people, for whatever reason, find themselves in close contact with people unlike themselves.

Nevertheless, practically every American public figure from the president on down praises diversity. As George W. Bush noted when the US Supreme Court upheld the limited use of race in college admissions, “Diversity is one of America’s greatest strengths.” In a 2007 statement about Hispanic heritage he called on Americans to “celebrate the diversity that makes America stronger.” In a joint American-Brazilian statement in 2003, Mr. Bush said both countries were “forged from diverse cultures, proving that diversity is our strength.”

Practically every American public figure from the president on down praises diversity.

Former president Bill Clinton and his wife Hillary are tireless promoters of diversity. Mr. Clinton once invited black columnists to the White House and told them, “We want to become a multiracial, multiethnic society. This will arguably be the third great revolution … to prove that we literally can live without … having a dominant European culture.” When Mrs. Clinton spoke at her former high school in the Chicago suburb of Park Ridge she said she was glad to see so many non-white faces in the audience. “We didn’t have the wonderful diversity of people that you have here today,” she said. “I’m sad we didn’t have it, because it would have been a great value, as I’m sure you will discover.”

State officials take the same view. Then-governor of California, Gray Davis, noted in 2003 with unintended humor that “my vision is to make the most diverse state on earth, and we have people from every planet on the earth in this state.” In 2007, Governor Martin O’Malley of Maryland said diversity is “our greatest strength as a people.” In 2003, Governor Gary Locke of Washington, who is Chinese-American, went farther: “In our diversity lies our humanity.” When Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York said, “Our city’s diversity is our greatest strength,” he was only repeating his predecessor, Rudolph Giuliani, who noted in his farewell address as mayor that “we’re a city in which our diversity is our greatest strength.”

The CIA values diversity. “At the Central Intelligence Agency, workforce diversity is a mission imperative,” the agency noted in a recruitment ad in Black Enterprise magazine. The even more secret National Security Agency has a website that explains, “Diversity gives us the power to conceive the inconceivable.” Chief of Naval Operations Michael Mullen, the top officer in the Navy from 2005 to 2007, explained, “Diversity is our strength. Let’s keep it strong.” In 2007, General George Casey, who was in command of American troops in Iraq from 2004 until 2007, announced, “I firmly believe the strength of our Army comes from our diversity.”

The private sector is equally committed. In 2008, no fewer than 352 companies vied to be included among the “Top 50 Companies for Diversity” selected by Diversity Inc magazine. JP Morgan Chase’s chairman and CEO Jamie Dimon sent a message explaining, “We’re committed to ensuring that diversity remains a key priority … our collective diversity is our strength.” Chairman and CEO Ivan Seidenberg of Verizon Communications said this: “What I want the company to be is relevant. If you’re not diverse you’re not relevant.” The top executives of all the competing companies sent similar statements.

At the CIA, “workforce diversity
is a mission imperative.”

In its final press release the day before it went bankrupt in 2008, the huge banking conglomerate Washington Mutual boasted about coming in sixth in Hispanic Business’s annual Diversity Elite list. “Diversity is an integral part of cultivating a welcoming, innovative and dynamic workplace here at WaMu,” said president Steve Rotella.

Although most companies claim diversity offers business advantages (“What Science Says About Diversity,” AR, November and December 2007, demonstrates that there are no advantages) some companies treat diversity as an end in itself. In 2005, Wal-Mart’s General Counsel Tom Mars told the company’s top 100 outside law firms that they would be graded not just on price and performance, but also on the diversity of their lawyers. It is possible to outrank other firms on price and performance but lose Wal-Mart’s favor because of insufficient diversity. This is because Wal-Mart values diversity even if it has no tangible benefits.

Like other large companies such as General Motors and Ford, Wal-Mart insists on diversity from its suppliers and requires reports on the number of non-whites in their workforces and among executives. It does not require reports on such things as budgeting, materials handling, or computerization. It insists on diversity — and encourages suppliers to demand diversity from their own suppliers — as a goal that is wholly independent of any business advantage.

Actual advantage may even be sacrificed in the name of diversity. The city of North Miami used to require that its police officers know how to swim because they may have to rescue someone in the water. In 2004, the department dropped that requirement because it desperately wanted Haitian officers, and most Haitian applicants could not swim. “Our swimming requirement may give the false perception that we are not serious in our efforts to hire Haitian police applicants,” explained police chief Gwendolyn Boyd-Savage, who is black. It was more important that the force appear to be committed to diversity than that officers be capable of a water rescue.

Suzanne Bump, secretary of labor and workforce development for the state of Massachusetts, explained in 2007 why she wanted diversity: “I could fill my office with white lawyers. We’re choked with applications from them. But they’re not going to get the job done. A diversity of skills, perspective and cultural background is necessary for success in creating more and better jobs in this state.” She herself is white, but did not explain what skills and perspectives whites lack that prevent them from doing the job.

“Diversity is as essential as the study of the Middle Ages, of international politics and of Shakespeare.”

Universities promote diversity with the same ardor. On April 24, 1997, 62 research universities lead by Harvard bought a full-page advertisement in the New York Times that justified racial preferences in university admissions by explaining that diversity is a “value that is central to the very concept of education in our institutions.” Lee Bollinger, who has been president of University of Michigan and of Columbia, once insisted that “diversity is not merely a desirable addition to a well-run education. It is as essential as the study of the Middle Ages, of international politics and of Shakespeare.” In 2003, Mr. Bollinger’s successor at Michigan, Mary Sue Coleman, welcomed a US Supreme Court decision permitting race-based admissions with the following statement: “Year after year, our student body proves it and now the court has affirmed it: Our diversity is our strength.”

Many companies and universities now have a “chief diversity officer” who reports directly to the president. In 2006, Michael J. Tate was vice president for equity and diversity at Washington State University. He had an annual budget of three million dollars and a full-time staff of 55. His office was on the same floor as that of the president, and he took part in the highest levels of university decision-making. There were similarly powerful “chief diversity officers” at Harvard, Berkeley, the University of Virginia, Brown, and the University of Michigan. In 2006, the University of Wisconsin at La Crosse decided that diversity was so important that its presumed beneficiaries — students — should pay for it. It increased in-state tuition by 24 percent, from $5,555 to $6,875, to cover the costs of increasing diversity.

The new American ideal.

American law schools are accredited by the American Bar Association (ABA), which uses its power to promote diversity. Schools with too many white students risk losing accreditation, which would mean students would not qualify for federal financial aid and, in many jurisdictions, could not even take the bar exam.

In 2000, an ABA reaccreditation inspection discovered that at George Mason University Law School in northern Virginia 93.5 percent of first-year students were white. The ABA recognized that GMU had made a “very active effort to recruit minorities,” but complained that the school was unwilling “to engage in any significant preferential affirmative action admissions program.” With its accreditation at stake, GMU lowered standards for non-white applicants and admitted more: 10.98 percent in 2001 and 16.16 percent in 2002. That was not enough. In 2003, the ABA summoned GMU’s president and law school dean and threatened them to their faces with disaccreditation unless the law school admitted more non-whites. GMU lowered standards even further, and managed to raise its non-white admissions to 17.3 percent in 2003, and 19 percent in 2004. This was still not good enough. “Of the 99 minority students in 2003,” the ABA complained, “only 23 were African American; of 111 minority students in 2004, the number of African Americans held at 23.”

True diversity, in other words, could not be achieved without a certain number of blacks, but what of the blacks GMU did admit? From 2003 to 2005, fully 45 percent had grade-point averages below 2.15, which is defined as “academic failure.” For non-black students, the figure was 4 percent. GMU officials pointed out that the ABA’s own Standard 501(b) says that “a law school shall not admit applicants who do not appear capable of satisfactorily completing its educational program and being admitted to the bar.” As the school’s dean, Dan Polsby, explained, this requirement was the greatest obstacle to achieving diversity targets.

American institutions pursue diversity with such enthusiasm that it would be easy to misunderstand their goals. There is a kind of diversity that is essential for any group undertaking, and one might think this is what Americans are celebrating. A contractor, for example, cannot build houses if he hires only electricians. He needs carpenters, roofers, masons, etc. If the advantage of hiring people with different skills had only recently been discovered, it would make sense to promote it enthusiastically, but that is not the kind of diversity George Bush or Lee Bollinger are talking about. They would insist that an effective workforce must have the right mix of blacks, whites, Asians, handicapped people, Hispanics, and American Indians. It is not clear how such a group would build better houses.

Let us examine what actually happens when Americans encounter diversity.

Los Angeles school students: How could they fail to get along?

Los Angeles is often called the most diverse city in the United States — perhaps in the world. Whites have been a minority in Los Angeles County since 1990, and its inhabitants represent more than 140 nationalities and speak 130 different languages. It should be a showcase for diversity’s strengths. The schools, in particular, should be exemplary. As Hillary Clinton assured the students at her former high school, multi-racialism should be an experience of great value. Southern California also has a particular advantage in that the most salient racial mixes are not the historically freighted one of blacks and whites. Blacks and Hispanics, for example, came into contact with no past grievances — no real past at all. There is nothing like the specters of slavery, Jim Crow, lynching, or segregation to poison their relations. If anything, two groups that share common experiences as minorities should find contact especially rewarding.

They do not. For decades, students in Los Angeles have stubbornly defied the expectations of those who praise diversity. Since at least 1990, calming racial tension — usually between blacks and Hispanics — has been one of the top goals of the school district. As the Los Angeles Times put it in a 1999 article:

“From Crenshaw to the San Fernando Valley, administrative offices to classrooms, the often-bitter emotions of racial strife plague the Los Angeles Unified School District. District officials have worked to defuse racial and ethnic tensions with everything from squads of mediators who can travel to troubled campuses to appointments of administrators with an eye toward racial balance — a Latino vice principal, for example, to complement a black principal.”

The article went on quote then-school superintendent Ruben Zacarias as saying that the school system was putting more effort into conflict resolution than any other organization in the city. It did not appear to be succeeding.


Racial violence in schools is a grinding, chronic problem that defies every effort to stamp it out. It can erupt at any time. For a great many students, conflict and tension are the most vivid consequence of the diversity that is said to be America’s strength. It would be scandalous if only a few students in America were trying to get an education in the shadow of the threat of racial violence. In fact, tension and violence touch hundreds of schools — perhaps thousands — and sear the lives of countless students.

There does not appear to be any central organization that monitors racial violence in schools, either at the state or national level, nor is it something that gets attention outside the neighborhoods in which it occurs. This makes it difficult to grasp the true dimensions of the problem or even to know whether it is getting better or worse. The only way to get a sense of the nature and scale of the problem is to describe specific incidents.

On November 20, 2004, a black-Hispanic brawl broke out at Jordan High School in South Los Angeles. Police estimated that as many as 1,000 people took part when a fight between two girls spread through the entire campus. Gang-members from adjoining neighborhoods joined the fighting, and it took about 60 policemen in riot gear to break up the fray. The school was locked down, as were two other schools in the area, for fear the violence might spread.

Just three days later, there was a fight between 100 blacks and Hispanics at Manual Arts High School, also in Los Angeles. It took dozens of officers, some in helicopters, to restore order. A week later, black students broke the jaw of a Hispanic student in front of Crenshaw High School. Police said the incidents were related: Fighting in one school can bring tensions to a head in an entire region.

The next year, there was a disturbing series of incidents at Jefferson High School in Los Angeles. On April 14, more than 100 blacks and Hispanics fought each other in the cafeteria after Hispanics told blacks to “go back to Africa.” Police broke up the brawl, administrators locked down the school, and let students out early. “It’s like we’re fighting the neighbors next door just because we’re a different race,” said Michael Ortega, age 17.


The next day, the violence at Jefferson jumped directly to two other schools in the area, Norte Vista High School in Riverside, and Santa Monica High School. Norte Vista was locked down for an hour while police searched for instigators and made five arrests. The same day, blacks and Hispanics fought each other at Santa Monica High School, which was also locked down to let tensions cool. Students were dismissed methodically, building by building, to be sure they did not mix and start fighting again. “It was more racial tension than it was gang-related,” explained Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District Superintendent John Deasy, in what was no doubt an attempt to be reassuring.

Back at Jefferson, no fewer than 16 school and city police officers were patrolling the campus to keep tensions under control, but three days later there was another cafeteria brawl involving 100 blacks and Hispanics. The police used pepper spray to defend themselves and stop the fighting. One student suffered a broken hip and several others were arrested. Jefferson administrators announced that the school would get a metal detector for the main entrance, and close off all other entrances. They also decided to close the cafeteria so that students could not congregate. Instead of hot meals, students would get bag lunches.

The next day, just to be sure there was no more violence, 29 police officers were assigned to the school, and 12 more patrolled the neighborhood. The school was careful to put nothing in the bag lunches that could be used as a projectile — just hamburgers and burritos. Even so, attendance was down by almost half because so many students were afraid. Those who did come to school were dismissed through a phalanx of teachers, administrators, and police in riot helmets. “We just have a lot of issues with race,” conceded Principal Norm Morrow.

As tensions continued during the succeeding weeks, the president of the school’s Black Student Union said that she, like some other black students, was thinking of transferring because she was afraid of being “jumped.” The Nation of Islam offered to escort outnumbered black students to school to protect them from Hispanics. Fifteen-year-old Stephanie Alonzo, who saw a friend knocked down and kicked during one of the brawls, said she thought the solution was to keep blacks and Hispanics apart whenever they were not in class.

Hispanic students started wearing brown T-shirts as a sign of racial solidarity. “It was saying that we’re here and that we have pride in each other and we’re not going to let nobody talk stuff about us,” explained 14-year-old Daniel Rios. Blacks started wearing black T-shirts in retaliation.

“I felt good defending my race. I was hitting anybody I could get my hands on.”

During the two months that followed, there were at least two more large-scale melees despite the stepped-up police presence. There were many small skirmishes, and a number of organized attacks in which a group from one race cornered and beat a student of another race. Twenty-five students were arrested, three had to be hospitalized, and dozens were suspended or transferred. An anonymous Hispanic student wrote about the fighting in the independent publication LA Youth. He said he had decided to “stand up for my family, my Mexican ancestors, and the people who worked hard so I could be here — my heritage that I’m really proud of.” “I felt good defending my race,” he added. “I was hitting anybody I could get my hands on …”

Ron Rubine, a counselor at Carver Middle School in South Los Angeles, which has had considerable black-Hispanic conflict of its own, as much as conceded that racial tension was intractable. It was all very well for outsiders to call the students at Jefferson “savages,” he said, but noted that “we all have onus in this thing,” adding: “Is it really that different with adults? If there was a fight among the staff, we’d align ourselves with the people we hang around with … We have our public face, but look at what we do in private.” If the chips were down the staff, too, would square off along racial lines.

Jefferson High School got a new Hispanic principal from East Los Angeles, and regular visits from human relations experts, ex-convicts, former gang members, and Justice Department officials, but racial tensions continued.

Jefferson was hardly the only Los Angeles School with racial tension in 2005. That spring, a rumor went around the district that Hispanic gang members were going to celebrate the Mexican holiday of Cinco de Mayo by killing blacks. School administrators put on extra police patrols, and principals sent home letters saying the rumors were groundless. Some schools mounted mass telephone campaigns to tell parents it was safe to send children to school. Despite these efforts, 51,000 middle and high school students — 18 percent of total enrollment — stayed home. At Crenshaw High School in South Los Angeles, about 1,700 of 2,800 failed to appear — an absence rate five times greater than usual. “I’m devastated that a rumor can cause such fear,” said Randy Cornfield, assistant principal at Hamilton High School.


Channa Cook, a black teacher at the highly regarded Los Angeles Center for Enriched Studies, explained that even there, black students routinely skipped school on Cinco de Mayo for fear of violence. As she reported: “My first year here, I didn’t believe it, but the students told me, ‘No, Miss Cook, if you come to school you’re going to get shot.’ When I arrived at class, all the black kids had stayed home.”

State funding for Los Angeles schools depends on daily attendance figures, and the thousands of absences that day were estimated to have cost the district $600,000.

The next year saw more violence. On March 21, 2006, five fights broke out between black and Hispanic students at Fremont High School in Los Angeles. Others joined in and eventually 100 students were rioting. Police locked down the school and dismissed students in small groups to keep them from mixing and fighting again. The school hired extra security officers.

In neighboring San Bernardino County, police arrested five students and 80 more were suspended after a black/Hispanic brawl at Pacific High School. The October 13 fight involved 80 to 100 students, and was the third time in three weeks that dozens of students had fought each other. There were eight campus security men present, but they were unable to break up the riot. and police finally had to use pepper balls to separate blacks and Hispanics. The riot was a replay of the previous year’s racial violence that greeted the start of the school year.

On the same day in the same county, an estimated 500 blacks and Hispanics pitched into each other with bottles, rocks, and fists at Fontana High School. It took more than 100 officers, including the Fontana SWAT team, more than an hour and a half to restore order. Helicopters circled overhead as officers fired bean-bag rounds, sting balls, and hundreds of rubber pellets. Girls were fighting alongside boys. Officers arrested six students and charged two with assault with a deadly weapon.


“It all started with blacks versus Mexicans, as always,” explained sophomore Abigail Orozco. Sixteen-year-old Samantha Dorgey said there were fights about once a week, but this one just got out of hand. Police locked down Fontana as well as nearby Citrus Elementary and Truman Middle School to keep the violence from spreading. Journalists noted that within the previous four years police had had to quell racial violence at A.B. Miller High School, Redlands High School, Bloomington High School, Wilmer Amina Carter High School, and Silverado High School, all in San Bernardino County. The Fontana school district later installed an anonymous tip line, hired an intervention specialist, and started making students wear identification badges.

Early the next year, 2007, police had to fire pepper balls to break up a black-Hispanic riot that broke out at San Bernardino High School during a pep rally. Hispanics were 70 percent of the student body, and some black students resented being outnumbered. “This racial stuff has got to stop,” said Tami Manning, as she walked out of school with her daughter, who had been suspended for fighting a Hispanic girl. Darnic Comer said that the high school had become so dangerous for blacks that he would pull out his 10th-grade son. “This is why I took him out of Pacific [High School], too,” he added.

Meanwhile, back in Los Angeles, police arrested a 16-year-old black student for stabbing to death a 17-year-old Hispanic student at Washington Preparatory High School. Other students said it was the culmination of persistent racial tension.

In 2008 it was Locke High School’s turn when as many as 600 black and Hispanics fought each other in a campus-wide brawl. There were only two officers on duty when the fighting started, but campus security brought in 60 more officers and the Los Angeles police sent a dozen patrol cars and 50 men. It took a half hour for the officers, many in riot gear, to stop the riot and lock down the school. The South Los Angeles campus had an enrollment of 2,600 that was 65 percent Hispanic and 35 percent black. One black student explained that the races do not mix at Locke — “Everybody usually just sticks to themselves” — and that violence on such a scale was unusual.

Locke High School has a long history of racial violence. In February 1996, 50 police officers had to be called in to break up a lunch-time riot involving hundreds of blacks and Hispanics. Boys and girls beat each other, and one boy jumped out of a second-story window to escape pursuers. After order was finally restored and school dismissed, police in riot gear had to keep students from rejoining battle in the streets. Tensions were particularly high because Hispanics resented the February celebrations of black history month.

Things are no longer …

The Los Angeles area may be the worst for black-Hispanic violence in schools, but the rest of the state is not immune. The Elk Grove Unified School District near Sacramento has conducted repeated meetings of something called the Task Force on Expectations for Student Unity to try to stop violence. Marjorie Beazer, a black mother with three students in the district, said that race was so close to the surface “it’s like breathing, almost.”

Some people are caught up in black-Hispanic violence by mistake. “I’m actually Kuwaiti,” explained Yuseff Esmail, who says a black mistook him for a Hispanic during a brawl at Silverado High School in Victorville. “Somebody I never met decided to punch me in the eye because of my skin color.” The attack left him with 20/60 vision in his right eye and a constant fear of blacks. His father, Jacob Esmail, was angry. “I came here to the San Fernando Valley looking for safety and now I have to leave because it’s dangerous for my kids,” he said. He said he would sell his house and move away, and was thinking of suing the school for not protecting his son.

Such suits have been successful. In 2005, the parents of four black students sued Valencia High School in the Santa Clarita Valley in northern Los Angeles County, saying it had not done enough to protect their children from attack. They received a $300,000 settlement.

Black-Hispanic school violence is concentrated in California because it is the state with the largest number of Hispanics, but other states also suffer. Patterson, New Jersey, is a city of about 149,000 that was half Hispanic and one-third black in 2001. Students at John F. Kennedy High School reflected this ethnic mix, and administrators tried to curb racial violence by implementing “conflict resolution” and “peer counseling” programs. On June 20, police had to break up a fight between young blacks and Hispanics near the school. Shortly afterwards, blacks went swarming through the streets and beat to death a 42-year-old homeless Hispanic man. Police arrested eleven blacks, ages 15 through 17.

… quite what they used to be.

On Nov. 12, 2007, at Lakewood High School in Lakewood, New Jersey, a fight that began between rival black and Hispanic gangs spread to 150 students. Seventy-five police officers in riot gear from five towns helped put down the violence. At the height of the melee, students were throwing tables and chairs and had pinned several officers to the ground. After officers finally gained control they locked down the school for an hour as they rounded up trouble-makers. Lakewood High School was 43 percent Hispanic, 36 percent black, and 19 percent white.

In Chicago in 2005, police made seven arrests after they broke up a brawl between black and Hispanic students at Washington High School. The teachers’ union reported that many teachers felt unsafe and were pressing the district to increase security. Likewise in Chicago, in 2006, blacks and Hispanics fought at Roberto Clemente High School, where Hispanics outnumber blacks. “They don’t want us here,” explained Stephen Flagg, a black student. “We don’t want to be here,” he added. “Everybody is different, and that’s why everybody is fighting.”

In late 2008, Hempstead High School on Long Island was wracked by two days of especially severe black-Hispanic fighting. The school suspended dozens of students, canceled the homecoming pep rally, and finally stopped the violence by blanketing the school with uniformed police and undercover officers. “They be groupin’ up, and I just had to defend my people and that’s what I do,” explained one of the combatants.


No state with substantial numbers of blacks and Hispanics is safe from violence. Five detectives and ten police officers set up a command post at Memorial High School in Madison, Wisconsin, after fighting broke out between blacks and Hispanics in October 2008. Officers followed school buses home to make sure the fighting would not continue after dismissal. A Hispanic girl who was beaten unconscious in one melee said the trouble started when a group of blacks called Hispanics “wetbacks.”

The consequences of racial tension can be heart-rending. In 1997, classes from two Chicago middle schools happened to book cruises on the same ship on the same day to celebrate eighth-grade graduation. The principal of Logandale Middle school, which is largely Hispanic, refused to let the students from Brown Elementary School, which is black, board the ship. The black children were left on the dock in tears as the Spirit of Chicago set sail. The Hispanic principal, Luis Molina, explained that the risk of violence was too great, even if the two schools were on different decks.

There is black-Hispanic tension in Texas. In 2001, Andress High School in El Paso was 55 percent Hispanic, 27 percent white, and 16 percent black. On March 1, a morning fistfight resumed at lunchtime as a full-scale riot involving 400 black and Hispanic students. Police came at 12:20 p.m., but could not control the situation. By 1:00 p.m., 100 officers were on the scene and closed a road to the school as part of their attempt to restore order. A police helicopter circled overhead as officers arrested 11 students. Terrel Tate, a 16-year-old white student who stayed out of the fighting, explained that “they [blacks and Hispanics] hate each other because of their skin.”

In 2004 in Phoenix, Arizona, three eighth-grade black girls from Maxine O. Bush Elementary School were convicted of assault for attacking a Hispanic girl. The parents of the Hispanic, who were convinced the attack was racially motivated, threatened to sue the school district for $25 million, and asked the local chapter of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) for help. LULAC demanded that the principal be fired for failing to protect Hispanics, and threatened a boycott if he were not removed.

Tension did not break into violence at Palo Verde High Magnet School in Tucson, Arizona, but there was so much simmering hostility that a half-dozen police cars were assigned to the area, and Principal Tina Isaac canceled a homecoming pep rally. “We know we have a lot of work to do in mending the relationships between these kids,” she said, “and that won’t happen overnight.”


Grown-ups can be drawn into the violence. On April 1, 2005, Mary Oliver, a Hispanic-Asian teacher at Travis Academy in Dallas, Texas, had to put down a disturbance outside her classroom. She told two black girls to get back to class, and then told a white girl to do the same, though the blacks may not have heard. One black girl called her mother, Paulette Baines, who was a teacher at North Dallas High School. Miss Baines left North Dallas High, marched into Miss Oliver’s class and attacked her right in front of her seventh-grade students. She dragged her across the floor, pulling out clumps of hair, and kicked her, breaking several ribs. She was reported to be incensed at what she considered unfair treatment of blacks at Travis Academy.

Blacks in Los Angeles do not see the arrival of Hispanics as an opportunity to celebrate diversity. They see it as a threat. By 1999, there were 26 schools in the Los Angeles Unified School District in which Hispanics were the majority of the students but blacks were the majority of the staff. Hispanic parents demanded more Hispanic staff but blacks would not step down. As Celes King III, president of the Congress for Racial Equality, who once lead a demonstration against a white principal at Manual Arts High School, noted with no apparent sense of irony: “The situation has gone full circle. The Hispanics are using the same thoughts and practices we used 30 years ago. … We need to organize and maintain our positions in education because we worked so hard for them.”

Black-Hispanic conflict in the schools has almost been institutionalized. In 2007, one advisory council to the Los Angeles Unified School District that had black and Hispanic representation fought for months over whether to hold its meetings in Spanish or English. Hispanics stormed out of one meeting when the blacks voted to censure the Hispanic chairman. In desperation, the district brought in dispute-resolution experts and mental health counselors. One wonders what service such an “advisory” council can render the district.

Hispanics seem to take proportional representation by race for granted. In 1999, Burton Elementary School in Panorama, California, was 90 percent Hispanic, and parents sharply criticized its white principal, Norman Bernstein, when he tried to phase out bilingual education in accordance with the provisions of a 1998 ballot initiative. The parents’ hostility was so pointedly ethnic that Mr. Bernstein sought advice from the Anti-Defamation League. Not long afterwards, he said, two Hispanic men waylaid him on his way to work. “We don’t want you here, white principal,” they said and then beat him unconscious. The Los Angeles school board president condemned the beating but noted that Hispanic parents often ask for Hispanic principals at their schools adding, “I don’t think this is an unreasonable request.” AR

The Dangers of Diversity” will continue in the following issue.

The Dangers of Diversity, Part II

The ugly reality behind the myth

by Jared Taylor

The Dangers of Diversity, Part I” cited examples of the extravagant expressions of support for diversity that have become common in the United States. It also described the wide-spread school violence that has followed the mixing of black and Hispanic students. This article examines other examples of violence that result from diversity.

Although the primary ethnic fault line in America’s schools today is between blacks and Hispanics, there can be friction whenever different groups mix, and as student populations become more diverse it opens up new opportunities for conflict. In Hamtramck, Michigan, the tensions are between blacks and Arabs. After a racially-motivated brawl in 2004, the superintendent of schools promised a constant police presence at Hamtramck High School, but police patrols were not enough. The next year, the school spent $22,000 on surveillance cameras to try to keep peace in a school that was averaging at least one fight every three days. The cameras were in addition to metal detectors and photo IDs students had worn for years. “It’s just the way things are,” said Terrell Beasley, who was hospitalized after an attack by Arabs. “Blacks and Arabs don’t get along. It’s been like that since the beginning.”


In rural Gentry, Arkansas, Hmong immigrants are a source of friction. Between November 2005 and January 2006, police arrested 14 public school students for what they called “racially motivated” fights. One student had to go to the hospital, and two Hmong and two Hispanic teenagers were expelled. The town quickly called in professional help to try to ease the tension. “We really want to make people aware of what’s going on over there before someone gets killed,” said Tessie Ajala, who led an intervention program at the high school.

In 2000, at Valley Center High School in San Diego County, California, 30 police officers put down a fight between dozens of Hispanic and American Indian students. Juan Granados, who is the founder of an organization that tries to train young people in peace-making, said that Hispanic and Indian students had been feuding for 40 years.

At Sanford Middle School in Minneapolis, there is friction between Indian students and some 200 Somali immigrant children. In May 2003, parents of Indians held a rally outside the school to protest bullying and violence by Somalis. School officials promised a program of cultural awareness and sensitivity.

“Blacks and Arabs don’t get along. It’s been like that since the beginning.”

At Purnell Swett High School in Lumberton, North Carolina, blacks and Lumbee Indians do not get along. Thirty Indians and nine blacks were suspended after an October 2002 fight, prompting 100 Indian students and their parents to demonstrate against what they thought was unfair treatment. Later that month the school was on edge over an anonymous letter filled with expletives about blacks that said, “I am a soldier in the Lumbee’s army. I will never surrender to the enemy.”

In Boston, there have been fights between Somalis and American blacks. At English High School a riot began when black students started snatching the Somali girls’ headscarves. “This was the most angry mob of kids I ever saw,” said Pat Mullane, a teacher. “It was very frightening.” She said the American blacks knocked Somalis to the floor and stomped them, while others linked arms around the mayhem to stop teachers from getting in to break up the fight. There were police officers on campus later that week, and all students were searched with metal detectors. “This is just the beginning,” said one Somali senior. “More will happen.”

Hamtramck High
Hamtramck High: Arabs and blacks do not get along.

There was similar tension at Roosevelt High School in south Minneapolis. In September 2001, a fight broke out between a Somali and a black former student, and more Somalis and blacks quickly piled on. Somalis stabbed a 14-year-old black in the chest and also stabbed an assistant coach who tried to break up the fight. Police said there was long-simmering hostility between these two groups.

At Evander Childs High School in the Bronx, American blacks and Jamaicans often fight. After a brawl that ended with one combatant stabbed in the chest, neck, and back, a 16-year-old Jamaican explained, “Most Jamaicans don’t like the black kids who are here and vice versa. They fight most of the time, but this time it got more physical than usual.”

There is trouble between Armenian and Hispanic students in Los Angeles County. In 2000, when 17-year-old Raul Aguirre came to the aid of a fellow Hispanic who was fighting two Armenians they stabbed Mr. Aguirre twice in the heart, twice in the head and beat his head in with a tire iron. Two Armenian boys, aged 17 and 15, and a 14-year-old Armenian girl were booked in connection with the killing. Hispanics took revenge a few days later. Just minutes after the conclusion of a community meeting held to promote ethnic harmony, three Hispanics in a car shot at a group of Armenians standing on a street corner. An 18-year-old Armenian went to the hospital with a bullet in his knee.

In March 2005, there was a riot involving 200 to 400 Armenian and Hispanic students at Grant High School in Los Angeles. Helicopters hovered overhead as police officers put down violence that sent four students, two teachers, and a police officer to the hospital. “The fight was very horrible,” said 15-year-old Grant freshman Mary Kirishyan. “All you saw was trash cans flying in the air and everyone running around, it was very scary.” There was so much chaos the Los Angeles police ordered a child development center across the street from the high school locked down to keep its 72 children from being injured. There had been persistent racial tension at the school, which was 68 percent Hispanic and 23 percent Armenian. According to a Hispanic student, the riot began when “the Armenians hit a 14-year-old girl in the face because she was Hispanic.”

Grant High School has had an Armenian-Hispanic problem that goes back many years. In October 1999, 20 or so Hispanics crossed the invisible line that divided the Armenian and Hispanic areas and were immediately attacked by a much larger group of Armenians. The fighting quickly escalated into a pitched battle involving 400 students. Fourteen students and two teachers were injured, and calm did not return until at least 30 Los Angeles police officers appeared, some brandishing shotguns. The school’s dean, Daniel Gruenberg, explained there have been similar ethnic battles at least once a year for more than a decade. The school has tried conflict resolution programs, cultural awareness classes, group mediation, peer counseling, and teacher training but nothing seems to work.

As we saw elsewhere (“Integration Has Failed,” AR, February/March 2008) so many whites have left urban public schools that those who remain are often a small minority. They usually do not push back in the escalation of affronts that lead to violence and hardly ever act in groups.

Gang signs

The exceptions usually involve white ethnics. At Herbert H. Lehman High School in the Bronx, 200 white students — all Albanians, many of them refugees — refuse to be intimidated. They are vastly outnumbered in a student body of 4,000 that is mostly black and Hispanic, but have stood up to mass attacks that had to be stopped by police. In December 2000, police arrested 12 students after a fight that involved dozens of Albanians fighting blacks and Hispanics. The year before, there was a major brawl when blacks spotted an Albanian wearing a black-and-red Albanian flag. Those are the colors of the Bloods.

“They all hate us,” said 17-year-old Diana Gjoljaj of the blacks and Hispanics. “That’s why we hang together.” “They’re a bunch of racists, all of them,” said John, a 19-year-old Albanian who was afraid to give his last name. “The kids think because we’re white we’re not going to fight back.” Fifteen-year-old Ylli Mujaj explained that unlike other white children, Albanians refuse to be pushed around. “We stick together,” he said. “We give as good as we get.” Evan Small, a black junior, explained that blacks stick together, too. “If you see guys fighting you are going to jump in and protect your people.”

Most of the time, racial incidents involving whites are relatively benign. In 2004, Westside High School in Omaha, Nebraska had about 1,600 students—the vast majority of whom were white—and only about 50 blacks. Every year, Westside would choose one from among that handful for its “Distinguished African American Student Award.” Some of the whites decided to satirize the award by putting up more than 100 posters around the school, nominating a white student from South Africa for the award. The South African and several of his friends were suspended.

Occasionally, however, there are reports of racial violence involving non-immigrant whites. Lake Elsinore is a costal town in Riverside County, California. At Canyon High School, 18 students were suspended and eight faced expulsion after two days of fighting between whites and Hispanics. The violence reportedly began when a Hispanic girl started singing in Spanish and a white boy swore at her and told her to shut up.

Whites are almost never involved, however, in the massive riots that continue to wrack some schools, especially in Southern California. Perhaps this helps explain why the problem attracts no national attention.

Asian students, like whites, have a reputation for not fighting back, and black and Hispanic students often bully them. Aimee Baldillo of the National Asian Pacific American Legal Consortium said that this was “something we see everywhere in different pockets of the U.S. where there’s a large influx of (Asian) people.”

Administrators may be reluctant to admit there is racial tension in their schools. It is an embarrassment to have to admit failure in an area into which the country puts so much moral effort. Mara Sapon-Shevin, a professor of inclusive education at Syracuse University, says high schools and middle schools must face the problem honestly. “The truth is that every school has a racism problem, and the only differentiation is between schools that are doing something about it and schools that aren’t.”


Those that are doing something about it have tried just about everything, including professional mediation, multi-cultural training, anger-management classes, and a host of other interventions. In 2004, the Murrieta Valley Unified School District, in Riverside County, California, even considered a resolution to punish students merely for “rejecting” each other. No student would have been permitted to “form or openly participate in groups that tend to exclude, or create the impression of the exclusion of, other students.” The school board narrowly voted to table the proposal when it was pointed out that the ban would have prohibited membership in the Hispanic group “La Raza,” and could even have been read to forbid playing rap music in the hearing of white students. That such an absurd measure could even be considered shows how frantic educators are to solve the race problem.

High school class rings used to be signs of school spirit and class solidarity. Now they can be symbols of ethnic pride. When Jennifer Nguyen got a ring at Bishop O’Connell High School in Arlington, Virginia, she had a dragon engraved on it as a symbol of Asia. “Even though I was born here, I’m still Vietnamese,” she explained. Vicky Rodriguez, a student at T.C. Williams High School in Alexandria, Virginia, was also born in America but her parents came from El Salvador, so she got a ring emblazoned with her country’s flag. “I’m very proud of where I came from,” she said.

Conflicting loyalties are so close to the surface that some schools have banned all flags — even American flags. After Mexican students at Santa Ynez Valley Union High School in Santa Barbara County, California, brought Mexican flags to school, whites replied with American flags. The whites said they were simply being patriotic, but Principal Norm Clevenger said the American flags suggested “intolerance” and confiscated them.

Likewise, at Skyline High School in Denver, Colorado, American flags were banned from campus when principal Tom Stumpf decided they had been waved “brazenly” in the faces of Hispanic students. He banned all other flags, too.

The entire Oceanside Unified School District in San Diego County banned flags and even flag-motif clothing. The district decided flags were too provocative after Hispanics participated in large-scale marches demanding amnesty for illegal immigrants. Officials said flags were being used to taunt other students and stir up trouble. It is difficult to think of diversity as our country’s greatest strength when it forces a school district to treat Old Glory as if it were a display of gang colors.

Racial tension is probably the biggest reason increasing numbers of American high school students skip school because they fear violence. A 2003 survey found that 5.4 percent of students had stayed home at least once during the previous month because they were physically afraid. This was an increase over 4.4 percent ten years earlier.

raising the Mexican flag
Flags are now the equivalent of gang colors.

The racial violence that comes with diversity probably contributes to the increase in home schooling. In 2003, a government study reported there were nearly 1.1 million home-schooled Americans, an increase of 29 percent over the figure for 1999.

One little-noticed effect of increased diversity is the pressure it puts on textbooks. Beginning in the 1960s, schoolbooks were rewritten to reflect the views of blacks, women, and — increasingly — Hispanics. There are now other challenges.

In Fairfax County, Virginia, Sandhya Kumar led a successful campaign to force the school district — the twelfth largest in the country — to revise its fifth-, ninth-, and tenth-grade materials to show proper respect for Hinduism, Indians, and Indian immigrants. The district duly submitted the texts to George Washington University religion professor Balaji Hebbar for approval. Miss Kumar said she started the campaign because she wanted the school curriculum to instill a love of India in her three children.

Immigrants have brought the conflict between established Indian historians and Hindu nationalist revisionists with them. Hindu nationalists successfully pressured the California board of education to tilt textbooks their way — to the dismay of Michael Witzel, a Harvard Sanskrit scholar and India expert. In testimony about the revisions before a government commission in Sacramento, he explained that “the textbooks before were not very good, but at least they were more or less presentable. Now, it is completely incorrect.”

The Hmong have been worked into the California curriculum as well. They are a Southeast Asian hill people whom the CIA recruited to fight Laotian Communists during the 1960s and ’70s. Hmong immigrants have formed knots of unemployment, poverty, and school failure, and after a well-publicized rash of teenager suicides, the California legislature decided it should do something to boost Hmong self-esteem. A bill, sponsored by Sarah Reyes (D-Fresno) and passed in 2003, “encouraged” California schools to teach students about the role of Southeast Asians during the Vietnam War.

The bill did not mention the Hmong by name, the very thing many believed would be an important psychological boost. The reason was, alas, diversity. There are several sub-tribes of Hmong, and they fought over what to call themselves. The worst split was between the Hmong Der (white Hmong) and the Mong Leng (green or, sometimes, blue Mong) who could not agree on whether the term Hmong includes the Mong. There was such a wrangle that Rep. Reyes threw up her hands and put only “Southeast Asians” in the bill, and for a while the Mong were getting hate mail from Hmong who accused them of sabotaging the bill.

Hmong in their natural habitat.

By 2008 the sub-tribes had struck a deal on what to call themselves, and were pushing a bill to require changes to the California curriculum that would give Hmong children pride in their culture. Whether it would help or not, the purpose of a history class is not to make everyone in the room feel proud. As other immigrant groups grow in numbers some will no doubt press for similar treatment.

Diversity makes it difficult to agree on school names. As the racial mix of a school changes, a name that was once popular becomes odious. The New Orleans school district, for example, which is overwhelmingly black, decided in 1992 that no school could bear the name of a slave-holder or Confederate officer. There was little surprise or opposition when schools named for Robert E. Lee and Confederate General P.G.T. Beauregard were renamed for black supreme court justice Thurgood Marshall and black astronaut Ronald McNair. However, George Washington Elementary, where 98 percent of 702 students were black, fell afoul of the slave-owner rule, too, and with practically no resistance from faculty, parents, or the community, it was renamed for Charles Drew, a black surgeon known for work in blood transfusions. As long-time black activist Carl Galmon explained, “to African-Americans, George Washington has about as much meaning as David Duke.”

Berkeley, California, has seen similar changes. In 1968, James Garfield Middle School was renamed for Martin Luther King, and in the 1970s, Abraham Lincoln Elementary became Malcolm X Elementary. The search for a new name can become a racial tug-of-war, however, if a school serves a diverse population. When Columbus Elementary in Berkeley had to be rebuilt after earthquake damage in 1999, it was rechristened Rosa Parks Elementary, but only after a fierce fight with a strong Hispanic contingent that insisted on honoring Cesar Chavez. At the end of 2008, the fight between blacks and Hispanics over what to name a new high school in Los Angeles—Hispanics wanted Cesar Chavez; blacks wanted the name of a black police officer killed in a shootout—was so bitter that the Associated Press headlined its story “Racial Tensions Flare Over School’s Name.”

Dr. Charles R. Drew Elementary School

In 2005, the teachers at Thomas Jefferson Elementary in Berkeley decided they could no longer work at a school named after a slaveholder, but again there was a fight between Hispanics who wanted Cesar Chavez and blacks who wanted Sojourner Truth. In a compromise that is likely to become more common as diversity makes it impossible to agree on a name that honors a person, the school finally proposed the neutral name of Sequoia to the school board. At what used to be Jefferson Davis Middle School in Palm Springs, Florida, it took a naming committee two years to reach a similar conclusion. Blacks and Hispanics could not agree on a hero so they replaced the Confederate president with the bland name of Palm Springs Middle School.

Chavez, however, was Mexican, and is therefore not a model for all Hispanics. There are 350,000 Salvadorans in Los Angeles County, mainly centered around MacArthur Park. In 2007 they opened Monseñor Oscar Romero Charter Middle School, named after an assassinated Salvadoran archbishop, to help Salvadoran children maintain their heritage. If the demographics of the neighborhood change, the name will no doubt have to be changed.


The racial diversity that leads to conflict in schools has the same effect in prisons. Prison race riots appear to be at least as common as school race riots — and more deadly. They can be a terrifying additional penalty to a prison term, but, like racial violence in schools, it is a problem Americans prefer to ignore. Southern California again leads the way.

Hispanics outnumber blacks in the prisons and racial tension has boiled beneath the surface for decades. It was old news in 1995 when the Orange County Register ran the headline, “Black Jail Inmates Say They Live in Fear of Being ‘Ambushed’.” Blacks in the Orange County Men’s Central Jail said they were afraid to leave their cells for fear of being attacked by more numerous Hispanics. “I don’t feel I can walk down to the infirmary without getting assaulted or without (someone saying) ‘We’re going to get you,’ ” explained one 29-year-old black inmate.

Racial tension often flared into violence, and up until they started using effective, non-lethal crowd control equipment around 2000, guards routinely put down brawls with live fire. On February 23 that year, when 200 blacks and Hispanics at Pelican Bay State Prison started slashing each other with home-made knives, guards could not control the fighting with tear gas or pepper spray. They shot 15 inmates, killing one and critically wounding another. Prisoners still managed to stab at least 32 fellow inmates.

Guatemalan gang member
Guatemalan gang member.

That may have been the last California prison riot put down with sustained rifle fire. A long series of incidents at the Pitchess Detention Center in Los Angeles County later that year proved the effectiveness of new crowd-control techniques. The problem at Pitchess — as in many other California prisons — was that the more numerous Hispanics had a policy of attacking blacks whenever they reached a certain numerical advantage. Critics said the authorities knew this but sometimes let the numbers in a dormitory tip as far as four or eight to one against blacks.

Whatever the cause of the outbreak, in April 2000, hundreds of blacks and Hispanics fought each other for three straight days. Approximately 80 men — most of them black — were injured and a black prisoner was beaten into a coma. Hispanics stuffed him under a mattress during a search for casualties, and would have finished him off if guards had not found him just in time.

Whenever the guards thought they had stopped the fighting it would break out again, and as a last resort, guards formally segregated the prisoners. Noting that there had been more than 150 major race-related disturbances since 1991, Sheriff’s Chief Taylor Moorehead explained that “it would be foolish to do anything but segregate.”

Your new roommate for the next 90 days.

The families of black prisoners were pleased. “I know that people say segregation is not fair, whatever, whatever, but segregation is safer for our boys,” explained Ethel Fuqua. “Can you imagine how it feels to go and visit your son and see 43 stitches ’cross his face?” asked Janice Cooper. Christopher Darden, who helped prosecute O.J. Simpson for murder, said black prisoners had to be protected at all costs, and that “if it takes segregation, then that’s exactly what the sheriff should do.”

The inmates enjoyed the respite. “It’s good to have us like this,” said a Hispanic prisoner. “We want to stay with who we know.” Blacks agreed. “I shouldn’t have to come to jail as a parolee and have to fight for my life,” said Leonard Bryant. The prisoners knew, however, that segregation was against state law and was only temporary. Asked what it would be like when the dormitories were reintegrated, a tattooed Hispanic gang member replied, “The raza’s always ready to fight.” A black was not looking forward to sharing quarters again with Hispanics: “It’s going to be very difficult for me to go to sleep with someone above me, next to me, under me who would kill me at the drop of a dime,” he said.

After several weeks of peace, the authorities reintegrated the prison, though they did develop special computer programs to track the racial balance throughout the complex to make sure Hispanics never achieved a crushing majority over blacks. Still, it did not take long for violence to resume. On July 8, 2000, blacks launched simultaneous attacks in three different dormitories to retaliate for the beating they took during the April riots that led to segregation. The next day, Hispanics in three other dormitories attacked black prisoners. Twenty-two men were hurt and two were hospitalized with deep facial cuts. Other Hispanics wrecked their own dormitory when they learned they were going to be moved from all-Hispanic housing to share quarters with blacks. Sheriff’s Chief Moorehead said that segregation would permanently eliminate racial tension but noted that the law required integration.

A month after the April riots, black inmates filed a class action suit against the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, claiming that it was a violation of civil rights to let the violence continue. “These riots have happened year after year,” said Leon Jenkins, the lawyer who brought the suit, “and if you don’t take corrective action it shows a deliberate indifference to the rights of these inmates.” ACLU lawyer David Fathi noted that “if the only way they can maintain control is to segregate—which is unconstitutional—then that’s a startling confession.”

The one good thing to come out of the Pitchess riots of 2000 was the discovery that with new types of “clean out gas,” pepper-filled balls, and sting-ball grenades, along with traditional hard rubber pellets fired from guns, guards could put down riots without lethal force. “I think the pilot [program] is over,” said Sheriff’s Chief Moorehead. “Let’s get more of ’em.”

New techniques did not, of course, stop the mayhem. In 2003, an estimated 150 blacks and Hispanics battled for 90 minutes at the Eagle Mountain prison about 60 miles east of Palm Springs. Two prisoners were killed, four had to be helicoptered to hospitals, and another 50 were treated by prison medical staff. Prisoners also broke windows and smashed furniture. “I walked onto the yard when it was over, and it looked like Beirut,” said Lt. Warren Montgomery, who rushed over from another prison to help put down the riot. He said prisoners attacked each other with knives and meat cleavers from the kitchen, as well as table and chair legs and mop handles—“anything they could get their hands on.” Eagle Mountain is a low-risk prison for non-violent prisoners.


In 2005, the state prison in Tehachapi had to be locked down after an estimated 480 black and Hispanic prisoners fought each other for 40 minutes. Mike Coghlan, a spokesman for the prison said racial disturbances were not uncommon at Tehachapi but that “this is a fairly large one.”

That same year, San Quentin State Prison had its worst prison riot since 1982 when Hispanics attacked whites, and 400 inmates joined in the fighting. Thirty-nine needed medical treatment and three of the most seriously wounded had to be taken to a hospital outside the prison. The fighting took place in part of the prison that had already been locked down for a week because of fighting between Hispanics and whites. Likewise in 2005, five inmates at the state prison at Chino, California, had to be hospitalized after some 200 black and Hispanic prisoners battled each other.

That same year, one white prisoner paid with his life for violating racial etiquette. At the Los Angeles County Men’s Central Jail there was a strict mealtime rule that reflected the racial balance of power: Hispanics ate first, followed by blacks, and whites last. A white decided not to wait for his dinner and got in line with 30 Hispanics. As soon as the guards were not looking, the Hispanics beat him to death. “Race is the predominate issue in everything going on in these jail modules,” explained Michael Gennaco, head of the county Office of Independent Review. There was to be an investigation into why guards left the men alone to eat their meal.

On February 4, 2006, 2,000 inmates went on a four-hour rampage at the North County Correctional Facility in Castaic, California. The riot began when Hispanics started throwing furniture from an upper level dormitory onto blacks in a day room below, but soon became “massive chaos,” according to Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca. It took 200 deputies to stop the fighting that sent 20 inmates to the hospital with serious injuries and resulted in one black prisoner being beaten to death. Sheriff Baca locked down the 21,000-man system and segregated prisoners even though it was against the rules. “Human life is more important than appearance,” he explained. The Sheriff added that racial violence “is impossible to prevent,” and released a letter from a Hispanic inmate that said: “If blacks come into the dorms we will fight … Please separate us race by race for everyone’s safety.” The initial assault on the blacks appeared to be retaliation for a stabbing attack two days earlier on a Hispanic inmate at the Los Angeles Men’s Central Jail.

According to official records, the riot was the seventh major incident in the county jail system in just two months. In the previous year, there had been 33 major inmate disturbances, including 19 at the North County jail, a state-of-the art facility that went into service in 1990.

The February 4, 2006 riot triggered racial violence that went on for nearly a month and spread throughout the Los Angeles County jail system. Six straight days of black-Hispanic riots in the Pitchess Detention Center left one black inmate dead and dozens injured. The Sheriff’s office admitted it was overwhelmed by constant warfare that had required hospitalization for 28 prisoners. Ironically, the last day of rioting—put down with rubber bullets—came just after a group of black clergymen visited the prison to meet with blacks who complained of being attacked by Hispanics. “Black inmates are begging us for help. They want to stay segregated and be protected,” said Najee Ali, of Project Islamic Hope.

On February 13 another black prisoner was killed, this time at the Los Angeles County Men’s Central Jail. Sheriff Baca locked down the entire county system and segregated as many dormitories as he thought he could without provoking a civil rights challenge. Meanwhile, the violence spread to juvenile lockups, with three black-Hispanic riots at youth detention centers, including Camp McNair in Lancaster.

That fall, whites battled Hispanics in a riot at the Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility about 25 miles southeast of San Diego. Guards broke up the brawl with tear gas, pepper spray, and wooden batons and locked down five housing units. Five inmates were hospitalized with stab wounds.

Asian gang member
Asian gang member.

When California firefighting crews are overwhelmed, they occasionally get help from prisoners, but they are not always much use. In December 2007, white and Hispanic prisoners who were supposed to be fighting the Poomacha fire in San Diego County ended up fighting each other and had to be pulled off the job, just when they were needed most. The fire burned 50,000 acres and 217 homes and other buildings.

For ten years, Asians were kept in segregated dormitories in Los Angeles County jails. The Mexican mafia had put a “green light” on them, meaning that Hispanics were to attack them on sight. They were only about 3.5 percent of the prison population, so it was relatively easy to house them separately. In early 2004, when the “green light” went off, prison authorities decided to return Asians to the general population. “It’s like feeding us to the sharks,” said Raymond Lim, who was serving time for attempted murder. “You can see the tension around here, and when it hits us, it’s going to hit us hard.” Some Asians barricaded their cell doors with beds and set fire to mattresses to protest the decision.

Nearly two dozen family members of Asian prisoners met with Sheriff Lee Baca to urge him to keep the “Asian-only module” at the downtown Los Angeles jail. Rosie Tse, whose husband was in jail awaiting trial, said after the meeting that she was disappointed Sheriff Baca thought ending segregation was more important than safety.

It didn’t take long for the “green light” to go back on for Asians, reportedly in retaliation for Asian attacks in March on a Hispanic gang in Garden Grove in neighboring Orange County. Inmates at two Orange County jails were put on several weeks of lockdown to keep Asians and Hispanics apart. They were banned from all recreational and educational activities and not allowed into public areas. They went to the mess in racially segregated, staggered shifts to get one hot meal a day—as required by law—and got two cold bag lunches delivered to their rooms. Privileges were to be restored gradually if there was no violence. Strict racial segregation of Asians was not restored.

California is not the only state with prison riots. In the summer of 1999, several dozen Hispanics in the Dominguez prison near San Antonio, Texas, used everything from steel-toed boots to trash cans to attack a smaller number of black prisoners, whom they had managed to ambush during a lockdown. As a 19-year-old Hispanic participant explained, “everybody was just swinging … All that time, all I could think of was hurting (the blacks) best I could.” The prisoners wanted segregation but the authorities would not allow it. “They’re going to have to learn to live together,” said guard captain Don Dalton.

Sheriff Lee Baca
Sheriff Lee Baca.

In April 2000 a fight started at the Smith Unit in Lamesa, Texas, when a Hispanic inmate told a black to stop fondling himself in front of a female guard. This turned into a riot involving 300 prisoners, in which inmates hacked at each other with garden tools. One prisoner was killed, several critically injured, and a kitchen went up in flames before 300 guards managed to stop the riot. Outnumbered whites stayed out of the fighting.

In Oregon’s Snake River Correctional Institution a 2000 race riot put two guards in the hospital and did not stop until a guard fired a warning shot. The fighting began when a black sat down in an area reserved for Hispanics.

Arizona also has prisons with serious black-Hispanic tensions. In October, 1999, more than 280 inmates were involved in a two-hour race riot at Fort Grant state prison that could not be contained without the help of tactical support units from three other prisons. Hispanics attacked black prisoners, who took shelter in a security building from which prison guards had fled. Hispanics then burned down the 3,000-square-foot building, though guards were able to rescue the blacks before any were killed. Eighty inmates were treated for injuries and the guards put the prison on indefinite lockdown.

At High Desert State Prison in Nevada, blacks crushed the skull of a Hispanic prisoner with a rock during a 20 minute race riot in 2004. Prisoner advocate Mercedes Maharis blamed the guards. They “let the wrong people out in the yard together,” she said.

In 2007 at the Prince George’s County Detention Center in Upper Marlboro, Maryland, blacks heavily outnumbered Hispanics, who were only 10 to 12 percent of the prison population. However, Hispanics were well organized and refused to be intimidated. Tensions were so high that guards resorted to segregation. “There’s too much conflict and fighting,” a supervisor said. He added that the prison was abiding by “jailhouse law:” housing inmates only with people of the same race. “It’s nothing written, but you try to keep the calm,” he said. The jail also made sure blacks and Hispanics were let onto the recreation field at different times of the day.

One of the best-known prison riots in American history was the 1993 riot in Lucasville, Ohio, between blacks and whites that lasted eleven days and caused ten deaths. One of the chief demands of the rioters was that the prison be segregated.

Inmates would overwhelmingly welcome segregation. As Lexy Good, a white prisoner in San Quentin State Prison explained, “We segregate amongst ourselves because I’d rather hang out with white people, and blacks would rather hang out with people of their own race.” He said this was no different from life outside of prison: “Look at suburbia. Look at Oakland. Look at Beverly Hills. People in society self-segregate.”

Motown Records
Prison ruined Motown for one inmate.

Another white man, using the pen name John Doe, wrote that jail time in Texas had turned him against blacks.

“[B]ecause of my prison experiences, I cannot stand being in the presence of blacks. I can’t even listen to my old, favorite Motown music anymore. The barbarous and/or retarded blacks in prison have ruined it for me. The black prison guards who comprise half the staff and who flaunt the dominance of African-American culture in prison and give favored treatment to their ‘brothers’ have ruined it for me.”

He went on:

“[I]n the aftermath of the Byrd murder [the 1998 dragging death in Jasper, Texas] I read one commentator’s opinion in which he expressed disappointment that ex-cons could come out of prison with unresolved racial problems ‘despite the racial integration of the prisons.’ Despite? Buddy, do I have news for you! How about because of racial integration?” (emphasis in the original)

A man who served four years in a California prison wrote an article for the Los Angeles Times called “Why Prisons Can’t Integrate.” “California prisons separate blacks, whites, Latinos and ‘others’ because the truth is that mixing races and ethnic groups in cells would be extremely dangerous for inmates,” he wrote. He offered Rule No. 1 for survival: “The various races and ethnic groups stick together,” adding that there were no other rules. He wrote that every new inmate confronts “a dining area filled with cliques, all potentially unfriendly, where any move could break some taboo or cause offense, like a nightmare version of a high school cafeteria. Because so many of the taboos involve race, only a person of the same race can be an effective guide.”

In 2001, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit bowed to reality when it ruled that prison guards may sometimes have a duty to segregate prisoners. A black plaintiff claimed guards had let blacks and Mexicans mix in an exercise yard even though they knew there was so much racial hostility it could lead to attacks. Judge Harry Pregerson agreed, saying prison officials must take reasonable measures to protect inmates from violence, and that segregation is a reasonable measure when racial tensions are high. This ruling became law in California, Nevada, Arizona, Washington, and Oregon — but not for long.

segregated prison
The Supreme Court insists on integration.

In 2005, the US Supreme Court ruled that segregation of prisoners was unconstitutional. Until that time, the entire California system had a rule of putting new arrivals in double cells with someone of their own race while they were initially evaluated. Really dangerous men were then sent to single cells, and others were put into the general population. The ruling meant that even this initial, temporary segregation had to be stopped.

“They should be thinking about what kind of war they are going to start,” said a 36-year-old San Quentin inmate. “It is like putting a cat and a dog in a cell together.” Lt. Rudy Luna, assistant to the warden at San Quentin said, “I think we will have a spike in fighting because we have races that don’t get along. If it was up to us, we’d keep it the way it is.”

Prison segregation would be a blessing to inmates and guards. It would save lives, relieve tension, and probably, as prisoner John Doe suggests, improve race relations on the outside by sparing convicts harrowing experiences that permanently embitter them. However, because the United States is committed to the ideal of integration the wishes of the people who suffer most from it will not be granted.


Some would say that racial violence in prisons says nothing about diversity as a national goal because the prejudices of the dregs of society have no relevance for the rest of us. We should not be so hasty to condemn people who face challenges we can hardly imagine. Prisoners must suffer the company of strangers in acutely invasive ways. To then force them into racial integration that is vastly more intense than anything most of us would choose voluntarily borders on cruelty. Federal judges should think very carefully about putting men’s lives at risk in the name of principles they, themselves, may not practice in their own lives.

Only a few people see the connection between what is happening in the prisons to what is happening outside them. Earl Ofari Hutchinson, a black Los Angeles radio talk show host, says that “the jail violence is only symptomatic of something larger. There is conflict and competition in all areas. This city and this state is a caldron of racial issues. This thing is pulsating.” The advanced, non-lethal crowd-control techniques developed for prisons are now used to break up riots in schools. AR

The Dangers of Diversity” will continue in the next issue.

The Dangers of Diversity, Part III

Prison violence spills into the streets.

by Jared Taylor

The Dangers of Diversity, Part I” cited examples of the extravagant expressions of support for diversity that have become common in the United States. It also described the wide-spread school violence that has followed the mixing of black and Hispanic students. “The Dangers of Diversity, Part II” described the brutal racial violence that is common in American prisons. Similarly horrific confrontations are now taking place outside of prisons in mixed-race areas, especially in southern California. This article also describes some of the tensions that diversity brings to the workplace.

Prison inmates cannot get away from each other, and this makes racial conflict worse. However, some of the bitterness that characterizes inmate race relations is now spreading into multi-racial neighborhoods. Again, its exceptionally mixed population makes Los Angeles the leading example of just how dangerous diversity can be. What can be described only as a low-level race war reached a crescendo in 2008.

As early as 2000, the Harbor Gateway/San Pedro area became a flash point as blacks moved into what had been a largely Hispanic area. That June, black and Hispanic gangs traded gunfire in San Pedro, leaving one black man brain dead and another shot in the abdomen. The next day in Harbor Gateway, Federico Estrada and a number of friends walked up to a young black man, Danny Dwayne Warren, and shot him to death. Homicide Detective Sam Snyder described the motive as pure racial retaliation.

By 2004, an unincorporated area just north of Watts between Florence and Firestone Avenues had become the scene of what the Los Angeles Times called a “deadly racial gang war.” From just January 2004 through June of 2005, a black gang, the Eastside Crips, battled a Hispanic gang called Florencia 13, producing combined casualties of 44 killed and 200 wounded in an area of just 3½ square miles. The authorities were shocked to find that only about half the victims were gang members. “Violence took a certain turn and became racial war,” explained Los Angeles Sheriff Lee Baca. “People were killed only because they were black or they were brown.” The department put together a 57-man task force to saturate the area.

shell casings

By the next year, federal officials had enough evidence to prosecute four Hispanics for trying to cleanse blacks from the Highland Park area (about 15 miles away from Florence/Firestone) in a series of attacks carried out between 1995 and 2001. During the trial, one witness testified that an order had come from the Mexican Mafia prison gang to “kill any blacks … on sight.” Others stated that they had targeted men, women, and children, and that cliques within the Hispanic gang known as “the Avenues” vied with each other to see which could drive the most blacks out of Highland Park. In 2006, four Hispanics were convicted, and three were sentenced to life in prison. “These defendants will now spend the rest of their lives in federal prison for the despicable act of trying to rid their neighborhood of African Americans,” said acting US Attorney George S. Cardona.

“They just see a young man of the opposite race and they shoot.”

Later in 2006, violence returned to Harbor Gateway. After blacks moved in during the 1990s, an informal boundary line was established at 206th Street: Hispanics to the north; blacks to the south. There had been inflammatory graffiti and racially-motivated killings on both sides of the line, but the death of 14-year-old Cheryl Green seemed especially odious. The middle-school student was on the black side of the line talking to friends when a Hispanic walked up to the group and started firing. He hit several other blacks, but managed to kill only Miss Green. The Los Angeles police announced a special peace-keeping effort in Harbor Gateway, but Sheriff Lee Baca warned that the almost random nature of the killings made them hard to prevent. Florencia 13 leaders continued to give orders to kill black rivals but that if a particular black could not be found, then it was, “Well, shoot any black you see.”

“They just see a young man of the opposite race and they shoot,” said Olivia Rosales, a former hate-crimes specialist who prosecuted many Florencia 13 murders from 2005 to 2007. Of the 20 cases she had handled, said Miss Rosales, “most of the victims have not been members of the rival gang.”

Timothy Slack, who is black, grew up in the contested Florence/Firestone area, when it was mostly black. “They were timid,” he said of Hispanics, “but as their numbers started getting bigger, then they started trying to be tougher. They started thinking they could demand stuff.” He said he no longer let his children go to the store or walk through alleys.

Cheryl Green
Cheryl Green: killed for being black.

The tension was affecting everyone. Irv Sitkoff, a local pharmacist, said his employees had to treat people of different races exactly the same because the slightest difference could lead to charges of favoritism. “You’ve got to very careful,” he said. “Before, we didn’t think about it.”

One former black gang member who still lived in Florence/Firestone because he owned property and had family ties there said he expected all blacks would move out: “It’s going to come a time when everybody’s going to have to leave.”

By 2007, blacks were publicly protesting what they claimed was insufficient police protection. In November, a noisy group of activists showed up at City Hall to rail against Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and members of the City Council. “You have one race of people exterminating another race of people,” said a black woman, who demanded that the city do something to stop it.

Canoga Park is another Los Angeles neighborhood that was the scene of sustained racial violence, as Hispanics shot blacks on 12 different occasions, from the summer of 2006 to the summer of 2007. “I feel we have an obligation to let [black people] know that they could be targeted,” said Lieutenant Tom Smart of the Los Angeles Police Department. “I’d like to remind them to be mindful. It’s random.” Ironically, two years earlier, Canoga Park had received the prestigious All-America City designation, largely because of its diverse population, which was 50 percent Hispanic, 28 percent white, 15 percent Asian, and 4 percent black.

In early 2008, race killing moved to the town of Monrovia in Los Angeles County, when two blacks entered the territory of a rival Hispanic gang and killed one teenaged Hispanic girl and wounded another. Police said there had been many shootouts in what they called a “racially charged gang war” in Monrovia and in neighboring cities.

Finally, in June 2008, Sheriff Lee Baca went public with an article in the Los Angeles Times called “In L.A., Race Kills.” He wrote:

“So let me be very clear about one thing: We have a serious interracial violence problem in this county involving blacks and Latinos. Some people deny it. They say that race is not a factor in L.A.’s gang crisis . … But they’re wrong. The truth is that, in many cases, race is at the heart of the problem. Latino gang members shoot blacks not because they’re members of a rival gang but because of their skin color. Likewise, black gang members shoot Latinos because they are brown. …

“I would even take this a step further and suggest that some of L.A.’s so-called gangs are really no more than loose-knit bands of blacks or Latinos roaming the streets looking for people of the other color to shoot.”

Later that year, even the mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa, had to concede that the city must “face up to” enduring racial conflict and violence between Hispanics and blacks.

Sheriff Lee Baca: ‘We have a serious interracial violence problem in this county involving blacks and Latinos.’

Not surprisingly, the county report on hate crimes published that year and covering 2007 found a 28 percent rise over the previous year to a total of 763 incidents. Hispanic-on-black was the largest hate-crime category, followed by black-on-Hispanic. The authors of the report noted that many hate crimes undoubtedly go unreported. During the first half of 2007, Pasadena police investigated 69 cases in which blacks robbed and beat low-wage immigrants. Police Chief Christopher Vincino thought race was at least a partial motive in those cases but said it was “impossible to meet the legal criteria required for official classification.

The killings continued into 2009. In January, three Hispanic gang members were charged with racially motivated murder for shooting a black bowling alley attendant in Canoga Park as he was taking out the garbage. LAPD detective David Peteque explained that the men shot James Shamp “for no reason at all other than the color of his skin.”

Southern California no doubt has the worst black-Hispanic violence because of its demographic mix, but other parts of the country also suffer. In November 2001, a Nevada jury sentenced Damon Campbell to life in prison for killing Carlos Villanueva. Witnesses said the black man shot Mr. Villanueva in an alley east of downtown Las Vegas after saying he did not want any more Hispanics in his neighborhood.

In the San Francisco Bay-area town of Richmond, Hispanics often complain of mistreatment by blacks. In 2006, Philip Herrera was watching a movie at a theater with his mother and girlfriend. Blacks sat in the back and Hispanics in the front. During a scene of interracial dating, blacks started shouting and throwing candy at the Hispanics. When Mr. Herrera stood up to ask the blacks to stop, several men dragged him from his seat and beat him badly enough to give him a concussion. Dozens of other blacks kicked him as he crawled up the aisle to the exit. Outside the theater, blacks attacked at least two other Hispanics while black theater employees looked on and laughed.

Mr. Herrera and his mother said that when black police officers arrived, they refused to enter the theater to look for suspects, refused to take a written report, refused to escort Mr. Herrera’s mother into the theater to look for shoes she had lost, and refused to escort them to their car. Mr. Herrera’s aunt, Aleta Martinez, said there had been black-Hispanic tension for years. “I was born and raised in Richmond, and I’ve lived with harassment and racial discrimination my entire life,” she said. “It’s gotten worse and worse there.”

He’ll grow up to be just like Daddy.

The city of Coatesville in eastern Pennsylvania is one of many places that have only recently begun to attract large numbers of Hispanic immigrants. In 2008, Police Chief William Matthews warned that the city’s blacks were targeting Hispanics for rape, robbery, and assault, and warned that “black-on-brown crime” could provoke the formation of violent Hispanic gangs for self-defense.

Increased black-Hispanic contact often brings tension even when it does not degenerate into violence. Many blacks see Hispanics as competitors for jobs and political influence, and resent it when Hispanics increase in numbers and, in some areas, become the dominant population. When black talk-show host Earl Ofari Hutchinson wrote a series of articles favorable to Hispanic immigration he was deluged with letters of outrage. “I have never received so much hate mail from blacks,” he said. “It touched a nerve among black folks, a raw nerve.”

In 2006, the Pew Hispanic Center found that the closer blacks lived to Hispanics and the more contact they had with them, the more they favored cutting immigration. Hispanics likewise had a low opinion of blacks. In a study of various racial groups’ attitudes in Durham, North Carolina, 59 percent of Latino immigrants said that few or no blacks were hardworking, and 57 percent said that few or no blacks could be trusted. By contrast, only 9 percent of whites said that blacks were not hardworking and only 10 percent said they could not be trusted.

Hispanics show their distaste for blacks by short-changing them on tips. According to one study, Hispanic passengers tipped white taxi drivers 150 percent more than they tipped black drivers.

We have already seen in Part I how black students, teachers, and parents resist Hispanic influence in schools; the same drama plays itself out in politics. The city of Lynwood in Los Angeles County used to be black-dominated, but by 2007 it was more than 80 percent Hispanic. Blacks still had considerable power, however, because 40 percent of residents were foreign-born and many could not vote. On the city council, disputes broke down along racial lines. “It’s all about race,” said City Councilwoman Leticia Vasquez.

Sometimes black-Hispanic wrangling is so bad white mediation seems to be the only solution. The two groups were at such loggerheads on the board of the Roosevelt School District in Phoenix, Arizona, that appointing a white man to fill a vacancy seemed to be the only solution. William Weiss said he hoped to bring “calm” to the warring school board.

As Hispanics move east, tensions move with them. Hispanics have congregated in the Mount Pleasant section of Washington, DC, but do not mix with blacks. As one reporter wrote, “A black person dating a Latino in Mount Pleasant and the communities around it is almost unheard of, even though Latinos and African Americans often live close enough to hear each other’s voices through thin apartment walls.” The same reporter quoted Omar Zavala, a Salvadoran activist who had tried to get the communities together, but sounded ready to give up. “There’s minimal contact,” he said. “The dialogue is nonexistent.”

After the autopsy.

Another black wrote about his decision to take his son out of a Washington, DC, primary school where half the students and most of the staff were Hispanic. He said black students came home crying because Hispanics teased them about their skin color and hair, and that the school seemed to make little effort to hire or keep black staff. “Diversity can be messier than most of us want to acknowledge,” he wrote. His conclusion? “[T]o all the friends — most but not all of them white—whom I’ve chastised over the years for abandoning the District once their children reached school age: I’m sorry. You were right. I was wrong.”

The South, where racial conflict traditionally pitted blacks against whites, has found a new fault line. When Hispanics in Georgia sought designation as “minority suppliers” so they could get preferential contracts with the state, it was black legislators who banded together to stop them. As Bob Holmes of the state’s Legislative Black Caucus explained, “There is growing competition between blacks and Hispanics, and in the South, it is going to get worse.”

The booming economy of the Raleigh-Durham area of North Carolina drew many Hispanics in the 1990s, but soon there was tension with blacks. Ana Cabello-Bumpass, who handled rentals for Lee Ray Bergman Real Estate Rentals, said that when Hispanics looked at apartments, “the first thing they ask me is if there are a lot of blacks around, because they do not want to live in a place where there are a lot of African-Americans.” She added that blacks also wanted to avoid Hispanics. “I get the same thing from both sides,” she said.

Once Hispanics arrived in large numbers in an apartment complex, blacks moved out. Thomas Everette, a black man who was still living in Durham’s Parkview complex said that just two years previously it had been nearly all black. “Now it looks like little Mexico,” he said. Mexicans complained that blacks break windows and steal car stereos. “We have nothing in common,” said one. Aura Ventura said that when she and her family moved into an apartment in a black area, neighbors threw eggs at the building.

Jim Johnson, who used to live and teach in Los Angeles, was a professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill specializing in inter-ethnic minority conflicts. He said the situation was like South Central Los Angeles in the 1980s.

Korean grocer.

There is conflict between Hispanics and whites. In 2007, two brothers, Nathan and Sam Corle, were sitting with a friend outside a fast-food restaurant in Grand Junction, Colorado, having a late-night snack when a group of Hispanic men pulled up and got out of a car. According to Nathan Corle, age 16, the Hispanics called them “white boys” and asked if they wanted to fight. He said he laughed because he thought it was a joke, but the Hispanics attacked. During the fight, which left the three whites with black eyes, bruises, and bloody noses, the Hispanics shouted such things as, “We’re going to teach white boys a lesson. White boys are going to die.”

The sad truth is that conflict can break out when virtually any ethnic group contacts another. In South Boston in 2004, hostility between white and Southeast Asian teenagers built up over a period of weeks and climaxed in what was to be a one-on-one fist fight between single combatants from each group. The fight degenerated into a brawl, leaving 16-year-old Bang Mai fatally stabbed.

In 2002 in Brooklyn, New York, a group of young Dominicans ventured into a Bangladeshi neighborhood looking for a bicycle to steal, but a group of Bangladeshis ran them out. The Dominicans returned with reinforcements and began attacking anyone who looked Bangladeshi. Thirty-seven-year-old Mizinor Rahman saw the attacks and dialed 911 from his cell phone. A Dominican screamed, “Who are you calling? The police?” The Dominicans then beat the Bangladeshi immigrant to death.

Hispanics and Vietnamese have been living side by side in Orange County, California, for 20 years but the result has been constant, low-level violence rather than friendship. The subtitle of a 2003 news story about the tension was “How Can the County Stop Vietnamese and Latinos From Duking It Out?” As a 25-year-old Hispanic who grew up with Vietnamese in Orange County explained, “Lots of Vietnamese and Latino immigrants just resent being next to each other.”

There is violence between American blacks and Somali Bantus in Columbus, Ohio. A 1998 brawl in one apartment complex prompted the managers to give tenants cultural sensitivity classes. That didn’t work. In 2004, there was another fight between Somalis and blacks at the complex that involved 60 people smashing each other with bats and bricks and ransacking apartments. Five Bantus went to the hospital. This time, the solution was segregation; all 15 Somali families moved to a different complex.

That same year, a fight at Mifflin High School in Columbus between blacks and Somalis left a 16-year-old Somali boy unconscious. Three Somali girls transferred to a different school because they could not get along with American blacks. “It [violence] happens more than we like to think,” said Hassan Omar, president of the Somali Community Association of Ohio. “And it will only get more complicated as the community becomes more ethnically diverse.”

Blacks have had well-publicized friction with Asians, especially with Korean grocers who set up small markets in black neighborhoods. In the 1980s, blacks picketed, burned out, or even murdered Korean grocers in New York City, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, Detroit and Chicago. There were many campaigns to urge blacks not to buy from “people who don’t look like us.”

Chinese children.
Not loved by blacks.

In New York City, there was so much black-Korean hostility that from 1981 to 1995, blacks launched 15 separate boycotts of Korean-owned groceries. Six lasted for at least a month. One went on for no less than 17 months and ended only when the Korean owner sold his store. Sociologist Pyong Gap Min, who has studied these events, notes that black-Korean conflict has finally subsided. Why? Because new zoning laws have led to the establishment of big-box stores that crowd out small grocers, gentrification has brought many non-blacks to Harlem and Brooklyn, and because the second generation of Korean immigrants have gone on to white-collar careers — not because blacks and Koreans learned to live together.

After the 1992 verdicts in the first trial of the Los Angeles police officers who beat Rodney King, black rioters singled out Korean-owned stores for arson. After the riots, the Los Angeles Black-Korean Alliance, created in 1986 to reduce tensions, fell apart in mutual recrimination and accusations. Outreach efforts had accomplished so little no one had the will to keep them going.

Many Korean businesses that were burned down never rebuilt. The number of Korean shops dropped to perhaps one half the pre-riot figure, more continued to leave, and this finally brought peace. “The black-Korean controversy has dissipated because the fuel has been removed,” explained Ronald Wakabayashi, executive director of the Los Angeles County Commission on Human Relations.

Chinese have been in conflict with blacks, too. An immigrant from China who grew up in Oakland, California, wrote that black grade-school classmates didn’t bother to learn her name and instead called her Ching Chong, Chinagirl, or Chow Mein. In high school, “I was the target of sexual remarks vulgar enough to make Howard Stern blush. When I did respond to the insults, I immediately faced physical threats or attacks, along with the embarrassing fact that the other ‘Chinamen’ around me simply continued their quiet personal conversations without intervening.” The Asians, she wrote, were too small to fight back. She added that Asian children started out with no prejudices against blacks but came to hate them.

Sometimes conflict overseas can spark violence when the same groups live near each other in America. In 2000, after Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon angered Palestinians by visiting the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, there was a series of attacks against New York City Jews, and in some cases assailants waved Palestinian flags. Mayor Rudy Giuliani ordered increased patrols of synagogues and Jewish schools.

The workplace

As we saw earlier, American corporations are among the most enthusiastic boosters of diversity, but what are its effects on the workplace? The number of job discrimination suits filed every year suggests an answer. In fiscal year 2007, the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) received 30,510 formal complaints of racial discrimination, 9,369 cases of national origins discrimination, and 2,880 cases of religious discrimination, for a total of 42,759 cases of job discrimination—170 every work day—that arose because of diversity. All three categories were up at least 12 percent over the previous year, and it is safe to assume that for every case filed with the EEOC, there are many cases of perceived discrimination that are not formally pursued.

Immigrants are bringing a new kind of discrimination: “colorism,” or complaints based on skin-tone differences among people of the same race. In 2004, Vice-Chair Naomi Earp of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission noted that such cases ran to more than 1,500 in fiscal 2003. Although blacks of different skin tones have long discriminated against each other, Miss Earp reported that the greatest increase in disputes had been among immigrants from India, Pakistan, and South America, who are extremely color-conscious. She warned that as the country became more diverse the problem of “colorism” would get worse.

A very busy place.

An EEOC filing is just one way to register a complaint. Many states, counties, municipalities, corporations, and universities have their own grievance procedures. Employees can also file directly in federal court; in 2001, black employees alone filed 21,000 racial discrimination cases. All branches of the armed services, which account for a total of about three million active and reserve personnel, have grievance procedures. The U.S. Civil Rights Commission, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance, the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, and the state and local equivalents of these offices all exist because of conflicts that arise from diversity. The December 2007 AR cover story presents findings that show workplace diversity generally lowers productivity.

If it were possible to count every case filed in every possible venue, it could well come to hundreds of thousands of diversity-related grievances every year. There are probably tens of thousands of Americans enforcing, adjusting, promoting, and regulating racial diversity. In addition to the emotional trauma for both accusers and accused, the costs of diversity management and the grievance mechanisms it requires probably run into the billions. This is entirely aside from the further billions spent to settle discrimination suits.

Tom McClintock, a former candidate for controller of California, estimated that before a 1996 state ballot initiative was approved to abolish the state’s affirmative action programs, the annual cost just to administer them was from $343 million to $677 million. This figure did not include the cost of private preference programs or the cost of state and local anti-discrimination machinery.

Because there are so many suits with potentially high damages, specialized insurers have arisen to offer protection. “Sooner or later, virtually every medium- to large-sized company is likely to find itself the defendant in a discrimination or sexual harassment lawsuit,” said Robert P. Hartwig, vice president of the Insurance Information Institute. “It is estimated that six out of 10 companies have been named in a discrimination or sexual harassment lawsuit in the past five years,” he added. Why? “The 21st century’s racially and ethnically diverse workforce is a potential powder keg.” In 1990, there were just a handful of companies that sold insurance of this kind. By 2000, there were more than 60.

Such lawsuits have typically been black grievances against white employers, but now accusations can go in any direction. As the Wall Street Journal noted in 2006, “A new wave of race-discrimination cases is appearing in the workplace: African-Americans who feel that they are being passed over for Hispanics.” As Anna Park, an EEOC regional attorney explained, “There used to be a reluctance to bring cases against other minorities. It’s no longer a white-black paradigm. This is a new trend.”

Black pride

Discrimination runs the other way, too. In October 2005, New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin voiced a common complaint among blacks when he asked: “How do I ensure that New Orleans is not overrun by Mexican workers?” This attitude can backfire. In 2007, a federal civil jury awarded a $254,000 verdict to a Hispanic lieutenant in the Inkster, Michigan, police department because he was repeatedly denied promotion for racial reasons. Thomas Diaz convinced the jury that Inkster “promulgated and continued a policy of discriminating in employment against non-African-Americans.”

In 2008, a Los Angeles jury found that black supervisors in the Sheriff’s Department had discriminated against a 19-year Hispanic veteran, Angel Jaimes. They called a group of Latino deputies the “Mexican Mafia,” complained that Mr. Jaimes’ substation “was run by Mexicans and they were going to change that,” and acted out of racism when they took disciplinary measures. The county paid Mr. Jaimes $432,000.

In the new age of diversity, even white plaintiffs have begun to win discrimination cases. In 2008, the city of San Francisco agreed to pay $1.6 million to 12 police officers who had sued in federal court, claiming they had been passed over for promotion because the city wanted black supervisors. Milwaukee was ordered to pay 17 white police officers $2.2 million for the same reason. A federal jury found that the city’s first black police chief, Arthur Jones, had discriminated against them a total of 144 times by promoting less qualified blacks and women. Mr. Jones said he believed the verdict set back the clock and “had a devastating effect on race relations within the department and within this city.”

In 2009, after more than 20 years of legal wrangling, 75 white Chicago firefighters shared a $6 million discrimination award. They had scored higher than blacks on a 1986 lieutenants’ exam but the city cooked the scores and promoted blacks. A jury found that the test had been fair, but the city unsuccessfully fought the decision all the way to the US Supreme Court.

In Atlanta, eight white librarians won nearly $25 million from the Atlanta-Fulton County Library System after a jury decided they had been given undesirable assignments because, according to one black library official, there were “too many white managers” in the downtown branch. This was the fourth time the county had been found guilty of discriminating against whites, and two-thirds of the monetary award was punitive damages, meaning the jury thought the county had acted willfully and maliciously against the defendants.

In 2007, an appeals court upheld a lower court that had found a black New Orleans prosecutor guilty of discriminating against 42 whites and one Hispanic when he fired them and replaced them all with blacks when he took office in 2003. A three-judge panel of the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals set damages against Eddie Jordan at $3.5 million.


In 2007 a white man named Mark Pasternak who worked for New York State as a social worker won $150,000 when jurors found that his black boss, Tommy Baines, had created a hostile workforce by calling him names such as “cracker,” “Pollack,” and “stupid white boy.” Mr. Baines reportedly told him, “You’re a white boy, and I don’t like white boys. Handle it.”

Complaints may be found where they are least expected. In Canada, it is the job of the Canadian Human Rights Commission to fight prejudice, discrimination, and insensitivity, but its highly diverse employees suffer from these scourges themselves. An internal report found deep dissatisfaction among the commission’s 230 employees, who complained of spiteful managers, sexual discrimination, and a “poisoned work environment.” Forty percent of the staff had quit in the previous 12 months, and 37 percent of those who were left were hoping to quit soon.

In the United States, government bureaus that provide social services are often extremely diverse, but they are not free of tension either. Denver’s Human Services Department, which handles child abuse, welfare, child support, etc., is one of the most integrated agencies in the city. In 2001, many of its 1,300 employees and eight of ten department heads were non-white, as were many of its clients. The city hired the Gallup organization to see how employee diversity was working, and was shocked by the findings. Fifty-seven percent of respondents disagreed with the statement that employees were treated fairly without regard to race, sex, age, etc. Sixty-nine percent said they did not trust top management.

The Gallup organization, which had done similar work before, assured the city that people in the helping professions are particularly sensitive to discrimination and vocal about it. Social worker Shanna Ritts, a union representative, said she heard many complaints about minorities discriminating against each other and even about different groups of Hispanics that could not get along. “We have a large group of minority people working, but they clash,” she explained.

Workplace diversity can be dangerous. On August 26, 1997, white and black air traffic controllers in the control tower at La Guardia Airport got into a fistfight when the white used the word “boy” in the hearing of the black controller. The black took the word to be an insult. The tower was out of contact with planes for about a minute, a hazardous situation that is strictly forbidden by federal regulations.

The armed forces are often said to be a model of good race relations, but this may not always be so. Although the study is now more than a decade old, in 1997 the military carried out a huge, congressionally-mandated race relations survey that covered more than 40,000 soldiers. Many reported that race relations were “not at all” good or good only to a “small/moderate extent:” 51 percent of blacks, 37 percent of Hispanics, 35 percent of Asians, 36 percent of American Indians, and 25 percent of whites.

The survey also asked about racially offensive behavior and threats or harm from other military personnel. A striking two-thirds said they had suffered anything from “insensitive language” to physical threats or violence: 63 percent of whites, 76 percent of blacks, 79 percent of Hispanics, 70 percent of Asians, and 76 percent of American Indians. When asked if opportunities for their race have gotten better or worse over the last five years, only 16 percent of whites thought things had improved. This compared with 39 percent of blacks, 47 percent of Hispanics, 50 percent of Asians and 41 percent of Indians. This report was so embarrassing to the Pentagon that it delayed release for two years.


Diversity is constantly promoted in the military, and anyone who is lukewarm about it has no prospects for promotion. Serving officers therefore dare not criticize it. Only after he retired did Army Green Beret Major Andy Messing argue that Special Forces units should be homogeneous because it gave them a better sense of identity. He said that differences — being black, Hispanic, Jewish or even overtly religious — add to the tensions of a grinding training regimen and dangerous combat missions.

Minority journalists have found that diversity is not always a blessing. Black, Hispanic, American Indian, and Asian journalists all have national professional associations, but formed an alliance in 1988 called Unity to promote more hiring of minorities and coverage of minority affairs. Far from enjoying the benefits of diversity, Unity suffered serious tensions, most publicly over the racial symbolism of the sites for its meetings. American Indians threatened to boycott Atlanta — heavily favored by blacks — because the Atlanta baseball team is called the Braves, and because the Georgia state government helped force out the Cherokees in 1830. Unity held its 1999 conference in Seattle, Washington, shortly after voters approved an initiative to end state- and local-government affirmative action. Many blacks refused to attend.

That year, Unity nearly fell apart. According to DeWayne Wickham, a black USA Today columnist, “What began as a survival mechanism has become an alliance of four organizations that have relatively little in common.” Unity survived, but even in 2008 its web page admitted that the group “may not always be an easy alliance.”

The more intimate the setting, the greater the challenges of diversity. Adopted children, for example, often report they never felt they fit in. In a British study of adults who had been adopted as children, 46 percent of whites adopted by whites said that although it was a positive experience they felt a sense of not belonging. In the case of transracial adoptions that figure jumped to close to 75 percent. Researchers reported that the constant refrain of non-white children adopted by whites was, “Love is not enough.”

There can be worse: The authors of a 2005 study on domestic violence in the United States reached the sobering conclusion that “the incidence of spousal homicide is 7.7 times higher in interracial marriages compared to intraracial marriages.”


One result of today’s immigration-driven diversity is that millions of Americans cannot talk to each other. Los Angeles, which is often said to point the way to America’s future, is home to people who speak more than 120 languages. As the Los Angeles Times has pointed out, this profusion of languages does not unite; it divides:

“The Filipino never hears the Persian radio program; it is impossible to tune in without buying a special radio — sold in Iranian boutiques — that uses a computer chip to receive a specially modified frequency. The Persian speaker never enters the Lithuanian church. The Lithuanian and the Hindi speakers take different freeway ramps into cultures divided by tracts and commercial strips and, most of all, how they speak.”

As immigrants cluster together, sharply-divided language islands arise: Russian in West Hollywood, Farsi in Beverly Hills, Mission Viejo and Laguna Niguel; Chinese in the San Gabriel Valley, Khmer in Long Beach, Armenian in Glendale. Some islands are tiny. Cecilia Miguel, originally from Guatemala, spoke only her native Indian language, Q’anjob’al, and lived a harrowingly isolated life. Authorities took her three children from her and put them into foster care because she could not explain how one got a black eye.

Other Angelinos become islands over time. After enough immigrants move in, earlier inhabitants may find themselves the only ones who do not speak the new language. The city of Monterey Park became famous in the 1980s because of a sudden influx of Chinese-speakers who infuriated whites by putting up signs only in Chinese. Months of tension and debate led to an ordinance that required English in addition to Chinese.


Whites kept moving out and dropped to about 12 percent of Monterey Park’s 60,000 people, making it the first mainland American city to have an Asian majority. There are now Chinese newspapers and cable channels, a huge selection of Chinese books in city libraries, and a large population of Chinese who live from year to year without speaking English.

Bridging the gap between Angelinos who do not have a common language is a constant challenge. Although naturalized citizens are supposed to be able to speak English, Los Angeles County prints ballots and voter registration papers in English, Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese, Japanese, Tagalog, and Korean. The California Department of Motor Vehicles translates documents into 30 languages, including Arabic, Greek, Hindi, Polish and Tongan.

Witnesses in trials need interpreters for more than 100 languages, at a huge cost to the state. In fiscal 1998-99 there were 193,909 man days of interpreter work in California trial courts and 91,600 days in Los Angeles Superior and Municipal courts. Sometimes trials must be delayed while the courts search for someone who can interpret exotic languages.

Hospitals often depend on a system of over-the-telephone interpreting that no one finds satisfactory. People have ended up stranded in mental hospitals because no one could understand what they were saying. Inner-city blacks must sometimes have their speech interpreted for doctors from India or China—or even Iowa.

There are more than 100 languages spoken by students in the Los Angeles public schools, and by 2000 the district was spending $3 million a year on translations into just a few of them: Armenian, Korean, Chinese, Spanish, Russian, and Vietnamese. The translation unit always had a backlog and dared not advertise itself within the district for fear of being swamped.

… and probably not much else.

Similar problems are moving East. For the 2001-2002 school year, Clark County, Nevada (which includes the city of Las Vegas), was spending so much money teaching English to Spanish-speaking students that other programs had to be “cut down to the bone,” according to superintendent Carlos Garcia. The county had reduced high school transportation, eliminated all middle school sports, and was seeking $77 million more from the state for the year’s English Language Learners instruction. Hispanic students accounted for 31 percent of students and were dropping out at an alarming rate.

Although it is frequently assumed that children quickly pick up English, a study by the California legislative analyst’s office found this is often not so. “We’re suggesting that there are kids who can go all the way through kindergarten to 12th grade and still be considered English language learners,” said Rob Manwaring, a policy analyst who worked on the report.

In 2000, the Supreme Court of New Mexico ruled that it was discriminatory to exclude people from jury duty just because they do not understand English. Since then, courts have been required to provide simultaneous interpreters. The cost runs from $30 an hour for common languages like Spanish to $180 an hour plus expenses for exotic dialects. The interpreters accompany the non-English-speakers into the jury room, but must declare that they served only as interpreters and did not take part in deliberations, which are supposed to be inviolate. So far, New Mexico is the only state to require interpreters for jurors.

Language complicates police work. Los Angeles police once picked up an elderly Korean who was lost and could not explain where he lived. They dropped him off far from home in the middle of the night. He was robbed and beaten and soon died.

In Pennsylvania, when officers pulled Miqueas Acosta over for driving with an expired safety sticker, they read him his rights in Spanish, but then spoke to him in English before searching his car. They found a kilo of cocaine worth $100,000, but Bucks County prosecutors could not use it as evidence because a Superior Court judge ruled police should have waited for an interpreter before proceeding with the search.

“The incidence of spousal homicide is 7.7 times higher in interracial marriages compared to intraracial marriages.”

Charges also had to be dropped against Mahamu Kanneh, who was accused of repeatedly raping a seven-year-old girl, because the courts spent three years looking for an interpreter for Mr. Kanneh’s tribal language, Vai, which is spoken only in Liberia and Sierra Leone. A Maryland judge found that Mr. Kanneh’s right to a speedy trial had been violated. Mr. Kanneh had arrived in the United States as a refugee and attended high school and community college, but claimed he still needed an interpreter.

A family of Oaxacan Indians managed to run a massive, East Los Angeles heroin smuggling ring for two decades, in part because they communicated in an impenetrable code: Mixteco Bajo, an Indian language that is spoken 2,500 miles away from California in southern Mexico. “The language—that stalled us,” said Larry Zimmerman, the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department’s lead detective on the case. In March 2009, officers arrested 48 members of the family, finally ending an operation that was making profits of roughly $2 million a month.

Linguistic diversity now means states must establish basic language standards for certain professions. In 2003, Wilfredo Laboy, superintendent of schools for Lawrence, Massachusetts, put two dozen of his teachers on unpaid leave for flunking a mandatory English proficiency test. It then became known that he, himself, had failed the test three times, though he complained he should not have to take it. “I’m trying to understand the congruence of what I do here every day and this stupid test,” he said. Later the Spanish-speaker managed to pass the test, and got a $6,000 raise added to his salary of $156,560.

Spanish is so well entrenched in some parts of the country that English has essentially disappeared. In 1999, the Texas border town of El Cenizo voted to conduct its monthly City Commission meetings and all other official business in Spanish. “I understand it is the United States, but what happens if people want to know what is going on?” asked Mayor Rafael Rodriguez.

“We speak Spanish. We’ll get you out of jail.”

Miami has also gone through phases of recognizing Spanish as an official language, and language remains a serious fault line. Since 1998, Florida has had a standardized high school graduation test, known as the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test or FCAT. It tests knowledge at only the 10th-grade level but 2003 was the first year it had real bite: students who could not pass did not get a diploma. At Miami Senior High, nearly 90 percent of students were not native speakers of English, and no fewer than 100 of 500 seniors failed. In May, 200 students demonstrated outside the school, waving signs and chanting “No FCAT.” Their main complaint was that they had to take the test in English. “We are a Hispanic-based society,” said Gerrter Martin, who failed twice. “My dreams are [over],” said Jessica Duran. “I want to be a doctor and because of that I can’t do it.” State Rep. Ralph Arza, who was also a Miami High teacher, said he would introduce legislation to offer the FCAT in languages other than English, but as of 2008, the test was still being given only in English.

Semi-official Spanish has cropped up in Texas. In 2002, candidates for the Democratic primary for the Texas governor’s race debated publicly in both English and Spanish. Businessman Tony Sanchez and former Texas attorney general Dan Morales spoke in English for an hour and then switched to Spanish to talk about such things as racial preferences and relations with Mexico. Mr. Sanchez lost points by occasionally speaking English during the Spanish portion, and by pointing out that English is the “primary language” of Texas. One voter, Carlos Rivera, who watched the debate, accused Mr. Sanchez of “pandering to non-Hispanics.”

Some English-speaking Americans are wary of the extent to which Spanish has taken root in the United States. A Rasmussen poll taken in 2007 found that 82 percent of white voters and 78 percent of black voters thought employers should be allowed to require English only on the job. Only 45 percent of Hispanics thought so. The same poll found that only 13 percent of black or white voters thought that requiring English was a form of racism or bigotry. AR

This series may or may not continue, at the discretion of the editor.

Note Updated 8/11/2011

Does Poverty Cause Crime? A Crime Theory Demolished

Poverty does not cause crime…Criminals do!

Most folks know that liberals have always linked poverty with crime. These same folks with common sense already knew that the reason for poverty is due to liberal policies. So, what causes people to commit crimes if it isn’t poverty?

Heather Mac Donald, reporting for the Wall Street Journal, is asking questions about this liberal myth. If poverty is the root cause of lawlessness, why did crime rates fall when joblessness increased?

The recession of 2008-09 has undercut one of the most destructive social theories that came out of the 1960s: the idea that the root cause of crime lies in income inequality and social injustice. As the economy started shedding jobs in 2008, criminologists and pundits predicted that crime would shoot up, since poverty, as the “root causes” theory holds, begets criminals. Instead, the opposite happened. Over seven million lost jobs later, crime has plummeted to its lowest level since the early 1960s. The consequences of this drop for how we think about social order are significant.

The notion that crime is an understandable reaction to poverty and racism took hold in the early 1960s. Sociologists Richard Cloward and Lloyd Ohlin argued that juvenile delinquency was essentially a form of social criticism. Poor minority youth come to understand that the American promise of upward mobility is a sham, after a bigoted society denies them the opportunity to advance. These disillusioned teens then turn to crime out of thwarted expectations.

The theories put forward by Cloward, who spent his career at Columbia University, and Ohlin, who served presidents Kennedy, Johnson and Carter, provided an intellectual foundation for many Great Society-era programs. From the Mobilization for Youth on Manhattan’s Lower East Side in 1963 through the federal Office of Economic Opportunity and a host of welfare, counseling and job initiatives, their ideas were turned into policy.

The Cloward mentioned above is the same Cloward that developed the Cloward-Piven strategy . Cloward & Piven wanted to force political change through orchestrated crisis. Doesn’t that sound like the same strategy Obama is using now?

Mac Donald points out several time-lines that defeat the liberal claims that poverty causes crime…

The 1960s themselves offered a challenge to the poverty-causes-crime thesis. Homicides rose 43%, despite an expanding economy and a surge in government jobs for inner-city residents. The Great Depression also contradicted the idea that need breeds predation, since crime rates dropped during that prolonged crisis. The academy’s commitment to root causes apologetics nevertheless persisted. Andrew Karmen of New York’s John Jay College of Criminal Justice echoed Cloward and Ohlin in 2000 in his book “New York Murder Mystery.” Crime, he wrote, is “a distorted form of social protest.” And as the current recession deepened, liberal media outlets called for more government social programs to fight the coming crime wave. In late 2008, the New York Times urged President Barack Obama to crank up federal spending on after-school programs, social workers, and summer jobs. “The economic crisis,” the paper’s editorialists wrote, “has clearly created the conditions for more crime and more gangs—among hopeless, jobless young men in the inner cities.”

Even then crime patterns were defying expectations. And by the end of 2009, the purported association between economic hardship and crime was in shambles. According to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports, homicide dropped 10% nationwide in the first six months of 2009; violent crime dropped 4.4% and property crime dropped 6.1%. Car thefts are down nearly 19%. The crime plunge is sharpest in many areas that have been hit the hardest by the housing collapse. Unemployment in California is 12.3%, but homicides in Los Angeles County, the Los Angeles Times reported recently, dropped 25% over the course of 2009. Car thefts there are down nearly 20%.

Why did liberals, like Cloward, want to push the myth that poverty causes crime? It was an excuse to redistribute the wealth to the unproductive in society. Liberals always attempt to place blame except where blame is due. The individual is responsible for their actions, not society. Liberal parents also share the majority of the blame. Poverty was just an easy scapegoat.

Not to Liberals: Poverty doesn’t cause crime…Criminals do! There are several reasons to why crime rates are lower. The increased sales of guns since Obama was elected is a major crime deterrent. Second reason is that when you keep criminals in prison, they’re not on the streets committing crimes against the productive folks in society. I know you liberals hate facts but the proof can be found in the stats.

What causes Crime?

The Real Root Causes of Violent Crime: The Breakdown of Marriage, Family, and Community

By Patrick Fagan, Ph.D.
March 17, 1995


Policymakers at last are coming to recognize the connection between the breakdown of American families and various social problems. The unfolding debate over welfare reform, for instance, has been shaped by the wide acceptance in recent years that children born into single-parent families are much more likely than children of intact families to fall into poverty and welfare dependence themselves in later years. These children, in fact, face a daunting array of problems.

While this link between illegitimacy and chronic welfare dependency now is better understood, policymakers also need to appreciate another strong and disturbing pattern evident in scholarly studies: the link between illegitimacy and violent crime and between the lack of parental attachment and violent crime. Without an understanding of the root causes of criminal behavior — how criminals are formed — Members of Congress and state legislators cannot understand why whole sectors of society, particularly in urban areas, are being torn apart by crime. And without that knowledge, sound policymaking is impossible.

A review of the empirical evidence in the professional literature of the social sciences gives policymakers an insight into the root causes of crime. Consider, for instance:

  • Over the past thirty years, the rise in violent crime parallels the rise in families abandoned by fathers.
  • High-crime neighborhoods are characterized by high concentrations of families abandoned by fathers.
  • State-by-state analysis by Heritage scholars indicates that a 10 percent increase in the percentage of children living in single-parent homes leads typically to a 17 percent increase in juvenile crime.
  • The rate of violent teenage crime corresponds with the number of families abandoned by fathers.
  • The type of aggression and hostility demonstrated by a future criminal often is foreshadowed in unusual aggressiveness as early as age five or six.
  • The future criminal tends to be an individual rejected by other children as early as the first grade who goes on to form his own group of friends, often the future delinquent gang.

On the other hand:

  • Neighborhoods with a high degree of religious practice are not high-crime neighborhoods.
  • Even in high-crime inner-city neighborhoods, well over 90 percent of children from safe, stable homes do not become delinquents. By contrast only 10 percent of children from unsafe, unstable homes in these neighborhoods avoid crime.
  • Criminals capable of sustaining marriage gradually move away from a life of crime after they get married.
  • The mother’s strong affectionate attachment to her child is the child’s best buffer against a life of crime.
  • The father’s authority and involvement in raising his children are also a great buffer against a life of crime.

The scholarly evidence, in short, suggests that at the heart of the explosion of crime in America is the loss of the capacity of fathers and mothers to be responsible in caring for the children they bring into the world. This loss of love and guidance at the intimate levels of marriage and family has broad social consequences for children and for the wider community. The empirical evidence shows that too many young men and women from broken families tend to have a much weaker sense of connection with their neighborhood and are prone to exploit its members to satisfy their unmet needs or desires. This contributes to a loss of a sense of community and to the disintegration of neighborhoods into social chaos and violent crime. If policymakers are to deal with the root causes of crime, therefore, they must deal with the rapid rise of illegitimacy.


The professional literature in criminology is quite at odds with orthodox thinking in official Washington. Many lawmakers in Congress and in the states assume that the high level of crime in America must have its roots in material conditions, such as poor employment opportunities and a shortage of adequately funded social programs. But Members of Congress and other policymakers cannot understand the root causes of crime if they insist on viewing it purely in material terms. This view blinds policymakers to the personal aspects of crime, including moral failure, the refusal to exercise personal responsibility, and the inability or refusal to enter into family and community relationships based on love, respect, and attachment both to the broader community and to a common code of conduct.

The Violent crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, supported by the Clinton Administration and enacted last year, perfectly embodies official Washington’s thinking about crime. It provides for billions of dollars in new spending, adding 15 new social programs on top of a welfare system that has cost taxpayers $5 trillion since the “War on poverty” was declared in 1965. There is no reason to suppose the programs will have any significant effect. Since 1965, welfare spending has increased 800 percent in real terms, while the number of major felonies per capita today is roughly three times the rate before 1960. As Senator Phil Gramm (R-TX) says, “If social spending stopped crime we would be the safest country in the world.”

Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE), former chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and a major sponsor of the recent crime bill, summed up the predominant view of crime prevention: “These [social services] are all good programs. They are all designed to do the same thing — give these kids something to say yes to.” Likewise, the Department of Justice’s report, “Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent and Chronic Juvenile Offenders,” accurately diagnoses the roots of the problem (in terms of family, religion, and moral formation), but then recommends a long list of new federal social programs on top of the current programs.

But the conventional assumptions about the root causes of crime — and thus the solutions — are wide of the mark:

poverty and Unemployment

The central proposition in official Washington’s thinking about crime is that poverty is the primary cause of crime. In its simplest form, this contention is absurd; if it were true, there would have been more crime in the past, when more people were poorer. And in poorer nations, the crime rates would be higher than in the United States. More significantly, history defies the assumption that deteriorating economic circumstances breed crime (and improving conditions reduce it). Instead, America’s crime rate gradually rose during the long period of real economic growth: 1905 to 1933. As the Great Depression set in and incomes dropped, the crime rate also dropped. It rose again between 1965 and 1974 when incomes rose steadily. Most recently, during the recession of 1982, there was a slight dip in crime, not an increase.

What is true of the general population is also true of black Americans. For example, between 1950 and 1974 black income in Philadelphia almost doubled, and homicides more than doubled. Even the Reverend Jesse Jackson, whose prescriptions for social reform mirror conventional liberal ideology, admits that black-on-black homicide is not an issue of poverty. The crime rate in other communities also shows no link between low incomes and crime. The Chinese in San Francisco in the mid- 1960s, for instance, had the lowest family income of any ethnic group (less than $4,000 per year) but next to no crime: only 5 Chinese in all of California were then in prison.

Race and crime

There is a widespread belief that race is a major explanatory cause of crime. This belief is anchored in the large disparity in crime rates between whites and blacks. However, a closer look at the data shows that the real variable is not race but family structure and all that it implies in commitment and love between adults. The incidence of broken families is much higher in the black community. Douglas Smith and G. Roger Jarjoura, in a major 1988 study of 11,000 individuals, found that “the percentage of single-parent households with children between the ages of 12 and 20 is significantly associated with rates of violent crime and burglary.” The same study makes clear that the widespread popular assumption that there is an association between race and crime is false. Illegitimacy is the key factor. It is the absence of marriage, and the failure to form and maintain intact families, that explains the incidence of high crime in a neighborhood among whites as well as blacks. This contradicts conventional wisdom.

Bolstering the Smith-Jarjoura study, University ofIllinois sociologist Robert J. Sampson, in a study on the differential effects of poverty and family disruption on crime, states:

Overall the analysis shows that rates of black violent offending, especially by juveniles, are strongly influenced by variations in family structure. Independent of the major candidates supplied by prior criminological theory (e.g. income, region, size, density, age and race composition) black family disruption has the largest effects on black juvenile robbery and homicide…. The effects of family structure are strong and cannot be easily dismissed by reference to other structural and cultural features of urban environments…. The effect of family disruption on black violence is not due to the effect of black violence on family structure.

Sampson adds: “the predictors of white robbery are in large part identical in sign and magnitude to those for blacks.”


Propensity to crime develops in stages associated with major psychological and sociological factors. The factors are not caused by race or poverty, and the stages are the normal tasks of growing up that every child confronts as he gets older. In the case of future violent criminals these tasks, in the absence of the love, affection, and dedication of both his parents, become perverse exercises, frustrating his needs and stunting his ability to belong.

The stages are:

  • Early infancy and the development of the capacity for empathy. Early family life and the development of relationships based on agreements being kept and a sense of an intimate place where he belongs. Early school life and the development of peer relationships based on cooperation and agreements conveying a sense of a community to which he belongs.
  • Mid-childhood and the experience of a growing capacity to learn and cooperate within his community.
  • Adolescence and the need to belong as an adult and to perform.
  • Generativity, or the begetting of the next generation through intimate sexual union and bringing others into the family and the community.

In all of these stages the lack of dedication and the atmosphere of rejection or conflict within the family diminish the child’s experience of his personal life as one of love, dedication, and a place to belong. Instead, it is characterized increasingly by rejection, abandonment, conflict, isolation, and even abuse. He is compelled to seek a place to belong outside of such a home and, most frequently not finding it in the ordinary community, finds it among others who have experienced similar rejection. He becomes attached to those who are alienated, for, like him, they have been rejected. Not finding acceptance and nurturance from caring adults, they begin conveying their own form of acceptance.


The evidence of the professional literature is overwhelming: teenage criminal behavior has its roots in habitual deprivation of parental love and affection going back to early infancy. Future delinquents invariably have a chaotic, disintegrating family life. This frequently leads to aggression and hostility toward others outside the family. Most delinquents are not withdrawn or depressed. Quite the opposite: they are actively involved in their neighborhood, but often in a violent fashion. This hostility is established in the first few years of life. By age six, habits of aggression and free-floating anger typically are already formed. By way of contrast, normal children enjoy a sense of personal security derived from their natural attachment to their mother. The future criminal is often denied that natural attachment.

The relationship between parents, not just the relationship between mother and child, has a powerful effect on very young children. Children react to quarreling parents by disobeying, crying, hitting other children, and in general being much more antisocial than their peers. And, significantly, quarreling or abusive parents do not generally vent their anger equally on all their children. Such parents tend to vent their anger on their more difficult children. This parental hostility and physical and emotional abuse of the child shapes the future delinquent.

Most delinquents are children who have been abandoned by their fathers. They are often deprived also of the love and affection they need from their mother. Inconsistent parenting, family turmoil, and multiple other stresses (such as economic hardship and psychiatric illnesses) that flow from these disagreements compound the rejection of these children by these parents, many of whom became criminals during childhood. With all these factors working against the child’s normal development, by age five the future criminal already will tend to be aggressive, hostile, and hyperactive. Four-fifths of children destined to be criminals will be “antisocial” by 11 years of age, and fully two-thirds of antisocial five-year-olds will be delinquent by age 15.

Summing up the findings of the professional literature on juvenile delinquency, Kevin Wright, professor of criminal justice at the State University of New York at Binghamton, writes: “Research confirms that children raised in supportive, affectionate, and accepting homes are less likely to become deviant. Children rejected by parents are among the most likely to become delinquent.”

family Condition Leading to crime #1: Fatherless Families

According to the professional literature, the absence of the father is the single most important cause of poverty. The same is true for crime. According to Kevin and Karen Wright,

Research into the idea that single-parent homes may produce more delinquents dates back to the early 19th century…. [O]fficials at New York State’s Auburn Penitentiary, in an attempt to discern the causes of crime, studied the biographies of incarcerated men. Reports to the legislature in 1829 and 1830 suggested that family disintegration resulting from the death, desertion, or divorce of parents led to undisciplined children who eventually became criminals. Now well over a century later, researchers continue to examine the family background of unique populations and reach similar conclusions.

The growth of the poverty-ridden family today is linked directly with the growth of the family headed by the always-single mother. And this modern form of family disintegration — or more accurately non-formation — has its consequences for criminal behavior. The growth in crime is paralleled by the growth in families abandoned by fathers.

As the chart on the following page shows, the rate of juvenile crime within each state is closely linked to the percentage of children raised in single-parent families. States with a lower percentage of single-parent families, on average, will have lower rates of juvenile crime. State-by-state analysis indicates that, in general, a 10 percent increase in the number of children living in single-parent homes (including divorces) accompanies a 17 percent increase in juvenile crime.

Along with the increased probability of family poverty and heightened risk of delinquency, a father’s absence is associated with a host of other social problems. The three most prominent effects are lower intellectual development, higher levels of illegitimate parenting in the teenage years, and higher levels of welfare dependency. According to a 1990 report from the Department of Justice, more often than not, missing and “throwaway” children come from single-parent families, families with step parents, and cohabiting-adult families.

Abandoned mothers. In normal families a father gives support to his wife, particularly during the period surrounding birth and in the early childhood years when children make heavy demands on her. In popular parlance, he is her “burn-out” prevention. But a single mother does not have this support, and the added emotional and physical stress may result in fatigue and less parent availability to the child, increasing the risk of a relationship with the child that is emotionally more distant. The single mother generally is less able to attend to all of her child’s needs as quickly or as fully as she could if she were well taken care of by a husband. These factors tend to affect the mother’s emotional attachment to her child and in turn reduce the child’s lifelong capacity for emotional attachment to others and empathy for others. Such empathy helps restrain a person from acting against others’ well-being. Violent criminals obviously lack this. At the extreme, and a more common situation in America’s inner cities, the distant relationship between a mother and child can become an abusing and neglectful relationship. Under such conditions the child is at risk of becoming a psychopath.

These observations have disturbing implications for society. If the conditions in which psychopathy is bred continue to increase, then America will have proportionately more psychopaths, and society is at an increased risk of suffering in unpredictable ways.

Abandoned sons. A father’s attention to his son has enormous positive effects on a boy’s emotional and social development. But a boy abandoned by his father is deprived of a deep sense of personal security. According to Rolf Loeber, Professor of Psychiatry, Psychology and Epidemiology at the Western Psychiatric Institute in the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, “A close and intense relationship between a boy and his father prevents hostility and inappropriate aggressiveness.” This inappropriate aggressiveness is an early indication of potential delinquency later on, particularly in boys. Furthermore, such bad behavior is a barrier to the child’s finding a place among his more normal peers, and aggressiveness usually is the precursor of a hostile and violent “street” attitude. Elijah Anderson, Professor of Sociology at the University of Pennsylvania, observes that these young men, very sensitive in their demands for “respect,” display a demeanor which communicates “deterrent aggression” not unlike the behavior that causes normal peers to reject and isolate aggressive boys in grade school. The message of this body language, of course, triggers rejection by the normal adult community.

Absence of a Father’s Authority and Discipline. The dominant role of fathers in preventing delinquency is well-established. Over forty years ago, this phenomenon was highlighted in the classic studies of the causes of delinquency by Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck of Harvard University. They described in academic terms what many children hear their mothers so often say: “Wait till your father gets home!” In a well-functioning family, the very presence of the father embodies authority, an authority conveyed through his daily involvement in family life. This paternal authority is critical to the prevention of psychopathology and delinquency.

The benefits a child receives from his relationship with his father are notably different from those derived from his relationship with his mother. The father contributes a sense of paternal authority and discipline which is conveyed through his involved presence. The additional benefits of his affection and attachment add to this primary benefit. Albert Bandura, professor of psychology at Stanford University, observed as early as 1959 that delinquents suffer from an absence of the father’s affection.

family Condition Leading to crime #2: The Absence of a Mother’s Love

According to Professor Rolf Loeber of the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine: “There is increasing evidence for an important critical period that occurs early in children’s lives. At that time, youngsters’ attachment to adult caretakers is formed. This helps them to learn prosocial skills and to unlearn any aggressive or acting out behaviors.”

The early experience of intense maternal affection is the basis for the development of a conscience and moral empathy with others.

If a child’s emotional attachment to his mother is disrupted during the first few years, permanent harm can be done to his capacity for emotional attachment to others. He will be less able to trust others and throughout his life will stay more distant emotionally from others. Having many different caretakers during the first few years can lead to a loss of this sense of attachment for life and to antisocial behavior. Separation from the mother, especially between six months and three years of age, can lead to long lasting negative effects on behavior and emotional development. Severe maternal deprivation is a critical ingredient of juvenile delinquency: As John Bowlby, the father of attachment research, puts it, “Theft, like rheumatic fever, is a disease of childhood, and, as in rheumatic fever, attacks in later life are frequently in the nature of recurrences.” A child’s emotional attachment to his mother is powerful in other ways. For example, even after a period of juvenile delinquency, a young man’s ability to become emotionally attached to his wife can make it possible for him to turn away from crime. This capacity is rooted in the very early attachment to his mother. We also know that a weak marital attachment resulting in separation or divorce accompanies a continuing life of crime.

Many family conditions can weaken a mother’s attachment to her young child. Perhaps the mother herself is an emotionally unattached person. The mother could be so lacking in family and emotional support that she cannot fill the emotional needs of the child. She could return to work, or be forced to return to work, too soon after the birth of her child. Or, while she is at work, there could be a change in the personnel responsible for the child’s day care. The more prevalent these conditions, the less likely a child will be securely attached to his mother and the more likely he will be hostile and aggressive.

The mother’s relationship with her children during this early period is also relevant to the debate over child care. According to Professor James Q. Wilson of the University of California at Los Angeles, the extended absence of a working mother from her child during the early critical stages of the child’s emotional development increases the risk of delinquency. Specifically, say Stephen Cernkovich and Peggy Giordano, “maternal employment affects behavior indirectly, through such factors as lack of supervision, loss of direct control, and attenuation of close relationships.” Thus, forcing a young single mother to return to work too soon after the birth of her baby is bad public policy. Unfortunately, the Clinton Administration’s welfare reform bill would do just that.

family Condition Leading to crime #3: Parental Fighting and Domestic Violence

The empirical evidence shows that, for a growing child, the happiest and most tranquil family situation is the intact primary marriage. But even within intact two-parent families, serious parental conflict has bad effects. The famous studies of Harvard professors Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck in the 1950s found that one-third of delinquent boys in their sample came from homes with spouse abuse. The Cambridge-Somerville Youth Study observed that the incidence of delinquent behavior was higher in intact homes characterized by a high degree of conflict and neglect than it was in broken homes without conflict. As this and other studies have shown, the lack of emotional attachment to parents is more strongly related to delinquency than is an intact home. Professor Kevin N. Wright, in his review of the literature for the Department of Justice, lists 21 other major studies that clearly show the link between parental conflict and delinquency. The lesson is clear: conflict between parents hurts the child. The more frequent or intense the conflict, the more the child is hurt emotionally. In sharp contrast, tranquillity and peace in the family and in the marriage help prevent delinquency.

family Breakup. Breakup of his parents’ marriage during the first five years of his life places a child at high risk of becoming a juvenile delinquent. This breakup — through either divorce or separation — is most likely to occur three to four years after marriage. Therefore, a large proportion of very young children experience the emotional pain of the early and final stages of marital dissolution at a time when they are most vulnerable to disruptions in their emotional attachment to their parents.

Conflict within “step families” (families where at least one of the married parents is not the biological parent of all the children) also has serious effects. According to the California Youth Authority study of female delinquents, conducted by Jill Leslie Rosenbaum, professor of criminology at California State University, “In the two parent families examined in this study a great deal of conflict was present. Of these parents, 71 percent fought regularly about the children. Since there were often ‘his’, ‘hers’ and ‘theirs’ present, the sources of conflict tended to result from one set of children having a bad influence on the others, the type of punishment invoked, or one particular child receiving too much attention.”

Rates of conflict are much higher outside intact marriage families. Not surprisingly, the rates of emotional and behavioral problems of children are more than double in step families. Given their impact on children, the marriage arrangements of parents have significant effects on the incidence of teenage crime.

family Condition Leading to crime #4: The Lack of Parental Supervision and Discipline

The absence of parental supervision and discipline often is due simply to a lack of parenting skill, particularly if the parents were not supervised properly by their own parents. Summarizing the findings of the Oregon Group, a team of social science researchers under the leadership of Gerald R. Patterson of the Oregon Social Learning Center, Travis Hirschi of the University of Arizona writes:

[I]n order for the parent to teach the child not to use force or fraud, the parent must

monitor the child’s behavior;recognize deviant behavior when it occurs; andpunish such behavior.

All that is required to activate the system is affection for or investment in the child. The parent who cares for the child will watch his behavior, see him doing things he should not do, and correct him. Presto, a decent, socialized human being.

Summarizing the Oregon Group’s work on parental skills, Professor Kevin Wright advises: “Notice what the child is doing, monitor it over long periods of time, model social skill behavior, clearly state house rules, consistently provide some punishments for transgressions, provide reinforcement for conformity, and negotiate disagreement so the conflicts and crises do not escalate. Monitoring children involves awareness of their companions, whereabouts, and free-time activities. It also includes appropriate communication, accountability of the child to the parents and the amount of time spent with parents.” A host of other studies confirm that good supervision is at least as powerful as parental emotional attachment to the child and other forms of indirect control. Monitoring fills the child’s need for parental attention, moral education, and correction.

The children of single teenage mothers are more at risk for later criminal behavior. One reason is that teenage single mothers monitor their children less than older married mothers do. They are more inclined to have an inconsistent, explosively angry approach to disciplining their children. In such homes family members, including children, generally use aggressive, coercive methods to make sure their needs are met by others in the family. The parent’s inability to monitor a child’s behavior compounds the hostility between parent and child and leads to the first of the two major stages in delinquency described by the Oregon Group:

[The first stage is a] breakdown in family management procedures, producing an increase in antisocial behavior and an impairment in social skills and application at school. [In] the second stage, during adolescence, these conditions continue and the disruptions in the parents’ monitoring practices and the adolescent’s own poor social skills place him further at risk for finding his community in a deviant peer group.

While parental monitoring and supervision obviously are good for children, harsh or excessive discipline has just the opposite effect. The parents of delinquents are harsher than ordinary parents in punishing their children; and depressed, stressed, or hostile parents more likely will vent their anger on their more aggressive children. In the case of the single teenage mother, the absence of the father increases the risk of harshness from the mother. For these children, harsh punishment can mean parental rejection. “Punishment that is too strict, frequent or severe can lead to a greater probability of delinquency regardless of parental attachments. That is, a strong parent-child bond will not lessen the adverse impact of punishment that is too harsh.”

family Condition Leading to crime #5: Rejection of the Child

Jill Leslie Rosenbaum, professor of criminology at California State University, writes: “Research consistently has shown that those youth whose bond to their parents is weak are more likely to be delinquent. [Y]outh who are more attached to their parents have greater direct and indirect controls placed on their behavior.”

As a child’s emotional attachment to his parents ensures a well- adjusted adult, so parental rejection of the child has powerful opposite effects. Ronald Simons, professor of sociology at Iowa State University, summarizes the research findings: “Rejected children tend to distrust and attribute malevolent motives to others, with the result being a defensive, if not aggressive, approach to peer interactions…. Such [rejecting] parents not only fail to model and reinforce prosocial behavior, they actually provide training in aggressive noncompliant behavior.”

Rejection by the family, which is the child’s first and fundamental “community,” sets the stage for another social tragedy. Rejected children tend gradually to drop out of normal community life. Professor Simons continues: “Parental rejection… increased the probability of a youth’s involvement in a deviant peer group, reliance upon an avoidant coping style, and use of substances.” Many other studies in the professional literature replicate these findings.

family Condition Leading to crime #6: Parental Abuse or Neglect

The professional literature is replete with findings of a connection between future delinquency and criminal behavior and the abuse and neglect visited upon children by their parents. This abuse can be physical, emotional, or sexual. “Overwhelmingly,” observes Patricia Koski, “studies conducted since 1964 have found a positive correlation between parent-child aggression-violence-abuse-physical punishment and aggression on the part of the child.” Or, as summarized by Cathy Spatz Widom, professor of Criminal Justice and Psychology at Indiana University, Bloomington, “Violence begets violence.”

Studies of the official records of abused children and arrested offenders put this connection in the range of 14 percent to 26 percent. But the connection triples to a range of 50 percent to 70 percent once researchers go beyond official reports of investigated cases of child abuse to reports of abuse by the delinquents themselves.

Significantly, West Coast Crips and Bloods gang members almost without exception grew up in dangerous family environments. Typically, they left home to escape the violence or drifted away because they were abandoned or neglected by their parents. Consequently, these young men have developed a defensive world view characterized by a feeling of vulnerability and a need to protect oneself, a belief that no one can be trusted, a need to maintain social distance, a willingness to use violence and intimidation to repel others, an attraction to similarly defensive people, and an expectation that no one will come to their aid. Young women delinquents who run away from home are also frequently victims of sexual abuse.

The close connection between child abuse and violent crime is highlighted also in a 1988 study of the 14 juveniles then condemned to death in the United States: 12 had been brutally abused, and 5 had been sodomized by relatives.

Child sexual or physical abuse alone can outweigh many other factors in contributing to violent crime but affects boys and girls differently. Abuse visited upon girls is more likely to result in depression (the inversion of anger) or psychiatric hospitalization than in the more outwardly directed hostility of abused males. According to Cathy Spatz Widom, “Early childhood victimization has demonstrable long-term consequences for delinquency, adult criminality, and violent behavior…. The experience of child abuse and neglect has a substantial impact even on individuals with otherwise little likelihood of engaging in officially recorded criminal behavior.”

family Condition Leading to crime #7: Criminal Parents

Patterns of crime are transmitted from generation to generation.

In a longitudinal study of 394 families in England, David P. Farrington, professor of criminology at Cambridge University, found that approximately 4 percent of these families accrued almost half of the convictions of the entire sample. “The fact that delinquency is transmitted from one generation to the next is indisputable…. [F]ewer than 5 percent of the families accounted for almost half of the criminal convictions in the entire sample…. In order to achieve such concentration of crime in a small number of families, it is necessary that the parents and the brothers and sisters of offenders also be unusually likely to commit criminal acts.”

The findings for England, though dramatic and for a different culture and country, comport with the earlier U.S. research as summarized by Professor Kevin Wright of the State University of New York at Binghamton:

The Gluecks determined that delinquents were more likely than nondelinquents to have delinquent fathers and mothers. Subsequent studies supported the Gluecks’ findings, observing that delinquent boys were more likely to have delinquent or criminal parents. In a study of the families of black delinquents in St. Louis, Robins found that a child’s delinquent behavior was associated with 1) arrests of one or both of the parents in their adult years, and 2) a history of juvenile delinquency on the part of the parents. Children with two parents with criminal histories were at extremely high risk of delinquency.

Girls involved in crime tend to mate with (if not marry) men with criminal records. Jill Leslie Rosenbaum of California State University, describing young delinquent women in her study, states: “[T]he men in the wards’ lives bore a striking resemblance to the men chosen by their mothers. Many were significantly older than the girls and had criminal records.”


Community Experience Leading to crime #1: A Child’s Rejection by Other Children

For most normal children, going to school is their first serious step into the broader community. But for future delinquents, this first experience pushes them further down the spiral toward delinquency and crime. Because of their family experiences, these children already are aggressive and hostile. Normal, emotionally attached children avoid them — in effect isolating and rejecting them. As a result, they seek compatible company elsewhere, in a group where they feel they belong.

As Ronald Simons, professor of sociology at Iowa State University, writes, “Ineffective parents produce aggressive first graders who are rejected by their peers and as a consequence must form friendships with other deviant youth.” Likewise, Gerald Patterson of the Oregon Social Learning Center says: “Poor social skills, characterized by aversive or coercive interaction styles, lead directly to rejection by normal peers.” Patterson, the leading expert in this area, also makes the point that peer rejection tends to be linked to ineffective parenting: “Specifically, early parent failures contribute to later skills deficits…. Parent skills in solving family problems correlate significantly with measures of academic skill and peer relations.” In a study of 1,224 grade school boys, James D. Roff, professor of psychology at Eastern Michigan University, concludes that the boy at highest risk of becoming delinquent “was characterized by aggressive behavior in the context of peer rejection.”

Closed off from the community of their peers, future criminals search out companions who feel comfortable with them. Not surprisingly, these companions are similarly aggressive-hostile children with whom they feel at ease and by whom they are accepted. The group thus reinforces its own aggressive-hostile ways and gradually rejects the conventional ways of normally attached children. Continued disruption at home, parents’ continued use of harsh discipline, and the continued absence of a father all add to the growing hostility of these future delinquents. Association with delinquent peers — almost all of whom come from similar family and parental backgrounds — is the next significant development on the path to habitual crime.

Community Experience Leading to crime #2: Failure at School

By the age of five or six, small children who are deprived of parental love and supervision have become hostile and aggressive and therefore have greater difficulty forming friendships with normal children. This hostility also undermines their school work and success. Professor David P. Farrington’s Cambridge University study finds a high correlation between school adjustment problems and later delinquency: “Youths who dislike school and teachers, who do not get involved in school activities, and who are not committed to educational pursuits are more likely than others to engage in delinquent behavior.”

Future criminals tend not to have good verbal memory at school or the ability to grasp the meaning of concepts, including moral concepts. They generally fail to learn reading and computation skills, undermining their performance in the middle grades. They often fail in the later grades and have no or low aspirations for school or work. They begin to be truant and eventually drop out of school in their teens. Typically, before they drop out of school they already have begun a serious apprenticeship in crime by having far higher rates of delinquency than do those who graduate.

Once again, all these problems are rooted in unfavorable family conditions. In a study on juvenile delinquency, Merry Morash, professor of criminology at Michigan State University, analyzed four large data sets: the British-funded Cambridge Study of Delinquent Development and the U.S. federally funded National Longitudinal Study of Youth, National Survey of Children, and Philadelphia Cohort study. Examining these four large studies of the development of children, particularly the connection between home , education, and crime, she concludes: “[The] mother’s [young] age is related to delinquency primarily through its association with low hopes for education, negative school experiences, father absence, and limited monitoring of the child.”

Consider the bleak impact of these family conditions on the future of the education system and the next generation of students. In the mid- 1980s, the Chancellor of the New York City school system was complaining: “We are in a situation now where 12,000 of the 60,000 kindergartners have mothers who are still in their teenage years, and where 40 percent of our students come from single parent households.” But since then, the national teenage out-of-wedlock birth rate has grown by 50 percent, from 30 births per 1,000 unmarried teenage girls in 1982 to 45 per 1,000 in 1991.

Community Experience Leading to crime #3: The Growth of the Gang

Commenting on the work of all parents as their children enter adolescence, Travis Hirschi of the University of Arizona writes:

Affection and monitoring had better have done the job already, because the “child-rearing” days are over. It is time to hope for the best…. [A] major feature of recent times is the increasing independence of adolescents from the family…. This independence from the family results in increasing dependence of the adolescent on other adolescents. But adolescents cannot take the place of parents as socializing agents because they have little or no investment in the outcome, and are less likely to recognize deviant behavior.

All children, especially during their teenage years, gravitate toward the influence of their peers. Not surprisingly, as the professional literature shows, delinquent peers move a boy in the direction of delinquency and crime. The same is true for girls.

In the company of their peers, future criminals gradually learn to exploit the people of their own community, a community to which they feel no responsibility or obligation. For these boys, increasingly involved with delinquent companions, their lives tend to become insulated from the weakening influence of their families. Continued weakness in parental supervision, monitoring, and control invariably escalates the conflict at home, and this increasing conflict and related family problems cause these children to deepen their affiliation with delinquent groups, the only class of people likely to welcome them “with a place to belong to.” While the children continue their aggressive, hostile, and violent ways, their behavior also increasingly repels normal, non-aggressive people. They grow more familiar and at ease with their delinquent peers. Dropping out of school is a natural development.


Criminal youth tend to live in high-crime neighborhoods. Each reinforces the other in a destructive relationship, spiraling downward into violence and social chaos.

The 1980s witnessed an extraordinary increase in community violence in most major American cities. In 1990, homicide in Boston increased by over 40 percent over the previous year; in Denver, it rose by 29 percent; in Chicago, Dallas, and New Orleans, by more than 20 percent; in Los Angeles, by 16 percent; in New York, by 11 percent. In 1988, nationwide firearm death rates for all teenagers for the first time exceeded the total for all other natural causes of death combined, and black male teens were 11 times more likely than their white counterparts to be killed by guns.

According to the national survey data, there is a clear correlation between the surge in criminal violence in these largely urban communities and the collapse of marriage. Professional research in criminology also supports this conclusion.

Tragically for these communities, single-parent neighborhoods tend to be high-crime neighborhoods. Researchers long ago observed that violent crime, among both teenagers and adults, is concentrated most heavily in urban neighborhoods characterized by a very high proportion of single- parent families. More recent figures indicate the illegitimate birth rate in many urban neighborhoods is a staggering 80 percent. And today’s researchers, like those before them, find that a neighborhood composed mainly of single-parent families invariably is a chaotic, crime-ridden community in which assaults are high and the gang — ” the delinquent subcommunity”– assumes control. In these chaotic conditions, parental supervision of adolescent and pre-adolescent children is almost impossible. In turn, children living in these neighborhoods are more likely to learn, accept, and use physical violence to satisfy their wants and needs.

While serious crime is highest in these socially disorganized, largely urban neighborhoods, however, its frequency is not a function of race. The determining factor is absence of marriage. Among broken families, with their chaotic, “dysfunctional” relationships, whether white or black, the crime rate is very high. Among married two-parent families, whether white or black, the crime rate is very low. The capacity and determination to maintain stable married relationships, not race, is the pivotal factor. The chaotic, broken community stems from these chaotic, broken families. The reason race appears to be an important factor in crime is the wide differences in marriage rates among ethnic groups.

While the crime rate among blacks has risen sharply, so has the disappearance of marriage. The same holds true for whites.

A recent report from the state of Wisconsin further illustrates the same relationship.

A high concentration of broken families without husbands and fathers is the danger signal for future crime.

Violent families, violent youth, and violent communities.

Violent youth often come from violent parents. Violent youth are the most likely to have witnessed conflict and violence between their parents. They also are the most likely to commit serious violent crime and to become “versatile” criminals — those engaged in a variety of crimes, including, theft, fraud, and drugs. Among these youths, physically or sexually abused boys commit the most violent offenses.

Internal family violence is only one major contributor to adolescent violence in these socially disorganized neighborhoods. The neighborhood itself (which includes the youth’s violent peers, also rooted in their own broken families) is the other powerful contributor, especially to violent delinquency, and its culture of aggression and violence is imported into the school. Consider a recent report from the Centers for Disease Control:

More than 4 per cent of high school students in Grades 9-12 had carried a firearm at least once in the past 30 days, and 35.5 percent of those had carried six or more times during that period. Thus, about 1.4 percent of high school students might be considered regular gun carriers. Furthermore, more than 60 percent of the students surveyed in Baltimore reported knowing someone who had carried a gun to school.

Given the level of violence in their neighborhoods, for young people to carry guns for self-defense is perhaps understandable. And the youth most likely to feel the need for defense is the member of a street gang in a violent neighborhood. After he has committed his first violent crime, the evidence shows that he is likely to commit further crimes and more than twice as likely as other criminal youths to commit more violence. Various studies indicate that violent crime is much more likely to come to the attention of the police and lead to investigation and arrest. For example, Franklyn W. Dunford and Delbert S. Elliott of the Behavioral Research Institute at Boulder, Colorado, find that young violent criminals are more likely than others to be arrested.

As a result of the low arrest rate for criminals, even the alarming official crime figures do not give policymakers a true picture of what is happening in high-crime communities. According to Dunford and Elliott, 93 percent of those committing between 100 and 200 offenses between 1976 and 1978 were not arrested, while 81 percent of the youth responsible for more than 200 offenses during the same two-year period were not arrested. Explains Dunford: “These data suggest that only those at the extreme have any risk of arrest, and even that risk is not high. It appears that the volume of crime committed by these youth may be such that arrest is a function of chance alone. The police may, figuratively, be stumbling over them. The likelihood of arrest is close to zero until one reports in excess of 100 total offenses.” Elsewhere in the same study, Dunford reports: “Of the 242 [career criminals] 86 percent had no record of arrest. In other words, the overwhelming majority of self-reported career offenders were never arrested during a three year period when they were involved in very frequent and serious criminal offenses.”

Given the very high frequency of undetected crime by career (expert) criminals, the other dramatic finding from the Cambridge University study of British delinquents may hold for the United States as well: that 50 percent of all crime probably comes from less than 5 percent of the delinquents’ families.

The family versus the “Hood.” Two researchers from the National Institute of Mental Health, John E. Richters and Pedro Martinez, have studied families in high-risk inner-city neighborhoods. Their study indicates that only 6 percent of children from stable, safe homes become delinquent. Meanwhile, 18 percent of children from homes rated as either unstable or unsafe (broken marriage or lack of supervision) became delinquent, but 90 percent of children from homes rated as both unstable and unsafe became delinquent. Only 10 percent did not.

Such studies show that the family is fighting desperately with the violent neighborhood for the future of its children. The good news is that even in violent and crime-ridden neighborhoods, “good families” are winning the battle, though a 6 percent juvenile delinquency failure rate is still a tragedy for them. Even the troubled family is winning, with its 82 percent success rate, though the one-in-five delinquency rate means that every second family has had a family member in jail. Remarkably, even 10 percent of children from the most unstable and unsafe families somehow survive and escape a life of crime. The 90 percent delinquency rate among their siblings may be inevitable, for these are the families with the highest concentration of neglectful and abusive parents who would warp any child.

Delinquent Girls

The discussion of delinquency generally focuses on boys because most violent crime is committed by males. But while male and female delinquents have similar experiences, the quality of the intimate family relations of delinquent females often is much worse. They tend to be even less attached to, and to have more problems with, their mothers than do male delinquents. They are even more firmly rejected by their female school peers than are their male counterparts. And, in turn, they are even more firmly attached to their own “bad companions” — the delinquent peer group — than are males to theirs.

Professor Jill Rosenbaum of California State University paints a graphic picture of the early life of a female delinquent. The relationship between family breakdown or disintegration and later criminal status is dramatic:

In 1980, records were requested on 240 women who had been committed to the California Youth Authority (CYA), the state agency for juvenile offenders…. family Structure: Very few (seven percent) of these girls came from intact homes families…. By the time these girls were 16, their mothers had been married an average of four times, and there was an average of 4.3 children per family…. family Criminality: seventy six percent of the girls came from families where there was a record of criminality…. family Violence: Although much data on family violence are missing, it is evident that violence was present in many of these homes…. family Conflict: In the two parent families (mainly step families) examined in this study a great deal of conflict was present. Of these parents, 71 percent fought regularly about the children. Since there were often his, hers and theirs present, the sources of conflict tended to result from one set of children having a bad influence on the others, the type of punishment invoked, or one particular child receiving too much attention…. Conflict over the use of alcohol was present in 81 percent of the homes…. Parent- Child Relationships: A Poor relationship between parent and child is highly influential in the child’s subsequent delinquency…. Many of the girls received very little positive feedback from parents in the home. Of the fathers who were present, 53 percent were viewed by parole officers as rejecting of the girl, as were 47 percent of the mothers. Rejection came in many forms…. The mothers appeared to be not only neglectful, but 96 percent were described as passive and 67 percent as irresponsible…. Generational Cycles: The mothers of the CYA wards tend to marry young, with 44% having had the ward by the time she was 18. These daughters tended to follow in their mothers’ footsteps and begin bearing children at an early age…. Parents often encouraged this behavior. One mother explained to her daughter’s parole officer that she was happy to hear that her 15-year-old daughter was pregnant –” That is what women are supposed to do.”… The men in the wards’ lives bore a striking resemblance to the men chosen by their mothers. Many were significantly older than the girls and had criminal records…. The Mothers: The wards’ mothers did not have the supports or resources needed to cope with their environments. They often were socially isolated and distrusted those attempting to help. They viewed welfare workers as those trying to take away funds and social workers as trying to take away their children. These attitudes and fears began long before the wards were born perhaps even before their mothers were born. The mothers of the CYA girls did not know how to be mothers, for they were often children themselves when their children were born, and lacked the emotional resources to instill a sense of trust and security necessary for self esteem and growth. Over time, just trying to survive depleted whatever emotional resources they might once have had.


Most ordinary Americans do not need to survey the social science literature to know that a family life of affection, cohesion, and parental involvement prevents delinquency. In particular, they know almost instinctively that maternal affection, maternal self-confidence, and the father’s esteem for the mother are among the critical elements in raising well-balanced children. The literature bears out these common-sense assumptions. Most Americans, too, know that in a law-abiding family the parents encourage the moral development of their children and promote an understanding and acceptance of traditional moral norms. Again, the professional literature reinforces these common-sense maxims. As Professor Wright observes:

The existing literature on the topic [of normative development] includes a study by Mak that found that a belief in law was negatively associated with several measures of delinquency for both boys and girls. Mak further reported that feelings of empathy are inversely related to seriousness, vandalism, and assault for girls and cheating and assault for boys. Agnew found that a belief that it is good to be honest and to avoid cheating was associated with a reduced likelihood of delinquency. Smith and Paternoster discovered that moral beliefs reduced the likelihood of marijuana use among both males and females. Paternoster and Triplettobserved that moral beliefs were related to both the incidence and prevalence of marijuana use, theft, and vandalism.

Moreover, most Americans know that this moral development of children usually is accomplished within the context of religious belief and practice. The government’s own surveys of the professional literature confirm this view. To continue from Professor Wright’s review of the literature for the Justice Department:

Another study found that attachment to church was inversely related to violence. And, finally Tolan found that the moral-religious emphasis within the family… was related to self-reported delinquency.Rodney Stark says that delinquency rises or falls in a high school to the extent to which the high schools contain a majority of religious students. This fits with the findings that among black men incarcerated and those not is that those who do not commit crime participated in church activities and had friends who went to church. By contrast those who were incarcerated had deviant friends and did not go to church.

The Crucial Elements

The root cause of violent crime thus is found in failed intimate relationships of love in marriage and in the family. The breakdown of stable communities into crime-infested neighborhoods flows directly from this failure. In contrast, addressing the root causes of crime requires an understanding of the crucial elements of supportive family and community life.

First in importance and influence is the basic marriage commitment. Its vital importance is starkly evident in the catastrophic impact of its absence.

Second is the relationship of love between parents and children, a love expressed primarily in supervision.

Third, stemming from the first and second, is the child’s ability to relate to other children.

Fourth, the backbone of strong neighborhoods, is friendship and cooperation between families.

It is no coincidence that one of the central rules in the traditional moral codes of all communities at all times, in all places, and in all cultures is the prohibition against giving birth to children outside of marriage. Societies all over the world have recognized that this prohibition is essential to social stability and to raising members of each new generation with the proper respect for their community and their peers. Unfortunately, and with disastrous consequences, this prohibition is ignored today in American society at all levels, but most especially in central-city neighborhoods. Having a child outside of marriage virtually guarantees a teenage woman and her children a life of poverty, low education, low expectations, and low achievement. It gradually puts in place the conditions which foster rejection and, ultimately, crime.

Whenever there is too high a concentration of such broken families in any community, that community will disintegrate. Only so many dysfunctional families can be sustained before the moral and social fabric of the community itself breaks down. Re-establishment of the basic community code of children within marriage is necessary both for the future happiness of American families and for a reduction in violent crime.

It follows, then, that the real work of reducing violent crime is the work of rebuilding the family. Institutions in the community, such as the church and the school, have demonstrated their importance in helping to restore stability. Government agencies, on the other hand, are powerless to increase marital and parental love; they are powerless to increase or guarantee care and attention in a family; they are powerless to increase the ability of adults to make and keep commitments and agreements. Instead, thanks to policies that do little to preserve the traditional family and much to undermine it, government continues to misdiagnose the root cause of social collapse as an absence of goods and services. This misdiagnosis is government’s own contribution to the growth of crime. Having misdiagnosed, it misleads.

There is an irreplaceable role for political leadership in the current crisis. It is not to take the place of family and community, however, but to articulate a compelling, positive vision of the nation in terms of family and community life. As President John F. Kennedy inspired thousands of young people to serve others overseas, another must inspire today’s youth to rebuild America’s families and community. This is the work not of government, but of the nation’s primary nurturing institutions: family, church, and school. The missions of these institutions are missions of love and the moral and the spiritual formation of a people.

The alternative is continued social disintegration.


Hold hearings on the real causes of crime.

Given the disconnect between the assumptions behind the social spending in the Omnibus crime Bill of 1994 and the real root causes of crime, a major correction in thinking is needed. The Judiciary Committees of Congress should conduct a series of hearings on the root causes — the long-term causes — of crime. These should focus on the relationship of family structure, and particularly of marriage and religious practice, to the prevention of violent crime. The literature, the scholarship, and particularly the experience are wide and deep.

Conduct a serious review of all national social programs.

Congress ought to conduct a comprehensive review of all national social programs, inviting the director of each program to present the evaluation data on the program’s effectiveness (or lack of it) in reducing crime.

Commission geographical mapping of social problems and their related conditions.

Congress should require the Departments of Health and Human Services, Justice, Labor, and Commerce to provide it with geographical mapping of the conditions known to be related to crime and other social problems. Among the problem indices that should be mapped:

The different types of crime;
Drug use;
Long-term welfare dependency (over two years);
School performance;
Out-of-wedlock births;
Domestic violence, by types;
Child abuse;
Sexually transmitted diseases, including AIDS.

Congress also should require information to examine the relationships between other social indicators and the lack of crime. Among the social strengths that should be mapped:

Presence of intact primary marriages (comparing these with alternative family structures, from blended families of different types to different forms of single-parent families);

Attendance of adults and children at religious institutions;

Religious education indices (attendance at religion-based schools and at supplementary religion classes);

Volunteer activity in social service associations. By mapping at the smallest geographical unit possible (county, zip code, or even smaller), many research benefits can be derived.

Request research on the effects on children of the intergenerational transmission of the single-parent family structure.

Congress ought to request summary descriptive and comparative research on how the children of first, second, third, and fourth generation single-parent families fare on indices of health and development, as well as social competence, during and by the end of their growing years. While we do have some knowledge of the impact of out-of-wedlock birth and single-parent family life on children, we do not know about multiple- generation effects. This knowledge could be very salutary.

Reform the welfare system.

welfare today is a destructive Faustian bargain between all potential mothers and the government. As the condition for receiving cash — as opposed to real community support — the system requires that women and girls abandon the traditional moral code. Explains Heritage Foundation Senior Policy Analyst Robert Rector: “The woman has a contract with the government: She will continue to receive her ‘paycheck’ as long as she fulfills two conditions: 1) She must not work; and 2) She must not marry an employed male.”

Whatever good intentions were served by the welfare system, the evidence shows that its perverse financial incentives discourage the formation of intact families and the pursuit of work. These are the outcomes of the current “community code” on which high-crime neighborhoods are built. Thus, current government policy is a powerful facilitator of the long-term rise in the crime rate.

Legislation is needed to end the destructive features of the welfare system. Instead of sending paychecks to single mothers, such a reformed system should channel money to local institutions and levels of government that can pull the mother toward helping groups in the community and pull the community toward the mother and child in need of help.

Legislation introduced by Senator Lauch Faircloth (R-NC) and Representative James Talent (R-MO) (S.2134 and H.R.4566) in the 103rd Congress takes these necessary steps and would foster a different community code. Money now used to support these broken and unformed families could be given instead to the local community to allow it to decide how best to help families in need, including newly formed, father-abandoned families. The community could disburse this money, at its discretion, to organizations committed to rebuilding the lives of these broken families.

Promote — through leadership in ideas, not national funding — volunteer community efforts, including the efforts of religious institutions.

Amid the social collapse of so many urban neighborhoods, there are stunning examples of successful efforts to turn around the lives of young people previously immersed in crime. These efforts invariably possess two features. One is a strong system of rules within an organization characterized by the love and firm guidance seen in a supportive family. The other is a strong spiritual dimension, most commonly a profound religious commitment.

Examples of this type of program abound.

Example: Leon Watkins of South Central Los Angeles, convinced that gangs fill a void for those who join them, helps them do it in a way that bridges to society. According to Watkins, being in a gang is like a religious commitment; there are codes of conduct and service to a higher good than oneself: the gang itself. Watkins shows gang members how to be true to all that attracts them to the gang and yet be true to themselves and society around them. The spiritual inspiration behind all his efforts becomes clear to the youth. They learn how to become aware of the spiritual dimension of their lives.

Example: The Reverend Lee Earl started a church in one of the most desolate sections of Detroit, a neighborhood whose economy was built on drugs, prostitution, and welfare. Within a decade the same neighborhood and the same inhabitants, under the inspiration of the spiritual leadership of Rev. Earl, motivated by a trust in God, had rebuilt their community. They became married families, started small businesses, and rebuilt and bought out their own homes. crime plummeted and a community was reborn.

Giving people a place to belong and hope in a future, hope communicated through inspiring leadership, is common to all these successes. Giving a neglected child a place to belong — someone to belong to — is communicated through the spirit of a giving person, something beyond social work alone. It involves a long-term personal relationship with a child. These relationships do not take money, but they do take a generous commitment of personal time, as in Big Brothers and Big Sisters. Government cannot purchase these efforts. If it tries, it will vitiate them by turning moral relationships into monetary ones.

Promote, through leadership in ideas, the benefits to the nation of regular worship at religious institutions.

The importance of codes of conduct and religious practice can hardly be overstated. According to the professional literature, active participation in a church significantly correlates with decreased incidence of crime. Expansion of active church membership and religious worship in a community contributes to the reduction of crime.

Government cannot re-empower religious institutions, for their essential nature is moral and spiritual. But it can be less hostile to their traditional areas of competence and mission. The potential for good among many religiously inspired schools, especially in America’s inner cities, is well-known. But Congress and the courts insist that the price of government cooperation in education is noncooperation among the three nurturing institutions of family, church, and school. This strategy weakens communities.

Conduct inner-city experiments with school vouchers.

Schools that maintain discipline and strong moral values can help support families that value these virtues and may make a difference in communities that have broken down. Parents need to be able to select such schools when their children are at risk. To give parents this choice, states and localities can be encouraged to offer vouchers to lower-income families. So far states have resisted conducting these experiments. The federal government ought to finance and evaluate six to twelve such local demonstrations.

Recent poll data in California and New Jersey confirm the general pattern of support for vouchers: not surprisingly, it is the poor who most want vouchers for private schools for their children. The poor well understand the importance of good schools in giving young people in crime- ridden neighborhoods the chance for a productive life. Private and religious schools have the major advantage of being able to instill and enforce a moral code for teachers, children, and parents. This is just the help that parents in fragile, crime-ridden communities desperately need. In the battle between the family and the “Hood,” such schools can be crucial allies for parents. Vouchers provide the constitutional and financial means for this close and effective cooperation between school and family in the moral formation of children.

Remove barriers to adoption.

Many children would have the benefit of a stable, two-parent family — reducing the probability that they would descend into crime — if adoption were made easier. Unfortunately, there are many frustrating barriers to adoption.

The largest barrier is the ethos of the social services establishment, which discourages adoption as the preferred option for a young unmarried mother and her child. The best way to deal with this is to provide competition by allowing other institutions to provide adoption services. One of the best competitors could be the nation’s churches, which have great outreach to young pregnant women and to couples desiring to adopt. Black churches are particularly well poised to perform this function and are likely to take care of balancing the needs of the child in racial matching of the parents where possible while also ensuring a speedy adoption, no matter who the parents are. However, liability law needs to be changed to remove obstacles to churches, particularly small churches, wishing to provide this natural form of charity.

Reduce taxes on marriage and children.

The federal tax code discriminates against the institution of marriage and the raising of children. Since the early 1950s, the tax system each year has increased the tax burden at a much faster rate on families raising children than on any other form of household. Talk of “family” values is largely meaningless if it does not address this central economic relationship between government and family, a relationship that will always be there, no matter the levels of social problems. A government intent on doing its limited best in the long-term prevention of crime will adjust its tax code to reflect the fundamental importance of stable marriage to the social order.

The federal government can and should reform features of the tax code that hurt families with children — particularly low-income working families. One such egregious feature is the “marriage penalty” on fathers and mothers who move from cohabitation to married family status. Another step Congress can take is to enact tax credits or other tax relief for parents with children. Adjusting the tax system to benefit the intact family silently but powerfully upholds marriage and the family.


The professional literature of criminology is surprisingly consistent on the real root causes of violent crime: the breakdown of the family and community stability. The sequence has its deepest roots in the absence of stable marriage.

Despite the good news that overall crime rates have dropped in recent years, the frightening news is that both the level and viciousness of teenage violent crime have been rising steadily. More ominous still, this was set in motion sixteen to eighteen years ago, when these violent teenagers were born into chaotic family and social conditions. Since then these conditions have become more prevalent, and we will see a continued rise in violent teenage crime. Furthermore, America is headed toward a 50 percent out-of-wedlock birthrate sometime in the next twelve to twenty years, inching more and more of the country closer to today’s inner-city illegitimacy rate. If this trend is not reversed, Americans must prepare for extensive and serious erosion of public safety and practical freedoms.

Government can staff and manage the criminal justice system efficiently and prevent crime in the short term by locking up violent teenage criminals so that they are no longer a danger to others. But it lacks both the capacity and competence to tackle the root causes of crime. That is the mission of three other basic institutions of society: the family, the church, and the school. For close to five decades government has increasingly burdened these institutions — has even become hostile to them. It is now time to help these institutions fulfill their missions by reversing course and removing these burdens.

However, it will take real leadership — leadership through ideas and passionately meant words — to inspire us all to cooperate in rebuilding our marriages, families, neighborhoods, and communities. That is the appropriate work for America’s political leaders and statesmen.

US Losing Ability to Pay off Debt

by Jeff Davis

The first official warning sign has now been posted. It isn’t just the individual states like California and New York and Illinois that are about to disappear into a financial black hole of bankruptcy and default. It’s all 50 states at once.

The London Financial Times reports: “Standard & Poor’s issued a stark warning to Washington on Monday, cutting its outlook on US sovereign debt for the first time and throwing more fuel on the raging debate over America’s swollen deficits. The agency kept America’s credit rating at triple A but for the first time since it started rating US debt 70 years ago, cut its outlook from ‘stable’ to ‘negative’. A negative outlook means there is a one-third chance of a downgrade in the next two years. Doubts about US creditworthiness could threaten the dollar’s use as a global reserve currency amid the rise of rivals such as China that have better growth prospects and fewer fiscal challenges.”

China also has a large, intelligent, and racially homogeneous population. You know, like America used to have. What we’re seeing is the transition of America from a White industrialized nation to a Third World nation. One third of our population comes from the Third World and government quotas force employers to hire people with brown and black faces regardless of how unqualified they may be.

The Financial Times notes: “The outlook cut highlights the damage to US creditworthiness from a decade of unfunded tax cuts and spending increases followed by massive fiscal stimulus during the recession. The US will have a deficit of 10.8 per cent of gross domestic product during 2011, according to the International Monetary Fund, and net government debt will exceed 70 per cent of GDP. The cut also reflects deep uncertainty about whether the polarised US political system is capable of thrashing out a deal to tackle the long-term fiscal costs of an aging population. More than two years after the beginning of the recent crisis, US policymakers have still not agreed on how to reverse recent fiscal deterioration or address longer-term fiscal pressures,’ said Nikola Swann, the primary S&P credit analyst for the decision.”

Well, voting out Obama and the Democrats couldn’t hurt.

Look, the handwriting is on the wall, and a few people are even starting to see it. At some point this whole house of cards is going to collapse. There will simply be no more money, and then Obama will start printing it, and so there will be money all right–it just won’t be worth anything. The African Communist Robert Mugabe tried printing up money and bankrupted his country and our African Communist, Barack Obama is apparently just as clueless.

Eventually, the flow of goodies to the violent, greedy and non-producing minorities will be cut off. And what then? Government hand out programs like welfare, Section 8 housing and racial quotas for jobs were meant to appease the Blacks so they would stop rioting. Don’t expect the Blacks to take the loss of their government check very well. Given a choice of doing manual work or a lot more muggings and burglary of White people; I think we all know what they will do.

The United States of America was once considered to be the source of nearly all the money and wealth in the world, and when there was an unfettered free enterprise system and a racially homogeneous, employed, and productive White population in charge, so it was. Now the United States no longer manufactures anything, one out of five people is unemployed and inflation is becoming increasingly noticeable.

To give you an idea just how crazy Congress is; they are now running a national deficit of 1.6 trillion dollars per year. Apparently not one Democrat considers this crazy or out of control. There is “talk” about cutting the deficit down to one trillion dollars per year, but that’s apparently all it is: just talk. The reality is that millions of Third World people are stealing jobs and promotions thanks to racial quotas, kicking productive White people into the ranks of the unemployed and forcing Third World incompetence into every American company. The rest of those 100 million Third World people living in the US today are getting a First World lifestyle on the backs of White taxpayers. The situation is getting critically bad, we need to expel the Third World invaders or they will cripple our economy.

That’s not light at the end of the tunnel; it’s an oncoming train.

FBI: Our military is full of gang members.

US Soldier flashes gang signs in Iraq. Photo from Business Insider.

What happens when the military is ordered to lower standards to get more minorities? Just recently four black US soldiers stationed in Oklahoma allegedly stormed a home occupied by members of the CRIPS drug gang. They unleashed a hail of gunfire, wounding six people. Local police believe the suspects were participating in a war for drug turf. Army and National Guard in Oklahoma and Missouri were told not to wear their uniforms in public for several days, and commanders feared retaliatory gang attacks on uniformed soldiers.

From Business Insider…

The FBI has released a new gang assessment announcing that there are 1.4 million gang members in the US, a 40 percent increase since 2009, and that many of these members are getting inside the military (via Stars and Stripes).

The report says the military has seen members from 53 gangs and 100 regions in the U.S. enlist in every branch of the armed forces. Members of every major street gang, some prison gangs, and outlaw motorcycle gangs (OMGs) have been reported on both U.S. and international military installations.

Happiness Tied To Racial Solidarity?

Well, except for Whites of course

Racial Identity Tied to Happiness, Study Finds

ScienceDaily (Mar. 7, 2011)–African American people who identify more strongly with their racial identity are generally happier, according to a study led by psychology researchers at Michigan State University.

The study, funded by the National Institute of Mental Health, appears in the current issue of Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, a research journal published by the American Psychological Association.

“This is the first empirical study we know of that shows a relationship between racial identity and happiness,” said Stevie C.Y. Yap, doctoral candidate in psychology at MSU and lead researcher on the project.

Previous research has found a relationship between racial identity and favorable outcomes such as self-esteem, Yap said, but none has made the link with happiness.

For the study, the researchers surveyed black adults in Michigan. The results suggest the more the participants identified with being black–or the more being black was an important part of who they are–the more happy they were with life as a whole, Yap said.

The study also explored the reasons behind the connection. Yap said it may be fueled by a sense of belongingness–that is, blacks with a strong sense of racial identity may feel more connected to their racial group, which in turn makes them happy.

More Proof Blacks Have No Business In America?

I wrote recently that Blacks have no business in America and I thought this piece bolstered that point nicely

Black Men Live Longer Healthier Lives in Prison Than Out

Black men are half as likely to die at any given time if they’re in prison than if they aren’t, suggests a new study of North Carolina inmates.

The black prisoners seemed to be especially protected against alcohol- and drug-related deaths, as well as lethal accidents and certain chronic diseases.

But that pattern didn’t hold for white men, who on the whole were slightly more likely to die in prison than outside, according to findings published in Annals of Epidemiology.

Researchers say it’s not the first time a study has found lower death rates among certain groups of inmates — particularly disadvantaged people, who might get protection against violent injuries and murder.

Which sort of begs the question: Can a group which thrives in a prison like setting really handle freedom? Or is it as self evident to you as it is to me that this tells us something fundamental about the difference between Blacks and Whites?

Note that Whites are more likely to have an adverse outcome in a prison setting.

Do you think this is further proof that Blacks have no place in America?

Update 1/18/2012

Americans’ Immigration Concerns Linger

Lymari Morales, Gallup, January 17, 2012

Nearly two out of three Americans (64%) are dissatisfied with the level of immigration into the country, down slightly from 72% in January 2008. About one in four (28%) are satisfied.

{snip} Americans’ dissatisfaction with immigration ranks 3rd highest among 17 issues Gallup asked about; the complete list will be released ahead of next week’s State of the Union address. Compared with 2008, the percentage of Americans who are very dissatisfied with the level of immigration, 39%, is down slightly.

Gallup posed a follow-up question only to those who say they are dissatisfied with the current level of immigration, asking whether the level of immigration should be increased, decreased, or remain the same. The net result is that 42% of all Americans are dissatisfied with the level of immigration and want it decreased—down from 50% four years ago. Just 6% are dissatisfied and want the level of immigration increased, unchanged from 2008 but slightly higher than in previous years.


With the exception of the controversy over Arizona’s immigration law, which Americans tended to favor when it was enacted, immigration has not received significant national attention over the past four years. Perhaps as a result, and because of seemingly more pressing economic issues, immigration is not high on Americans’ priority list at the moment. In the current survey, 3% mention it as the nation’s most important problem, compared with 11% in January 2008.


Diversity Perversity

Ted Nugent, Washington Times, January 9, 2012

Diversity is America’s greatest strength, according to the left and its socialist, Marxist, commie cohorts and co-conspirators running rampant across the country.

If you listen carefully to these America-hating, social-engineering liberals, virtually all behavior, conduct, morals and beliefs make America stronger.

This, of course, is toxic, brain-dead logic that leaves ordinary Americans shaking and scratching their heads in confusion and disgust. We recognize bull dung when we hear, see and smell it, and we have no desire whatsoever to embrace it.

The left’s definition of diversity does not make America stronger. It is weakening and destroying America. Let’s be bold and honest: The left’s version of diversity is repugnant.


Those Americans who stand up to the left’s diversity mantra are pilloried and labeled as pernicious, vile, intolerant, racist, backward Bubbas.

The left is forcing its version of diversity throughout our society and culture. According to the left and its acolytes, we are supposed to respect people who refuse to respect Old Glory or learn English, look for a job or put forth the effort to do an honest day’s work. We are supposed to respect all cultures, values, laws and religions—even when they have proved throughout history to be dangerous and diametrically opposed to our American way of life, customs, laws and traditions.

It will be a cold day in hell before I embrace voodoolike religions and unclean stone-age cultures that retard progress instead of advancing it.

The real issue is that by forcing diversity and multicultural nonsense in our workplaces, schools and government agencies on people who still cherish common sense and traditional American values, we’re ripping the nation apart.


I respect diverse people who respect and cherish basic American customs, traditions, goodwill and values. I have no respect for left-wingers who employ intimidation to make multiculturalism or diversity mandatory as the law of the land.

The diversity punks believe in racial set-asides and preferences. You won’t ever solve discrimination by engaging in reverse discrimination. Maybe a racist like Jesse Jackson or Mr. Holder believes in reverse discrimination, but ordinary Americans do not. {snip}

Real diversity, real change, real progress is accomplished by promoting and embracing Western culture, values and traditions, which is what made America great and created the greatest quality of life ever. {snip}

Diversity is an intentional left-wing disaster and destructive platform. The result of the left’s efforts to force this cultural rot on America is that there is more cultural rot, more social and racial division and less economic activity.


The left’s version of diversity is social, cultural, economic and ethnic rot. Believe it.

Reverend’s ‘Kill Whites’ Tweet a Shocker

Angelique Serrao, The Star, January 9, 2012

A reverend used Twitter at the weekend to call for white people in South Africa to be killed.

The man singled out Helen Zille as among those who should be killed.

The Reverend Kemo Immanuel Waters runs a business called the KemoTherapy Institute of Truth and is an active member of Twitter, Facebook and MySpace. He is a DJ and describes himself on his Twitter profile as a preacher, author, poet, father and truth seeker.

From his previous tweets, Waters sounded like an intellectual, spiritual person, who occasionally discussed politics, but not with any controversy.

Then suddenly in the early hours of Saturday morning, this changed.

At 1.33am, the reverend wrote: “The only way to end racism is to kill a material number of whites. @helenzille your indifferent and patronizing stance is a double dare…”

The tweet caused an uproar, with many responding angrily.

Zille said the tweet was hate speech and that she would be laying charges against Waters.

Tweeter @bronwynnielsen asked if he had lost his mind.

Waters replied: “No I have not lost my mind. But it is sad that this is what it takes to give racism the attention it deserves?”

In response to @Sibusisomtungwa, he tweeted: “You missed the gist of my msg… which is the only time a black man is afforded a dignified audience is when he pulls a gun.”

Waters also discussed the ANC centenary: “Happy 100th year anniversary to @MyANC_. You (sic) job is not done… but, a job well done in the past 100 years… You will rule till the rapture”.

Reverend Kemo Immanuel Waters

Reverend Kemo Immanuel Waters

Since his rant on Saturday, Waters has received many death threats. He said he had received five phone calls yesterday morning from people wanting to kill him.

“All the people who gave me death threats have a racist undertone. Someone, a boer, said to me that everyone close to me will die,” Waters said.

“I will never back down. I will never take it back and I will never apologise,” he added.

Waters said he had been upset after his family had been made to sit at the bar in a busy restaurant in Camps Bay, Cape Town, for half an hour.

“In Joburg, you can go anywhere and you feel welcome.”

Waters said he would never kill anyone but knew black people who would.

80 thoughts on “The Dangers of Diversity

      • Mr Jeff Davis says :

        “China also has a large, INTELLIGENT, and racially homogeneous population”

        what? the chinese are intelligent??

        let see back in 1854..(

        The chinese were considered by the wasp “a race of people whom nature has marked as inferior, and who are incapable of progress or intellectual development beyond a certain point, as their history has shown “…

        well, how much time will take you to understand that u are not the super Homo sapiens?

        it doesn´t matter by 3000 you will be such a minoritie nobody will care about your opinions

      • Backlash against globalism
        Oct 27th, 2011
        by Brett Stevens.

        In a previous post, our two options for future civilization were revealed:

        Managerial. Like attending a job, days at an American high school or going to a mall, the managerial state consists of people who have nothing in common except wanting to make money and not get murdered. As a result, a strong nanny/police state is needed to make lots of little laws, enforce them, and subject children to intense propaganda for the “morally right” way to behave.
        Organic. More like an extended family, this society has an organic values system arising from culture in the form of shared values, customs, language, heritage and beliefs. As a result, less police enforcement is needed and commerce is restrained by what the people value based on their shared ideals.

        Naturally, government and commercial interests hate the latter example. It doesn’t need them like an addict needs heroin, a battered wife in a codependent relationship needs her husband, or Bugs Bunny needs Elmer Fudd.

        Cops need robbers to chase, government needs problems to legislate, and commerce needs fears to sell products. An organic society rewards each of these with less in the way of power and future options. In fact, an organic society forces government and commerce to serve the people, not the other way around.

        This problem became obvious shortly after the French Revolution in 1789. The solution they saw then is the same as the one seen now: smash, destroy and deconstruct all culture and values and replace them with “social values” of the “we must all get along” variety you remember from kindergarten and pre-school.

        In other words, instead of trying to find answers to our problems and a direction for our society, we are forced into increasingly restrictive structures to force us to get along with each other. The totalitarian future will not come under a swastika or hammer and sickle, but a picture of Gandhi and John Lennon.

        Globalism arose from this movement. A form of liberalism taken to its logical conclusion, globalism aims to destroy all national cultures and replace them with commerce and the nanny/police state. Through consumerism, and a mass media that teaches us anything but globalism is racist and evil, this new empire will compel us to enforce it through our own self-interest.

        In a social values system, you get ahead by convincing people that you are nice and inoffensive. This means approving of everyone, always demanding compromise, always getting along and never having any conflicting opinions. The result is utterly conformity, compliant and easily manipulated people.

        However, a backlash has begun:

        Prime Minister David Cameron, who said this year that multiculturalism has failed in Britain, is calling on immigrants to learn English fluently, “make a contribution” to the economy and society and avoid being a “burden on the welfare system and the taxpayer.”

        Labor Party leader Ed Miliband recently conceded that his party “got some things wrong” on immigration during its 13 years in power. He acknowledged public concern that a rapid influx of Eastern Europeans in the past decade has driven down living standards in Britain.

        “This clearly had effects on people right up and down the country, and we’ve clearly got to learn those lessons for the future,” Mr. Miliband told the BBC. – The Washington Times

        Our leaders have told us since 1945 that blending ourselves into a uniform shade of tan and doing away with culture, religion and strong moral beliefs is the right way to “get along.” The problem is that getting along sacrifices getting anything done, and destabilizes societies like the UK.

        What is clear is that there are presently many more people in Westminster demanding a referendum on EU membership than in the City complaining about capitalism. I have just spoken at a rally of the People’s Pledge, at which more than 2,000 people were present. What’s more, we know that those 2,000 are representative of the country as a whole. They are a fraction of the 100,000 whose signatures triggered Monday’s proposal for an In/Out referendum – a proposal which, as a poll in today’s Daily Express reveals, more than two thirds of voters want their MP to back. A further 80,000 have pledged to vote only for pro-referendum parliamentary candidates.

        It will be interesting to compare the amount of coverage generated by the two protests. Will the People’s Pledge get ten times as much attention as the anti-capitalist sit-in, on the basis of the number of people at Westminster? – The Telegraph

        The idea behind the EU is the same as the idea behind the “new” United States for which a vast Civil War was fought in 1861-1865: we will unify the entire nation on a uniform standard, create a managerial morality so we all get along, and then use those people as fodder for employment, consumerism and government. Europeans are starting to realize what a dark and soulless path this is.

        The proposal, put forward by Herman Van Rompuy, the European Council president, would be the clearest sign yet of a new “United States of Europe” — with Britain left on the sidelines.

        The plan comes as European governments desperately trying to save the euro from collapse last night faced a new bombshell, with sources at the International Monetary Fund saying it would not pay for a second Greek bail-out.

        It was also disclosed last night that British businesses are turning their back on Brussels regulations to give temporary workers full employment rights, with supermarket chain Tesco leading the charge. – The Telegraph

        Magically, the agenda never changes because liberalism is globalism. Liberals have one solution: enforce more equality. Unfortunately, that causes society to deviate from reality by replacing actual goals with a political agenda. The result is further social schism.

        Ms. Fisher’s lawyers filed a petition seeking a Supreme Court review last month, and legal experts say the justices will probably agree to hear it, setting the stage for a decision by June. Such a decision, given changes in the membership of the court since 2003, is likely to cut back on if not eliminate the use of race in admissions decisions at public colleges and universities.

        Diversity is the last man standing, the sole remaining legal justification for racial preferences in deciding who can study at public universities. Should the Supreme Court disavow it, the student body at the University of Texas and many other public colleges and universities would almost instantly become whiter and more Asian, and less black and Hispanic

        A judicial retreat from diversity would be deeply symbolic, too. The term — a gauzy, unobjectionable way to talk about the combustible topic of race — has had a remarkable run. If the diversity rationale falls apart in university admissions, it could start to test the societal commitment to it in other arenas, notably private hiring and promotion. – The New York Times

        Civilization is a zero-sum game. If you do not stand up for your own interests, others will replace you. While human life as a whole is not a zero-sum game — other civilizations exist, one for each culture — the self-destruction of European-Americans shows us that the well-meaning “diversity” programs we so enthusiastically supported since 1945 have become a war on the majority. Slowly, the majority is nibbling at the edges of this vast political establishment.
        Recognition of speech codes is occurring as well:

        Upon leaving the conference I hailed the closest taxi and as the driver carried me safely home, I reflected on what was a very long day.

        What struck me the most about the day was the tone of the conference and the people there. I admit that my preconceived expectations were probably tethered to an imagination gone wild. It’s not that I was expecting to see people burning crosses or singing Nazi anthems per se, but I anticipated a little more anger, a little more foaming-at-the-mouth hatred of non-whites.

        Instead, the attendees were friendly, even a little shy. They seemed happy to be able to speak so freely on topics considered by most of society to be taboo and ideas so extreme they at times resembled science fiction. It felt a little like a failed comic book convention, sparsely populated by introverted patrons shuffling in quietly and clutching an obscure book they want autographed or hoping to see a celebrity known only within their narrow cultural circle. – Media Matters

        While it is still taboo to mention that diversity is destructive (regardless of the ethnic groups involved), it has become more popular to speak in private about it. Just to express doubts. Much as in the final days of the Soviet Union, when people finally felt confident enough to speak their discontent, Americans of all races, creeds and backgrounds are speaking up about diversity: it will destroy our culture, and make us a mechanical civilization overseen by an all-powerful moral nanny/police state.

        We face a powerful and determined source of corruption in globalism. By disguising itself as government by the people, it makes itself the target of much criticism, none of it directed at the legitimacy of its rule. This makes globalism safe from attacks from within.

        Attacks from without are difficult as well. Citizens of globalist states are propagandized to fear anything smacking of communism or extremism, which means the globalism media is incentivized to sell newspapers by finding fascists under every rug.

        Awareness within the population is also difficult, since globalism operates more like a social fashion or trend than a culture. It motivates people to push others down for failure to adhere to the dogma; those who display the best obedience are those who are blameless, and thus promoted and socially popular.

        It is a perfect reign of control. It pits us against each other, and makes us fear anything but it. Like a domineering parent, it sabotages our self-esteem and then makes us addicted to its comfortingly secure but unsettling domain:

        There is an old true story told about financier Jay Gould. When asked what he would do if there were ever a threat of a genuine revolution in America he answered, “I can hire one-half of the working class to kill the other half.” This is not a facetious statement. He was deadly serious because this tactic always works. It has been refined since then to encourage letting off steam rather than letting off gunpowder, yet it is generally the same. – Taki’s Magazine

        Despite this near-total control, the backlash has begun the best way possible: by whispered conversations, by general grumbling, by a lack of faith in a system that has failed to produce the Utopian results it promised, but has instead brought us a society laden with crime, corruption, advertising, ugliness and fear.

        So far, using the most powerful media establishment in history, the globalist elite have managed to keep this criticism to a minimum. They are counting on the selfishness, lack of attention span and general apathy of the citizens around them. But as the days pass and the misery intensifies, even oblivion loses ground.

  1. Don’t know why I bothered to read this non-sense, or why you neglected to address the real issues, starting from education all the way up to governement… but just a tiny history lesson…here you go, maybe you can learn a thing or 2…

    “The civility of a country is determined on the way they treat their minorities”

    A large percentage of the gangs in America are made up of Hispanics. Why is that? Well, gangs more or less started in Los Angeles. More precisely, they started in East Los Angeles. Mexicans have been in the East LA area since before California was part of the United States. California used to be part of Mexico until the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which ended the Mexican American War. East Los Angeles has traditionally been the heart of the Latin community.

    So how did these gangs all begin? Well, it can be traced all the way back to how the Mexican community was treated in the USA throughout history. The people who make up the Mexican community have almost always been treated like second-class citizens. First we took their land in the Mexican American War. Then we segregated them from society by making them go to separate schools. We took advantage of their hard working skills by exploiting them in the grape fields of California, and so on and so on. Ever since the US took their land, they have been in a constant struggle.

    The birth of gangs today can probably be traced all the way back to the zoot suiters. The zoot suiters wore baggy suits tapered at the bottom. The suits were looked at as unpatriotic, but that’s the reason why they wore them. They wore them in protest, to express their feelings on how they were being treated. This led up to the Zoot Suit riots in 1943.

    With the zoot suits gaining popularity among the Mexican community, many of the zoot suiters started organizing clubs. Soon, the way you could enter these clubs was being “jumped in.” This meant that you had to fight more than one member of the club, resulting in your getting jumped in. But, after it was all over, you were accepted into the club. This has carried on to the modern gangs of today. These zoot suit clubs started to gain popularity among the youth.

    As with any other groups of young people, there were often fights. The philosophy of these clubs was that once you fought, the problem was solved. Once you joined these clubs, you gained the honor and respect of the people in your club. The clubs became very close, with tight-knit groups becoming a second family to many of their members. And, in many cases, the club became a first family to many members, because of the generation gap between the zoot suiters and their parents. Many of the youth in clubs didn’t have a family structure, so these clubs became their family. The little things that the clubs fought over were the honor of their girlfriends, popularity, who had the nicest clothes, who was the best fighter, and so on. These were the same problems that all youth faced; the zoot suit clubs were no different.

    The things that changed the clubs were guns and drugs, which appeared during the Vietnam War. Many Mexican members of these clubs went off to war, where they experienced violence and drugs. Many Mexican Vietnam veterans came back on drugs and angry for what their country had put them through. Carrying a gun became a common thing, and instead of fighting their enemies like they did in the past, they killed them. Selling drugs and guns became the main force behind the gangs. They retained their beliefs of honor and respect, but now that the guns and drugs were mixed in, it was hard to determine what was honor or respect.

    The introduction of crack cocaine to the streets of LA just fueled the problem. Now the gangs weren’t just fighting over girls and popularity, they were fighting over drugs and the marketing and selling of drugs. This led to disputes over territory and who had rights to sell certain drugs in certain parts of the city. Thus the modern gangs were born.

    During the times when the Hispanic gangs were growing, so were the African American gangs. They grew out of the same reasons that the Hispanic gangs did, the poverty and despair of urban America. Like Hispanics, African Americans have struggled throughout history and continue to struggle today. Many former gang members were the ones who helped form the Los Angeles chapter of the Black Panther Party.

    The African American gangs started out as community-based organizations, but then crack cocaine was introduced to the streets of LA. This created an all-out war on the streets. The two main African American gangs then and now are the Bloods and Crips. These two gangs are in turn made up of several other gangs. There are currently 274 Blood and Crip gangs in Los Angeles County. They can also be found all across the nation in over one hundred American cities.

    Gangs are a part of society and have been throughout history. They are a social problem that shouldn’t be overlooked. The gangs in America exist because of the way we have treated our minorities. Gangs are lasting reminders that there are many social problems that minorities face. I’m by no means glorifying gangs, but I am saying that gangs were started as a result of youth reacting to the government and society.

    The gang situation in America was fueled by the aftershock of the Vietnam War. It introduced drugs and guns to the streets. The formation of modern gangs today was put into high gear by the introduction of crack cocaine to the streets. Both directly and indirectly, our government and our society have played an important role in the gangs that exist today. If we as a society want to stop gangs and the lifestyle of violence that surrounds them, we must solve the problems of poverty and equality first, because this is where the seed for gangs was first planted.

    – Nick Treck

    Don’t forget… Ignorance is how the masses are controlled and turn against eachother, keep up with your history and will help you undestand and welcome different people…

    • More liberal crap, and why do minorities compose over 90% of the gang population, these primitive low life’s know only one thing, just like the Muslims they fear those with power, simple, to respect power is at the heart of the Latino, Black, and Muslim worlds. Black gangs existed long before the introduction of narcotics, you stupid moron. Youth reacting to a government and society, NO I don’t think so, an inbreed animalistic social trait, yes. There are so many lies here I don’t know where to begin. I know what is coming for you and yours, I can smell it, my brothers smell it, and we are preparing for it, I will see you on the battlefield, and I will cut you down where you stand.

      • How are you any different from these violent gangs/cults? You’re a bunch of extremist people who belong to a distinct race, who believe that you are better than anyone else and that people who don’t agree or conform with your ideology should be killed… or “cut down on the battlefield”
        You probably belong to the KKK or something, and you are right up there with the bloods and the crips. Just as bad.
        And if your gonna bother answering me, don’t just say “more of this liberal egalitarianism crap”… because it’s actually kind of a compliment, coming from you.

    • yes, while the incredibly rich at the top profits. It helps to create a diversion by stirring things up. Like race, class, and there by successfully distracting the masses while robbing them blind. All your works are being shipped off to other countries because those at the top(many white folks) don’t care. This isn’t about race, as much as greed, that really stems from insecurity. Rich people have no idea of what they need, so they blindly grab everything they can, and some. Like a scared driver running away faster and faster instead of looking at the issue. A fine example is BP oil, they make $20 Billion in profit, it would take about $7 to fix their oil spill, but they are too greedy to get their shit together and take responsibility like any other smaller businesses would be expected to do. Enough of whining about race. There’s more pressing issues that idiots are creating. It’s time at least the awaken one’s to do the right thing.

  2. I see problems, and I’d say it has to do with quality and/or lack there of education. Educated people don’t quibble about superficial things. I have grown up around many different race, and all my friends are from different diverse background and race(most people in US are mixed) But what matters to me are a persons integrity, honesty. Insecure people may have to cluster together in hostile environment such as in prison(but that’s not everyone’s reality, in fact it’s a very poor reality going no where)

    For you the author of this blog all I can say is treat everyone with respect, unless whatever individual doesn’t treat you fair/or with respect. Then either find out why, or walk away if you don’t care about such individual.

    The world doesn’t have to be a hostile place unless you engage in it that way. Just don’t take on other’s crap.

    • where is the line? When is enough really enough? I have to say I agree with you on the binary level but when I find out why, it is ridiculous. I’m told ,”because I’m white and I’ve always had an advantage”. Like they assume all whites are born to wealth or something. I was born to white trash. I lived in government housing or section 8 neighborhoods most of my childhood. My mother used to give us $1 food stamps to buy a piece of penny candy so that she could use the change to buy smokes and booze. She would belittle my father because, “the child support was two days late”. That was the postal system not him. (by the way, postal system is very diverse) when she got it, she bought booze, pot and pills. The diverse court system decided that children need their mother over father so I was relegated to having to grow up this way. I’m not angry at my mother. Due to genetics i guess, My intelligence is higher than that of my mother. For that matter, according to my father is much higher than his. I am devoid of anger for my mother because she did the best that she could. You see, at about eleven years old I realized that her 100% effort was far less than say my 100% effort. This same conundrum applies to my relationship with the rest of America. Only now, I’m getting angry. I’m being discriminated against for having a higher standard, for trying harder and being more motivated. I’m discriminated against for following the rules and asking why we keep diluting the rules. ie Why doesn’t every one speak English if your a citizen? It’s one of the requirements. Why do so many immigrants not know how our constitutional / democratic system works? They don’t care. They have been taking advantage of a forced white guilt. So I’ve come to realize that a very large portion of my beloved society can not comprehend my point. Basically I’m relegated to being mad at a bunch of chimpanzees for not being able to read, and that is ridiculous in it self. The root problem is, that the chimp population is going up and I cant sustain them. They are harming them selves and degrading our society. We have all forgotten the true meaning of the word,”impasse” We must cull the worst of the chimps and train the truly trainable. The notion that we are all equal is plain stupid. We all have equal opportunity at life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That does not mean that you deserve what I have simply because you exist. Furthermore it does not give me the right to take unfair advantage of you inability to comprehend the word. I am obligated to provide you a purpose if you cant seem to find one. Life long welfare, like my mother, is not acceptable and you should be moved to usefulness or perish at your own hand. Our pain is self chosen.

  3. I am a left wing liberal to heart. I have money and a great job with a big rich company. Left wing politics!

    However, the largest population in jails and prisons are blacks followed by hispanics. Illegal aliens cost us too much money. My money. Evict them or extinguish them. They are breaking a law in our country. What would happen to me if I broke a law in their country. I would be locked up and tortured.

    • I am also a left wing liberal but I do not agree with you. The US is the country it is today because of immigrants. Yes, the largest population in prisons are blacks and Hispanics but you also have to be aware of the discrimination and racism there is in the judicial system. White Americans get less time in prison or probation for the same crime blacks and Hispanics commits is that fair to you? I am an immigrant born in Mexico and I have never taken money from the government and right now I am attending a 4 yr university paying with my own money. Tell me how am I hurting this country?

  4. Even though segregation was outlawed, it’s still very much in existence. When I was in high school, there were 3 cafeterias, 1 for the blacks, 1 for the hispanics, and 1 for every race. People split up and keep to themselves, people that have the same morals and look like them; it’s in our nature. Diversity is spitting in the face of nature. There was a reason why when we were created, we weren’t mixed together; we were never meant to mix.

    Self-hating white liberals are loading the gun that is going to be used to kill them. Once La Raza or Mecha is the majority and takes charge, we will NOT be afforded the same privileges that we currently give to minorities. Does anybody honestly think there will be any Mexican liberals? Please, every race but the white race sticks together. I mean, groups like La Raza already say they hate white people, who expects them to have a change of heart once they grasp power?

    • Actually, it’s oppressive racist white people who loaded the gun years ago, when they shipped all these black people from Africa over here against their will, finally released them, but then didn’t give them any education or money (and treated them as inferior), so they were forced to live in slums and, of course, violence and racism breeds in slums. We are also not helping new immigrants as much as we should: do you really believe that if a Hispanic family moved to the US, they were treated as equals, we helped them get started in this country/get jobs, and educated their children well that they would hate white people, democracy and America? In my mind, either stop so many immigrants from coming into America OR just accept and try to help them become productive members of society. It’s only the poor and oppressed “minorities” (actually this includes white people too) that would want to rise up against what they would see as the evil white majority, and you guys are kind of proving them right.

      • yeah, those damn white devils right? We should punish the present generation for the mistakes of the past right? White people don’t have a right to exist or have a language or culture, or heritage right? they should be systematically wiped off the face of the earth though egalitarian policies which result in their alienation and ethnic cleansing right? this is all okay, so long as its only being done to whites, am i missing something here? nope you and your kind will get whats coming to you, you think that we will remain silent forever, we can’t, you think that will just go peacefully into the night, we won’t, these liberal democracies are anything but democratic, these policies which favor our racial enemies will not hold against the natural forces of the universe. All things come down eventually and your liberal western nations are on the chopping block of history. You see you socialist parasites forgot history, even if America falls, Canada goes down the toilet, Europe collapses, and every white nation faces total economic collapse, the white European people will still exist, we will retake our nations, through blood and sacrifice and you will pay for what your kind has done. We hold the keys of power, meaning nuclear war! The day is coming when we will rain nuclear fire on our racial enemies!

        Don’t try that racist crap with me, every race on the planet is racist except whites, only our nations get flooded by none whites, we are the minority on earth with less then 10% of the population. We have a right to live amongst our own kind, however we choose to live, with no interference from anyone else, but you can’t let us live can you?

        War by its very nature is ethnically based, look it up! whether if its inner ethnic or against another tribe, war is war, if whites have been good at anything its that, and we will wage war like it has never been waged before in the history of human kind! We will crack the very crust if it means you will respect our right to exist, if whole tribes and nations must succumb to our vengeance then so be it. you have been warned.

        We don’t care if global temperatures drop, our kind will do well. See you soon on the battlefield, from the streets of L.A. to the wards of Louisiana, to the coast of Maine, we will fight you.

  5. Those of you need to look at the rest of this site. There are hundreds of documents by many different authors, you have an open mind, you will find the truth for yourselves. If you don’t know by now, that America is finished, and that war is coming to states like California, then you are lost, I cannot help you, enjoy the time you have left. For the rest of you, be ready, none of the crap above means much to me anymore, I know this, when the time comes, your a male who is not white, I will put you down, I don’t want to hear about how evil that is, or why I should not say such things.

    You know who your are, you know what you and yours have done to my people and our nations, and you know you will pay with blood, see you soon.

    Locust Clan

    • Ok, I have an open mind, could you explain to me exactly why you feel this way? Or are you joking (I can’t tell)

  6. Mr. Taylor,

    As a seventy year old high school drop out who survived much of what you so articulately presented, I offer up a sincere thank you. I conclude from previous experience, and years of research that you have an extraordinary grasp of this problem and do hope that you will continue. It is rare to find an intelligent research writer who will expend the hours you have on this subject without any expectations of profit, and I want to assure you that I have gained much from your eloquent elucidation.
    I am extremely curious about where you are going with this subject because I have for some years now concluded that segregation is the only solution, even though the majority of people reject it, and Amos 3:3 has authenticated it with the following words of wisdom. “Can two walk together, unless they are agreed?” I have yet to find a society of like minded people who are culturally diverse, and I spend more hours reading than most people are conscious.
    When humanity becomes willing to face up to having been brain washed, and pursue their own intellectual development, the inevitable conclusion will be, they are more comfortable, productive, and benevolent with their own race.

    • How on earth can you talk about “intelligent research” and underline the articulation of this “presentation” ? There is no valuable argument here. I guess your “many years of research” have taught you to consider relevant some two-neurons thoughts such as “All that is required is a look at what happens when people, for whatever reason, find themselves in close contact with people unlike themselves”…

      Well, maybe you should consider a change in your professional orientation… Or maybe directly instal your office in a pigsty, so as to be in close contact with people like yourself.

  7. Hey everybody, have you listened to various European leaders have said recently? Example Mercle of Germany has said that multi-cultureism has utterly failed. These years&decades they have let all these non-white peoples into their countries has created massive problems, now they have to live with the mess that the liberal socialist/atheist have made. The near future for Europe is quite dark but they reap what they so. LIBERALISM IS A MENTAL DISORDER- MICHAEL SAVAGE.

  8. In reply to John’s 07 25 011 objection to my previous post. You are a classic example of what happens when people who cannot accept life as it is are confronted with common sense. People who demand that everyone must behave and believe as they do are the source of all societal dysfunction. You cannot accept what you try and force on the rest of society. Even the lower animals have the natural intelligence to stay separated. Even the fact that I realized the necessity to expand my intellect offends you. There is no place on earth where people like you and I can live in close proximity to one another in peace. Because you won’t allow it. It matters not what I do, or what my skin color may be, you are, and will remain convinced that you have a right to demand equality for all, even when it has never in all of humanities history existed. I do not hate you for being so obtuse, but you will never be allowed to dictate who I associate, or live with. You can do all that is in your power, even kill me, but I will not allow you to demand I think like you. There is a good reason for this, as all who can see and hear know. We are not compatible! We are both convinced that we are right, and we both have different attributes, good and bad. You are like a Preacher that wants to have the power to force everyone to love each other, even when they do not have that ability. I admit that one of my lessor attributes is, it gives me great pleasure to offend you with my rejection of being like you. Have a miserable life, you deserve it. Michael is correct, LIBERALISM IS A MENTAL DISORDER.

  9. Holy fuck this is both depressing and hilarious at the same time.
    Sorry locust, you’re wrong. It’s not a race problem. It’s a money problem. Poverty breeds crime, and if you weren’t so biased you would have noticed this is the most common factor and not race.
    Ever been to europe? There’s very little minorities in many of those countries, so you’d think by your logic they don’t have any unruly poor folk? Wrong, they are so common they even have a name. Chavs.
    As I said before, it’s not a race problem it’s a poverty problem.

    The only way to fix this is to universally increase the quality of living, which is ironically only going to be brought about by socialism.

    • Sorry, Folks. “Poverty” Does NOT “Cause Crime”
      When you stop to think about it (the step the Left never takes), the ‘poverty causes crime’ meme didn’t make any sense. Hundreds of millions of people live in poverty around the world–and their ‘criminal’ activity is either less than or equal to what we see in the US.

      But regardless, the theory took another body-blow from Heather MacDonald. Too bad Jim-the-Doylet and his parties-to-crime in the Legislature don’t get all too interested in facts before they started releasing criminals (“non-violent” my ass) back out here. You’ll see why in the excerpts.

      The recession of 2008-09 has undercut one of the most destructive social theories that came out of the 1960s: the idea that the root cause of crime lies in income inequality and social injustice. As the economy started shedding jobs in 2008, criminologists and pundits predicted that crime would shoot up, since poverty, as the “root causes” theory holds, begets criminals. Instead, the opposite happened. Over seven million lost jobs later, crime has plummeted to its lowest level since the early 1960s.

      Hundreds of disappointed folks in tweed jackets, and rectories, nationwide…..

      …[I]n the early 1960s[,] Sociologists Richard Cloward and Lloyd Ohlin argued that juvenile delinquency was essentially a form of social criticism. Poor minority youth come to understand that the American promise of upward mobility is a sham, after a bigoted society denies them the opportunity to advance. These disillusioned teens then turn to crime out of thwarted expectations.

      Yes, THAT Cloward. The subversive one. See Cloward-Pivin: the strategy whereby capitalism is overthrown by overwhelming the bureaucracy with entitlement demands.

      …The 1960s themselves offered a challenge to the poverty-causes-crime thesis. Homicides rose 43%, despite an expanding economy and a surge in government jobs for inner-city residents. The Great Depression also contradicted the idea that need breeds predation, since crime rates dropped during that prolonged crisis

      Ah, but those are mere facts.

      …as the current recession deepened, liberal media outlets called for more government social programs to fight the coming crime wave. In late 2008, the New York Times urged President Barack Obama to crank up federal spending on after-school programs, social workers, and summer jobs. “The economic crisis,” the paper’s editorialists wrote, “has clearly created the conditions for more crime and more gangs—among hopeless, jobless young men in the inner cities.”

      Sound familiar? It should. It’s Mayor Tommy’s thaaannng, too.

      …by the end of 2009, the purported association between economic hardship and crime was in shambles. According to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports, homicide dropped 10% nationwide in the first six months of 2009; violent crime dropped 4.4% and property crime dropped 6.1%. Car thefts are down nearly 19%. The crime plunge is sharpest in many areas that have been hit the hardest by the housing collapse. Unemployment in California is 12.3%, but homicides in Los Angeles County, the Los Angeles Times reported recently, dropped 25% over the course of 2009. Car thefts there are down nearly 20%.

      Cops using tools!! Whadda Concept!!

      As New York Police Commissioner in the mid-1990s, Mr. Bratton pioneered the intensive use of crime data to determine policing strategies and to hold precinct commanders accountable—a process known as Compstat. Commissioner Kelly has continued Mr. Bratton’s revolutionary policies, leading to New York’s stunning 16-year 77% crime drop. The two police leaders were true to their word. In 2009, the city of L.A. saw a 17% drop in homicides, an 8% drop in property crimes, and a 10% drop in violent crimes. In New York, homicides fell 19%, to their lowest level since reliable records were first kept in 1963.

      Anyone who visited NYC during Dinkins and then visited NYC in the last 5 years can tell you the difference. It’s night-and-day. Rudy Giuliani, folks…

      The recession could still affect crime rates if cities cut their police forces and states start releasing prisoners early. Both forms of cost-saving would be self-defeating.

      Frankly, the Doylet agenda is defeating Wisconsin’s law-abiding taxpayers.

      November cannot come too soon.

    • To say that in the hundreds of thousands of years of divergent evolution, that there are no differences in the physical, mental, emotional and spiritual traits in the various tribes of man, speaks volumes to those who have eyes and ears. Those who believe in evolution but deny mankind’s own evolution, you live a lie. You are a liar, a deceiver, a corrupter, a subverter, a traitor, and death in my opinion would be too sweet a release for your ignorantly blissful or stupidly moronic waste of human flesh. While you may believe this lie here in America, the other five and a half billion parasites say otherwise, yet you will continue to live your lie because you are a coward, a feeble minded dishonorable, dishonest lowly creature. Your ancestors died for your existence, generations of sacrifice, all the history and suffering, and you are the end result, I’d pity you if I didn’t hate you.

      I’m not a god believing, heaven and hell kinda guy. But if there was a hell, i’m sure there would be a special place just for you. Not to worry my friend, just because you will not acknowledge mans own evolution doesn’t mean it will have not effect on you, mother nature has a special way of dealing with people who will not, refuse to, fight against, opening their eyes to what’s around them, you live in your segregated white utopias now, but the wall of universal reality approaches, and all will stand accountable for their actions, or in your case inaction. I hope i’m there to witness it for myself, the fall of liberal America, and the rise of racial nationalism, no where on this Earth will you be able to hide, no where, we will find you, our mission and purpose in life will be to find your kind, and like I said, death for you is not good enough. Do me the favor, end yourself now, so we don’t have to come and find you and do it for you.

  10. Oh my God I am going to be physically sick. Whitelocust your starting to piss me off along with the rest of you who agree with him. I…I just don’t know anymore, I’m a product of a mixed family, and to hear you say such thing really makes me upset. I look at the world today and I think ‘wow we really are changing, race isn’t such a big deal anymore’. Then I find blogs like this and i think to myself ‘Wow I guess i was wrong’. And it depresses me, because i am attracted to to the opposite race and i see myself eventually marrying and having children with someone outside of my own race, but with people like you around, it makes me scared, but at the same time i want to rub it in your face. As for you Whitelocust i just think your fucking crazy. Your sick and fucked up in the brain, your going on about seeing everyone on the battlefield well buddy, the only place i plan to see you is burning in Hell. You have insulted a countless number of people and it sickens me to know that such people like you are still around. I was really hoping that people and their views were changing, well how wrong was I?

    • No we just view everything the way the rest of you do, by race. You want us to ignore the damage done to our people the millions who have been murder by blacks, well sorry no, we refuse to. This isn’t about whether you are mixed race or not, its about black culture, its parasitic self absorbed inferiority complex that so many of your people suffer from. Nothing good has come from blacks, Latinos, or Asians, attaching themselves to my civilization. As things spin out of control, we will be proven right once again, the rise of the Imperian is coming, whether you like it or not.

      • I never said anything about ignoring or forgetting if that is what you perceived then my bad, but i want you to know that i am looking into this and i am going to fight against you, because YOU ARE WRONG.

      • How are we wrong? Explain. If you can make a valid argument, then you can change my mind, so far you have not.

      • The final years of the Amerikan experiment.

        Demographics means something, heritage, culture, race, all mean something in the greater history of humanity. Any nation that ignores these universal principles, walks the path of self destruction. The decade to follow we will see the end of the Amerikan empire, the fall of the Western world into the progressive socialist chaos, the end of an age. Western liberal democracies will come to an end, and something new will be born in its place.


        Race war, class war, anti-government riots –you name it. All of it is headed our way. The sentiment across the nation, as Michael Bloomberg suggested in a recent interview, is that Americans know something is wrong in this country. For every individual and the groups with which they affiliate it’s different. For the black panthers it’s racism and poverty. For unions it’s benefit cuts, wage cuts and free market solutions. For Tea Party members it’s an intrusive and socialist government. The majority of America is not happy and they’ve lost hope, because regardless of what group you identify with, what color you are or what way you lean politically, you’re losing jobs, falling behind on essential bills, having difficulty putting food on the table and are constantly being accosted by government on all levels. When the riots start –and they will –the core motivators for individuals who hit the streets will be similar. Where the difference will arise is who each person or group will blame. Those elites in the upper echelons of our command and control apparatus thrive on hate, confusion and panic, and they will use our own ignorance against us. When we discuss the coming civil disobedience and unrest in America, we may find ourselves visualizing protests where the people join together to oust a tyrannical government. Be forewarned. This is not the most likely outcome –at least not at the outset. With so many different ideologies in this country, every one of us interprets the problems and directs blame a different way. These differences will be used against us; they’ll be used to turn us against each other. As you watch the following short speech from Black Panther National Chairman Malik Shabazz, consider that, while you may disagree with his solutions to the problems or where he places some of the blame, his core message is very similar to those of others that are fed up with what’s going on in this country.

        New Black Panthers:

        “Our message to the State Department, our message to the CIA, our message to Homeland Security, our message to the government today, is that your enemy is not our enemy. Your enemy in Afghanistan, your enemy in Iran, your enemy that you are bombing in Libya today –those are not our enemies. Our enemies are right here in the United States of America. Our battle is not against Ghaddafi. Our battle is against police brutality right here at home. Our battle is against budget cuts right here at home… … A message to the President, Barack Hussein Obama. We elected you. But we did not elect you to bomb your homeland. We did not elect you to bomb Africa. We are pleading with you Mr. Obama. You cannot make a compromise with the devil. The bible says resist the devil, and the devil shall flee from you. You can’t cut a deal with Satan, Mr. Obama. You got to stand up for God… … We have to fight. Gird up your loins college students. Gird up your loins young black man and young black woman, for the hour of war is at hand.”

        Combine that statement with this one from the Chicano nationalist moments:

        Chicano race organizations Calls for Race war?

        Miguel Perez says he is the current president of Chicanos Unidos Arizona and an active member of La Raza. He says he also served as the vice president of MECHA in Fullerton California.

        La Raza, or NCLA, is a militant Latino group that Obama is funding with American tax dollars. MECHA is a nationwide Latino student organization. MECHA explicitly calls for the creation of Atzlan, a new Chicano/Latino nation, in what is now the Southwest United States.

        Perez is using to call for Latinos in the Southwest to arm themselves for race war. Perez tells his readers Latino groups believe they have enough people in states such as California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas to successfully wage a war on the United States. 

        Who’s side will you be on?

        Perez is hyping a call to arms by a fellow Chicano militant…

        Phoenix-based Nuestros Reconquistos claims that there will be a war very similar to the Civil War fought in the next five years. “La Raza and MEChA have already talked to Latinos and Phoenix and explained that Latinos need to arm themselves for war,” says Nuestros Reconquistos President Manuel Longoria.

        Cecilia Maldonado of Chicanos Unidos Arizona isn’t hoping for any sort of war, but believes it may be unavoidable. “For generations, our people have prepared us to take back the lands of the Southwest that were stolen from our Mexican ancestors. Because of the bad economy and many racist laws, Latinos will be forced to fight sooner than later,” says Mrs. Maldonado.

        Perez is listed as the “civil rights” writer for the Phoenix area on He recently praised Obama for issuing a unilateral amnesty for illegal aliens by ordering law enforcement to cease deportations.

        Miguel Perez, current president of Chicanos Unidos Arizona and an active member of La Raza, also served as the vice president of the Latino civil rights organization MECHA in Fullerton California. He is the son of two Mexican immigrants. Perez plans to become a lawyer in order to protect the rights of Latinos. You can reach Perez at

        Phoenix-based Nuestros Reconquistos claims that there will be a war very similar to the Civil War fought in the next five years. “La Raza and MEChA have already talked to Latinos and Phoenix and explained that Latinos need to arm themselves for war,” says Nuestros Reconquistos President Manuel Longoria.

        Don’t kid yourselves, this guy and MANY MANY of his fellow travelers are quite serious… dead serious in fact. They already have the numbers in many communities and will be able to easily overrun most adjacent communities for the simple fact that most people think it can’t or won’t happen. Come on, think about it, the majority of Americans believe that they are just here to bus our tables and cut our grass… they’re just good hard working decent people who only want a better life for themselves and their families… and most importantly, they’re no threat. That is what ALL media outlets and political/community leaders have been telling the people for years now.

        Maybe in some states something like this might only last a week, but in states such as CA, AZ, & N.M. it would be devastating and they could easily gain control of large portions of the state. Look at the devastation that a relatively small number of drug gang members have wrought on whole cities just south of the border…and they’re killing their own people there! These guys basically hate white people, do you think for even a moment that they would have a problem with killing entire neighborhoods just to get their point across?

        Go ahead and laugh this guy off and treat what he is saying as a joke, but do so at your own peril, Arizonians and seriously fear what I believe is coming.

        The black and brown people want to defend their own people from aggression they believe whites will inflict upon them for the destruction of the Amerikcan nation, they understand that they are the cause of most of our problems, they know that they deserve nothing less then genocide for their racial crimes against the white race, and they are correct. But to believe that they would be able to hold on to any territory they steal from white Americans is foolish. Let them have los Angels, atlanta, and other non white cities, a cluster of thermal nuclear bombs detonated in those cities, will make it clear we mean business. The challenge for we the vanguard will be to convince our racial comrades, that in a civil war we must use chemical, biological, nuclear, and concentration camps against our racial enemies.

        They brought this upon themselves, they started this war by invading our communities, weakening our civilization, we will finish it. I support the nuclear open in the coming civil war, make it clear to all whites, they must as well.

  11. Who is this dumb ass that support’s nuclear war in the non white cities, are you out of your fucking mind? It’s the God Damn International Bankers that you should direct you hatred towards, and if you had shit for brain’s you would already know that. Eat a bullet you fuck head.

    OldDog said that!


      • Hey whitelocust your problem is you don´t realize you´re in the 21 century,
        have you read “The clash of civilizations” ???
        we are in a world of civilizations and you still speak about races and tribes…
        this could be useful back in the paleolithic , but not now!
        Osama didn´t care if you came from “black” Somalia, “white” Bosnia, “brown” Yemen or “brown-yellow” Indonesia to enroll you in Al Qaeda …

        you have to think broader man …let see …

        as Hutington states Western is in decline and so the US, no doubt about that ,
        perhaps the major challenger today is China , now the second economy in the world
        but they are 1300 millons while USA population is just over 300, if China succeed integrating the still extremely poor masses into its economy the result is obvious , as they
        took second position from 120 million Japans they will take the first from 300 mill yankis…
        and you know, after economic power comes military power and so on …
        in an article in this blog about “diversity” and multiculturlism the writer complains
        that at every level in USA society “diversity” is encouraged , even in the army and
        private large corporations everybody wants to improve “diversity” and speak
        about it as a “strength” and you don´t undertsand why…
        you never understand why your leaders do what they do, as I see in another article ,many “conservative whites” ask for something like a politic of “isolation” , you are very
        critical about the wars in Irak and Afghanistan and want to stop inmigration …
        well , first at all, American Imperialism is not for free, as I try to explain
        to pepole in my country the Yankis are not wealthy because they are imperialist,
        it´s the other way around, they became rich because of its own effort and abilities
        and once they become rich they began to expand taking for them what they need for
        its growing economy just as any other empire in world history, from the 13 colonies in the
        Atlantic coast to the 50 USA states…
        todays economy as all we know is lagrely based on oil,in the past half century the USA is runing out its own and obviously needs oil from other countries,the obvious consequence is that the USA have no choice but to get involved in international affairs relating oil,
        suporting friendly dictatorships (Saudi Arabia) or invading unfriendly dictatorships(Irak) is part of the bussiness you have to run in order to purchase your oil , like a vampire looking for blood to survive you suck oil from all over the world , if you stop sucking oil your economy colapse so you have no choice but to keep on sucking ….

        in the same way you needeed and need petroleum for your economy to work you now need … workers !
        and we are back in the “Chinese” problem , how can you deal with those 1300 millons ?
        and with the 1000 millions Indians? once these two countries could “integrate” all its people to the entire economy you´ll say goodbye to USA supermacy , so simple… so the the key word is to “integrate”, as China and India struggle to “integrate” its own “poors” you have no choice but import “poors” as you import oil because you are less than a quarter of China and less than a third of India, it´s that simple …

        of course you can get the “Switzerland” approach , to isolate from the rest of the world
        and keep your 70% “white” nice “America” … but forget to remain a major global power because you will be for the world just what Switzerland is for Europe …. in the 21 century
        the global powers will be those with a large poulation … so ..
        you not only need us for clean your asses when you are ill or to keep up your beutifuls gardens you need us to survive as a 21 century major power (not as the number one
        power you are now, that´s out of the question , but at least to play the cards as one of
        the bigs ), the question for you to survive is not how to stop inmigration but how to improve it and integrate inmigrants in your society , as you know your demographics are very poor and there´s no way you can change it in the near future … so .. ..what´s the problem about being a multiethnic and diverse country?? and who told you that this never worked?
        learn from the Roman Empire experience … the Roman Empire was also multiethnic and diverse , Latins,Greeks,Egyptians,Jews,Syrians,Celtics, Germanics,Scyths, Phoenicians etc , peoples from Europe,Asia and Africa, dozens of tongues and religions and it lasted centuries until that evil sect spread all over the empire like a cancer …

        it´s simple or you evolve (and this always means to change ) or you become extinct…

      • And advanced you mean, economically bankrupt, socially unstable, and demographically in decline right?

        By democracy you mean the failed ideology of social globalist authoritarianism?

        As for the vikings, they were as advanced as the weak societies they sacked and burned, just like non whites are doing to white civilization today. By supporting this evil occupation by Zionist jews, you support the two party tyranny of whites world wide by the flies in Washington.

      • Where to begin, Rome collapsed because its society became corrupt welfare state, its government bankrupted the state making it incapable of paying for its own defense. Once the rot set in, outsiders from the rest of euorpe immigrated, but they did little to the overall social stability of Rome, it was when non Europeans entered into citizenship and promoted their own peoples goals that Rome was weakened by the enemy of non assimilating masses from the outside. These in combination didn’t destroy Rome it was its own people, as it will be with Amerika. The roman citizen no longer cared about defending its own culture, its own race, they put economics ahead of racial cultural preservation. So as with Rome it is now with Amerika. Economies must be made to serve the volk, not the other way around if the want to exist for very long.

  12. In “homogenous” Europe whites have kill each other for centuries , English killed Frenchs, French killed Germans killed Russians and so on …

    • In a nation founded, built, and maintained by white males, what did they expect?

      Voluntary dispossession, population replacement, and soft ethnic cleansing of whites by everyone else to go unchallenged forever? When blacks revolt they riot and burn down their own communities, when whites revolt, its called a civil war or revolution.

  13. “The day is coming when we will rain nuclear fire on our racial enemies!”

    jajaja, poor boy , it sounds like a Tiranosaurius rex roaring and shouting , he thinks he wont became extinct…

    but the only way dinosaurs avoided extintion was becamin birds …..

    • What happens when compromise becomes impossible, when debts are so large they dwarf the combined wealth of entire nations. When costs continue to grow while returns continue to shrink? Its called collapse of everything we have known, a massive global financial collapse, and genocidal carnage raging across the planets surface, sweeping away the weak ignorant and stupid into mass graves.

      Christians have named this event, the final war, the war of Armageddon.

  14. “but the wall of universal reality approaches, and all will stand accountable for their actions, or in your case inaction. I hope i’m there to witness it for myself”

    poor boy , he is like first century christians that waited for Christ second coming to Earth …

    keep waiting boy, you better look for a chair to seat and wait

    • How will they fail?

      Consumerism is the necessary to the survival of the globalist financial system. One that needs an ever increasingly exponential growth of consumers, ever increasing production of waste, and labor is disenfranchised from employees as it is treated just like as any other commodity. Multinational conglomerates have become the apex, the highest form of both capitalism and communism. So from the start the seeds of their own destruction were sown.

      Our enemies lay the very foundation of their own demise. The very system they have built, pushes up against the natural forces of human nature. The paradoxical nature of their belief, is already busily at work smashing away the pillars of their civilization, the economy. Already the collapse is underway, one must open their eyes to see the truth, becoming aware of what is to come.

  15. yeah, yeah, and the world will end by 2012 as the Mayan people said…

    by the year 1000 AC everyone in Europe beleive the world was about to end…

    since then there has been hundreds of lunatics like you prophetising the end of the world,
    the final apocalipsis… and nothing happens…

    by the way in 1000 AC England, Ireland , northern France and so on were attacked by wild gangs from
    Scandinavia , the Vikings , those “uncivilized” warriors that brought chaos over christian north-western Europe,
    they were consider in the same way you consider Blacks an Latinos now … today Scandinavian countries
    are perhaps the most advanced societies in our world ….

    and the “yapa ” for you…

    explain this word form an article in your blog:

    ” Although blacks, at a rate of 13.5 per 1,000 live births, are more than twice as likely as whites to die as infants, the mortality rate for Hispanic infants, at 5.5 per 1,000 live births, is lower than the white rate of 5.7.”

    Why mortality rate for Hispanic infants is lower than the white rate of 5.7 ?????

  16. well liberal.. of ocurse !!!!, socialist? you have no idea what that means, anti-freedom?????? and about anti-white , froma a crazy paranoic like you all no-whites are anti-whites … keep on roraing you T rex ….

  17. The way you undestand Roman history is quite weird, first at all, a “Roman” in the Roman Empire was note necesarily a man born in Rome , not even in the “Latin League” not even a Roman or Latin by “blood””, St Paul was a Jew born in todays Turkey and was a Roman Citizen and he only knew Rome when he was an old man, as a first century Roman citizen he was a part of that diverse and multiethnic Empire that you misunderstand , it´s because the Romans were wise at integrating so diverse peoples that its empire could stand for such a long…this lesson is one that part of your leaders learnt..

    in the series “The Pacific” Basilone’s friend J.P. Morgan plays this straight: an Australian soldier tries to start a fight with him and Basilone about the fact the Marines are on liberty in Melbourne, dating Australian women and occupying the city, while disrespecting their recently deceased comrade Manny Rodriguez:

    J.P. Morgan: If it wasn’t for us, you’d be chugging sake with a pair of chopsticks up your ass, you stupid fuck!

    right, if the US could save the Aussies from the Japs it was because all those inmigrants that help the USA became a global power, without those millions Irish,Italians,Poles,Mexicans,etc the USA would be as weak as Australia was…
    and guess what, when all this inmigrants mostly “whites” from Europe arrived in the US they were also poor , they also had high crime rates and they also had problems integrating to the rest of society, Irish and Italians gangs spread all over the US and they also were blamed for the increasing violence of that times… but without all of those “Basilones” , “Manny Rodriguez” and so that gave their lives through the Pacific all US would end up “chugging sake with a pair of chopsticks up theirr ass” …

    and belive me , this blacks and hispanics you hate so much one day will say:

    If it wasn’t for us, you’d be down on your knees praying in a mosque, you stupid fuck!

    • Our Rulers Want the Third World People Here
      Filed under:

      by Ian Mosley

      America has gone from a 90 percent White nation in 1960 to about 66 percent White today. A demographic change this severe is no accident. It is a deliberate policy being imposed on us against the will of the White majority. There can no longer be any doubt: the people who rule us want to transform North America by importing millions of Third World people, both legal and illegal.

      The ultra-liberal Huffington Post reports: “Department of Justice officials made a surprise appearance at a community forum in Birmingham, Ala. on Thursday evening, encouraging residents to report civil rights violations in the wake of the state’s harsh new immigration law. The law, H.B. 56, requires police and some government officials to demand proof of legal status if they have reasonable suspicion a person may be in the country illegally. So far, it has driven many undocumented immigrants and Latino residents out of the state.”

      So the Feds want to undermine local efforts by police in Alabama to round up illegal aliens with the threat of law suits. What kind of lunatic asylum is this?

      The article goes on: “Thomas Perez, assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, and a handful of department staffers and attorneys attended the forum, which was hosted by the local branch of the NAACP and held at Glen Iris Elementary School. Perez and panelists from local immigrant advocacy groups sat at a table at the school, several feet from a banner that said ‘Celebrate Hispanic Heritage Month,’ and listened as men and women in the room voiced their fears about the law.”

      “Some immigrants said they were unsure how to get to work, because renewing their license plates would now require them to show immigration papers, and any traffic stop could now lead to an officer detecting them as undocumented. Others said they feared sending their children to school, now that public schools might ask their children about their legal status. Some asked whether they should flee the state, leaving their jobs and homes behind.”

      So officials of the federal government’s primary law enforcement agency sat in a room with a large number of law-breakers and advised them on how to continue to violate the law? Monty Python seems to be writing the script here.

      It is now clear that the United States government, both Republican and Democrat, has made a deliberate decision to alter the basic cultural and racial demographics of this country into a Third World morass. Why? What are they thinking? What is going on in these people’s minds?

      The Democrats obviously want these millions of people legalized so they can vote Democrat and ensure perpetual power for the Dems, keeping the last remaining elements of the White middle class around for a while so they can serve as a financial slave labor force, taxed at an ever-increasing income tax rate to pay for it all.

      But what happens when the last Whites die off or are carted off to state-run nursing homes and the golden goose is dead? What then? Has the ruling class thought of that? Have they thought of anything beyond their own immediate monetary and political advantage? America became a great and prosperous nation thanks to White inventors and highly productive White workers. Replacing the White population with a hodge-podge of Blacks, Latinos and other non-Whites will simply create another very large Third world nation, much like Indian or Indonesia. Does the upper class really want to raise their children in that sort of world?

      • Our Rulers Want the Third World People Here – TRUE

        “Why? What are they thinking? What is going on in these people’s minds?”

        ANSWER “The Democrats obviously want these millions ,bla bla,bla…” – WRONG , Only a stupid paranoid can think this way

        The RIGHT answer – “America has gone from a 90 percent White nation in 1960 to about 66 percent White today.” yes and by 1850 was 90 percent WASP , if the USA could become the major world power in the 20 century was due to the non WASP whites inmigrants arrived from 1850 till 1920 …without them USA it would be another Australia, the same wasp heritage but not enough people to build a superpower… to remain a major power in the 21 century
        the US needs inmigrants, U wasps thought chinese and indians were something like sub humans, now reluctantly accept chinese are not as stupid as you think before and u r making up your minds about India as it continues to develop…
        (in the IT & electronics world if your surname is Syalamaputra is just as good as if it were Yamamoto and best than being Hoffmeister …) the very soul of the USA has changed a lot , u r far away from that 90% wasp nation back in 1850 and u r far away from what the US will be by 2050 , u know that, you wasp had utterly failed in propagating your genes what reamins for U is to propagate your culture, as I try to explain to you with the example of the Roman Empire and St Paul the turkey jew that was as roman as one born in Rome from “pure” roman parents, the Romans made the trip from a tiny village in central Italy to the masters of three continents not by remaining “pure” and isolating from the rest of the world but to integrating all mediterranean cultures and peoples and giving the same rights they enjoy to the peoples they have conquered and doing so they changed themselves as well , the US has made a similar trip from the tiny 13 colonies till now…

        remember ,to remain a dinosaur and survive is not a choice, or you evolve and survive and then you are no longer a dinosaur or you choose extinction, your grand grand son wont be as white as you , that is something you can´t change from now, what you can change is the culture he will live in … perhaps he will be down on his knees prying in the mosque …
        this is something i guess you dont want for your grand grand son…nor i want for mine .

        it´s a time of civilizations clash, nor race clash , nor tribe clash… wake up to the 21 century.

      • Free Trade Or Fair Trade? 20 Reasons Why All Americans Should Be Against The Insane Trade Policies Of The Globalists

        It is absolutely amazing how many Americans are still convinced that more “free trade” is the answer to our economic problems. The truth is that there is a vast difference between “free trade” and “fair trade”, and in this article I will prove that all true conservatives and all true liberals should be completely against the insane trade policies of the federal government. Yes, we will always need to trade with other nations. Other nations make or have things that we need to trade for. Balanced trade relationships with other nations that have similar economies and that share similar values can be very beneficial. For example, our trading relationship with Canada, though not perfect, is generally beneficial to both sides. However, the United States also has dozens of trading relationships that are highly destructive to the U.S. economy. There are some predatory nations that are blatantly and openly cheating and everyone can see it. They are getting away with bloody murder and they are robbing us blind. The United States of America is being taken advantage of, and as a result thousands of good businesses are being destroyed and millions of good jobs are being lost. If you are an American and you are in favor of all of the unfair trade that is currently going on, then either you don’t know much about economics or you actually want to see the U.S. economy be destroyed.

        Congress has just passed new free trade agreements with South Korea, Colombia and Panama. The Obama administration has also made “the NAFTA of the Pacific” a very high priority.

        Obama says that all of these new trade pacts will create more U.S. jobs.

        Well, either Barack Obama is completely ignorant when it comes to economics or else he is lying.

        When we merge our economy with the economies of nations where wages are much lower, it is inevitable that large numbers of jobs are going to leave the high wage areas (where we live) and go to areas where wages are much lower.

        It also certainly does not help that we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world, that we burden our businesses with mountains of ridiculous regulations, and that we allow our “trade partners” to give their businesses a huge advantage by openly subsidizing them.

        The way that the system is set up now, nearly all U.S. businesses are at a massive, massive disadvantage. In general, the only businesses that can compete effectively in this environment are the giant corporations that can offshore huge portions of their operations.

        If you are a conservative, then there is no way that you should support our current trade policies. If you are a liberal, then there is no way that you should support our current trade policies.

        However, if you are a “George W. Bush Republican” or a “Clinton/Obama Democrat” that believes in globalism and the establishment of a one world economy as part of a “New World Order”, then it would make sense why you would want to see America deindustrialized and brought down to the level of the rest of the world.

        But if you are a true conservative or a true liberal, then the following are reasons why you should be horrified by our current trade policies….

        #1 Other Nations Openly Manipulate Their Currencies In Order To Gain A Significant Competitive Advantage

        For example, China keeps its currency set at a super low level relative to the U.S. dollar. By doing this, their products are far cheaper than U.S. products, and U.S. businesses cannot compete with them. This has resulted in the death of large numbers of U.S. businesses and the loss of millions of U.S. jobs.

        So just how bad is this problem? Well, a recent CNN article stated the following….

        Critics of China’s policy estimate that the yuan is still undervalued by 25% to 40%, even with the recent rises in value.

        The other day the U.S. Senate passed a bill that would impose tariffs on currency manipulators, and China has already retaliated, even though the bill has not become law yet and even though it almost certainly won’t.

        China plays hardball. They love the advantage that they are getting right now and they do not plan on losing it.

        #2 Millions Of Good Paying Jobs Have Been Shipped Overseas And They Are Never Coming Back

        Our politicians all try to tell us how good they are at creating jobs.

        But what is the truth?

        The truth is that a total of zero jobs were created last decade. The following is a quote from a recent article in Washington Monthly….

        “If any single number captures the state of the American economy over the last decade, it is zero. That was the net gain in jobs between 1999 and 2009—nada, nil, zip. By painful contrast, from the 1940s through the 1990s, recessions came and went, but no decade ended without at least a 20 percent increase in the number of jobs.”

        Last decade we opened up our trade with the rest of the world more than ever before. But instead of creating jobs it destroyed them. Our trade deficits exploded and unemployment skyrocketed.

        The Economic Policy Institute says that since 2001 America has lost approximately 2.8 million jobs due to our trade deficit with China alone.

        So if you are unemployed, that is probably what happened to the job you are supposed to have.

        It went overseas and it is not coming back.

        #3 America Is Being Deindustrialized At A Blistering Pace Thanks To Globalism

        The advocates of “free trade” cannot dispute the cold, hard facts….

        *The United States has lost an average of 50,000 manufacturing jobs per month since China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001.

        *The United States has lost a staggering 32 percent of its manufacturing jobs since the year 2000.

        *If you can believe it, more than 42,000 manufacturing facilities in the United States have been closed down since 2001.

        *Between December 2000 and December 2010, 38 percent of the manufacturing jobs in Ohio were lost, 42 percent of the manufacturing jobs in North Carolina were lost and 48 percent of the manufacturing jobs in Michigan were lost.

        *Back in 1970, 25 percent of all jobs in the United States were manufacturing jobs. Today, only 9 percent of the jobs in the United States are manufacturing jobs.

        #4 (For Conservatives) True Conservatives Should Be Horrified That We Are Being Taken Advantage Of By A Hardcore Communist Nation That Hates Us

        Ronald Reagan would have never engaged in “free trade” with the Soviet Union. The Communist Party is in complete control of China and while we may regard China as a “frenemy”, they really do believe that they will totally defeat us someday. If you doubt this, just read what the top generals and politicians in China are writing.

        It is so incredibly stupid what we are doing. Our trade relationship with China has enabled the largest communist economy in the world to go from third world status to superpower status. China is now the second largest economy in the world, and that would have never happened without our help.

        A lot of people like to talk about how “capitalist” China is becoming, but the truth is that they have never wavered from their pure belief in communism. 7 of the 10 largest corporations in China are owned by the government.

        A host of other corporations in China are very deeply subsidized by the government.

        U.S. businesses have a very hard time competing with foreign businesses that are deeply subsidized by their own national governments.

        It is called cheating, and we let other countries get away with it.

        So our businesses die and their products fill up our store shelves.

        #5 We Are Endangering Our National Security By Greatly Enriching Our Biggest Potential Enemies

        The biggest threats to the United States are not some goat herders hiding out in the caves of Afghanistan.

        The biggest threats to the United States are actually China and Russia.

        Conservatives are supposed to be the ones that are so concerned about national security. But instead of expressing concerns about China, they just keep pushing for more free trade.

        As a result, China has been able to become a true global military superpower.

        Someday we will deeply, deeply regret that.

        #6 China Brazenly Steals Technology From Anyone And Everyone That They Can

        China gets away with bloody murder when it comes to stealing technology. They will do it “legally” if they can, and they will do it in “other ways” if they have to.

        At this point, China has invented a whole host of ways to extract technology from any firms that wants to do business in China.

        The following is a short excerpt from a recent article on CNN….

        Foreign companies are often required to set-up joint ventures with Chinese firms before the can start doing business there. And China is instituting new “indigenous innovation” rules that U.S. companies say force them to transfer their own technology to their Chinese partners.

        #7 We Should Never Trade With Any Nation That Has A “One Child” Policy

        China has a very strict “one child policy” which should be absolutely abhorrent to all Americans.

        Most Americans have no idea what is really going on over in China. The following is from a recent article in the Epoch Times….

        Pregnant women lacking birth permits are hunted down like criminals by population planning police in China and forcibly aborted.

        All over China, mobile abortion vans are used to help enforce the one child policy. What women in China must endure is absolutely sickening, and this kind of behavior should never be accepted in the global community.

        But instead of penalizing China, we reward them for this behavior. They even get awards at the United Nations for it.

        Look, conservatives are supposed to be pro-life. If you are a social conservative, then it goes against everything that you believe to support trade with China.

        You can support trade with China if you want, but then don’t even try to call yourself “pro-life” again.

        We should never trade with any nation that has a “one child policy”. Such a policy is against everything that America is supposed to stand for.

        #8 Our Horrendous Trade Imbalance Has Allowed Other Nations To Accumulate Gigantic Amounts Of Our Debt

        Every month, we send much more money to the rest of the world than they send to us. One thing that those other nations are doing with all of that money is that they are buying up our debt.

        Our trade deficit with China has enabled them to accumulate nearly a trillion dollars of our debt. This gives them tremendous leverage over us and is a very serious threat to our economy and to our national security.

        So now China can threaten the stability of our financial system with just a phone call.

        #9 Globalist Trade Institutions Are A Serious Threat To Our National Sovereignty

        Today, the “global economy” is governed by globalist institutions such as the G20, the WTO, the IMF and the World Bank. The United States has given up huge amounts of national sovereignty to these organizations.

        If you are a true conservative, this should greatly disturb you.

        We don’t want faceless international bureaucrats telling us what our trade policies will be. But to a large degree that is the situation that we have gotten ourselves into.

        #10 Liberals (And All Americans) Are Supposed To Care About What Is Best For American Workers

        Millions of working class jobs have been shipped overseas, and yet Barack Obama just keeps pushing for more “free trade” agreements which will make the problem even worse.

        But instead of screaming bloody murder, liberals keep on supporting Obama.

        It’s disgusting.

        The truth is that the Obama administration actually says that there are certain kinds of jobs that we “don’t want” in the United States.

        For example, the following is what U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk recently told Tim Robertson of the Huffington Post about the Obama administration’s attitude toward keeping manufacturing jobs in America….

        Let’s increase our competitiveness… the reality is about half of our imports, our trade deficit is because of how much oil [we import], so you take that out of the equation, you look at what percentage of it are things that frankly, we don’t want to make in America, you know, cheaper products, low-skill jobs that frankly college kids that are graduating from, you know, UC Cal and Hastings [don’t want], but what we do want is to capture those next generation jobs and build on our investments in our young people, our education infrastructure.

        So where is the outrage?

        Is anyone even awake out there?

        Even the construction of many of our roads and bridges is being outsourced to China. Just check out the following quote from a recent ABC News article….

        In New York there is a $400 million renovation project on the Alexander Hamilton Bridge.

        In California, there is a $7.2 billion project to rebuild the Bay Bridge connecting San Francisco and Oakland.

        In Alaska, there is a proposal for a $190 million bridge project.

        These projects sound like steps in the right direction, but much of the work is going to Chinese government-owned firms.

        “When we subsidize jobs in China, we’re not creating any wealth in the United States,” said Scott Paul, executive director for the Alliance for American Manufacturing.

        Liberals are supposed to be working to defend the working class.

        So why won’t they openly go after Obama on these issues?

        Our unfair trade agreements have put American workers in direct competition for jobs with the cheapest labor on the globe.

        Until this is fixed, you will continue to hear a “great sucking sound” as millions of jobs continue to leave the United States and go to places where labor is ten to twenty times cheaper.

        It is insanity what we are doing. We allow big corporations to send their manufacturing offshore and also to ship their products back into the United States for free.

        Where in that equation is good news for the American worker?

        #11 Liberals (And All Americans) Should Be Horrified By The Exploitation Of Slave Labor Around The Globe

        All over the globe, workers toil in nightmarish conditions for slave labor pay just so that Americans can feed their addiction for cheap foreign products.

        Big corporations and collectivist governments such as China are getting unbelievably rich by exploiting this slave labor pool.

        Get educated about this and find out the truth. It just might totally change the way that you view “free trade”.

        #12 Liberals (And All Americans) Should Be Horrified By The Damage To The Environment Our Trade Relationships Cause

        Liberals are supposed to deeply care about the environment. But our trade relationship with nations on the other side of the globe result in thousands of factories and businesses leaving our shores and ending up in countries where the environmental regulations are not nearly as strict. In fact, nations such as China are a complete and total environmental nightmare at this point. If liberals truly cared about the environment they would want to keep factories and businesses here.

        #13 Very Dangerous Products Continue To Flood Into This Country From Overseas

        Isn’t product safety supposed to be a big thing for liberals? Today, a huge percentage of the products we buy are made outside the United States far from the watchful eyes of our regulatory agencies. Over the past couple of years, there has been headline after headline about dangerous products made in China. The following is just one example of this: 10 Babies Die Mysteriously At Fort Bragg: Toxic Drywall From China Used In Base Homes The Culprit?

        #14 The Globalization Of The Economy Causes Income Inequality To Grow

        By paying slave labor wages to workers overseas, the big corporations are becoming very wealthy. At the same time, that means that there are much fewer jobs for average working class Americans, and wages for the jobs that remain are pushed down because of increased competition for jobs.

        So the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

        If you don’t believe that income inequality in the United States has become a huge problem, just check out this chart.

        #15 Because Of All Of The Cheating And All Of The Predatory Behavior That Is Going On, Our Trade Relationships Have Become Incredibly Imbalanced

        Today, the United States spends about 4 dollars on goods and services from China for every one dollar that China spends on goods and services from the United States.

        So how is that even close to “fair”?

        Our store shelves are absolutely packed with stuff from China.

        In 2010, the number one U.S. export to China was “scrap and trash”.

        Even in high technology products we are being destroyed. In 2002, the United States had a trade deficit in “advanced technology products” of $16 billion with the rest of the world. In 2010, that number skyrocketed to $82 billion.

        #16 Our Gigantic Trade Deficit Is Destroying Our National Wealth

        The United States has had a negative trade balance every single year since 1976, and since that time the United States has run a total trade deficit of more than 7.5 trillion dollars with the rest of the world.

        Our gigantic trade deficits are making us poorer as a nation each and every month. Each year, somewhere around half a trillion dollars of our national wealth gets transferred out of the United States. That half a trillion dollars could be going to support U.S. businesses and U.S. jobs. Taxes could be paid on that half a trillion dollars. But instead it leaves the country and makes other nations wealthier.

        #17 The Globalization Of The Economy Has Caused Unemployment In The United States To Explode

        If you gathered together all of the workers that are “officially” unemployed in the United States today, they would constitute the 68th largest country in the world.

        #18 As Our Cities Are Deindustrialized, Many Of Them Are Being Transformed Into Absolute Hellholes

        The other day, I wrote the following about what is happening in cities and towns across the United States….

        All across America there are cities and towns that were once prosperous and beautiful that are being transformed into absolute hellholes. The scars left by the long-term economic decline of the United States are getting deeper and more gruesome.

        #19 Without Good Jobs, An Increasing Number Of Americans Are Having To Turn To Government Assistance

        We are going to support U.S. workers one way or another. Either we are going to provide them with good jobs, or we are going to let their jobs be shipped out of the country and we are going to pay for the government to feed and house them.

        Today, there are more than 45 million Americans on food stamps. That number has gone up by more than 70 percent since 2007. Almost every single month we set a new all-time record for the number of people being fed by the federal government.

        #20 If Nothing Is Done, All Of This Is Going To Get A Lot Worse

        According to Professor Alan Blinder of Princeton University, 40 million more U.S. jobs could be sent offshore over the next two decades.

        Can you imagine what America is going to look like if that happens?


        Okay, so in light of all of that information, can anyone out there defend the current “free trade” policies of the federal government?

  18. From

    What does it mean to be ‘White in America’? We are going to explore this in a long essay for another Web site, but have no problem in stating the thesis: racial violence against white people is hardly a cause for concern nor justification for coverage by the media, for it is just another example of the privilege of being white; white people shouldn’t worry about the changing demographics in America, for the joyous day when white people are just another minority group is the moment when a peaceful Utopia will occur.

    In summation, white people have no voice in their continued dispossession that they have the privilege of funding, and have the honor of bearing the brunt of the primary racial assaults (Black-on-white attacks being the most prolific) transpiring in this nation that the media admittedly will not cover.

  19. Hello there $author. Pretty good post. I simply found your website and wanted to tell you that I have actually undoubtedly enjoyed checking your site. Anyway I’ll be signing up into the rss feed and I also expect you post once again soon.

  20. Hi there, I discovered your blog by means of Google at the same time as looking for a related topic, your website came up, it seems to be good. I have added to my favourites|added to bookmarks.

  21. Wow! This can be one particular of the most helpful blogs We’ve ever arrive across on this subject. Basically Magnificent. I’m also an expert in this topic therefore I can understand your hard work.

  22. Its such as you read my mind! You seem to understand so much approximately this, such as you wrote the book in it or something. I feel that you simply can do with a few p.c. to drive the message house a little bit, but instead of that, that is fantastic blog. A fantastic read. I will certainly be back.

  23. The REAL problem in America is, and always has been, the Blacks! They are an inferior race and culture, and unfortunately, too many of them live up to the
    stereotyple of being, dumb, violent, irresponsible, and lazy! Hispanics overall are much more intelligent and hard working, as well as law abiding. The biggest mistake that was ever made was the slave trade, which resulted in bringing an inferior group of people to this country. We are now paying a HUGE price for that mistake!!

    • The real problem is not the blacks. It’s the libertards who insist on bringing into all white nations dark people. Dark people as a rule have lower intelligence and higher levels of testosterone. This makes their men violent and their women very mean. To expect dark people to act intelligently and compassionately is fantasy. They arent capable of these qualities. Its so simple really. There is no amount of knowledge you could bring to dark people to make them behave sensibly. The problem is in their DNA. Mother nature is a racist.


  25. Pingback: Treason in the US Government | Economic & Multicultural Terrorism

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s