Make your own free website on
Issue Thirteen Winter 2000


Our Objectives
Issue 23 Summer 2002-03
Issue 22 Spring 2002
Issue 21 Winter 2002
Issue Twenty Autumn 2002
Issue Nineteen Summer 2001-02
Issue Eighteen Spring 2001
Issue Seventeen Winter 2001
Issue Sixteen Autumn 2001
Issue Fifteen Summer 2000-01
Issue Fourteen Spring 2000
Issue Thirteen Winter 2000
Issue Twelve Autumn 2000

A few articles selected from our Winter 2000 issue.


The main topic of this editorial is the government's announcement that immigration will increase by up to 15,000. This will take immigration from 82,000 settlers and refugees a year to 97,000 a year and thats not counting the 5,000 concessional places for those sponsored by state governments or the change of status cases. The final figure could blow out to over 120,000 a year.

An important question is where are we going to get these migrants? The population of Britain is growing at a rate of 0.2% a year and most of Europe has as low or lower growth rates. Some have reached zero population growth and their numbers will soon go into decline. This compares to Australia with a population growing at around 1.2% a year, about half of which is due to natural increase. Even if we took in a large proportion of white Zimbabweans we are hardly likely to attract many other whites.

No doubt we will take in more Asians but this could be a problem to the least racially conscious of us. Most of the successful countries of Asia have sharply dropping birth rates and are reaching the low population growth levels of Europe. None of these countries look like following Australia's lead and accepting a flood of foreign races and then sending us their best people.

What we are likely to see is a bigger influx of Third World people. This will lead to an increase in just about every social problem you can think of. Many of these problems are already evident. It was not so long a go that migrants would arrive in Australia and go straight on the dole. At one stage Turkish immigrants had an unemployment rate of 55%. Even now Turks, Lebanese and Vietnamese figure disproportionately high in the unemployment figures. The last census showed that migrants from China, Vietnam, Lebanon and Turkey tend to be earning below average incomes. Worse still are the crime rates for certain groups. Lebanese, Turks, Vietnamese and Pacific Islanders have imprisonment rates considerably higher than the Australian born.

Things could be worse of course. In the United States, blacks constitute 12% of the population but account for over 60% of the robberies and 57% of the murders. Rape statistics are horrendous and half of the victims of black rapists are white women. In fact in most inter-racial crime the assailant is black and the victim white. High crime rates among blacks are not a unique American problem. Practically everywhere in the world that has a population of black African descent the problem is the same. Blacks make up 10% of the population of London but are involved in 50% of the crime. Fortunately Australia currently has only a very small black African population but it is growing and we can expect black crime to grow as well.

It is sometimes claimed that Asian countries are noted for low levels of crime. Most don't reach the level of blacks but there is one notable exception. The Philippines has a homicide rate roughly twenty times that of Australia. The Philippines, notably is one country that has failed to curb its birth rate and no doubt this will put pressure on many of its citizens to migrate. Incidentally, the Republic of Ireland has a homicide rate about one third that of Australia. No Asian country has such a low rate.

Over the last three decades the Asian-Middle Eastern component in Australias population has grown at a rate roughly thirty times that of the white European component. This in itself is an attack on the nature of Australian society. The society that attracted millions of migrants to these shores resulted from white, and predominantly Anglo-Celtic, culture and white genes. The current racial engineering going on in this country could end up killing the goose that laid the golden egg.

The average intelligence levels of many Third World populations are a cause for concern. Test scores in India show an average I.Q. about 14 points below the average for whites. In black African countries it is about 30 points lower than in whites. The claim that Asians tend to have high I.Q. is exaggerated by sampling error and the drawing of samples from low birth-rate north east Asian populations and not the less successful south east Asian populations.

As Australia's living standards fall further behind other Western nations we will have even more trouble attracting quality migrants and will import more of the dregs of the Third World. Social and economic problems will escalate, as we become more like the Third World and less like the highly successful Western nation that our antecedents built. The sensible solution is to drastically lower our immigration intake or cease immigration altogether.


The question of mandatory sentencing has focussed attention on crime. Surprisingly statistics in this area are not all bad.

According to the web site of the Australian Bureau of Statistics the murder rate actually dropped from 1996 to 1998. In 1996 it was 1.7 per 100,000 of population but by 1998 it had dropped to 1.5. Unfortunately during the same period the number of manslaughter and attempted murder cases increased. If we include these crimes in the total homicide rate it actually rose slightly. There were notable increases in other crimes too including assault, kidnapping & abduction, armed and unarmed robbery, and unlawful entry.

If we go back further we find that the tendency for most crime to increase has been with us for some years. The exception is murder, which reached a high of 1.8 per 100,000 of population in 1995 and actually dropped in 1996, the year that Martin Bryant went amuck at Port Arthur.

The ABS site also gives figures on Aboriginal imprisonment. The proportion of Aboriginal prisoners compared to the total prison population is actually lower in the Northern Territory than it is in any state apart from Tasmania. The proportion of Aboriginals in prison in comparison to their number in the community is lower in the NT than it is in any state other than Tasmania and South Australia. This is despite the Territorys Mandatory sentencing law.

The ever politically incorrect Piers Akerman weighed into the debate on mandatory sentencing with an article in the Sunday Telegraph (26/3/00). He points out that Johnno, the so-called pencil thief actually had a string of 28 prior offences including the theft of $7850 from a local store. Jamie, the biscuit thief also had a long record of offences behind him. Remember the mandatory sentence only kicks in after a third offence and other diversionary schemes have not worked.

Akerman had more to say on Aborigines in another article in the Sunday Telegraph of the 23/4/00. He points out that suicide is 70% higher among Aboriginal men that the rest of the nation, murder rates are seven to eight times higher and deaths in car accidents are more than four times higher. Health and infant mortality records also show equally dismal figures. Akerman points out that the situation is not going to be improved by ideological nonsense like sorry days or land rights.

As Miranda Devine pointed out (DT 5/4/00) a lot more practical things have started. This includes the government spending $63 million on counselling and reunion for the stolen generation, $360 million for Aboriginal housing and infrastructure, $40 million for ATSIC and the Army to provide water, sewerage, power, roads and airstrips for remote communities, $185 million on indigenous health and an extra $16.3 million on indigenous education programs. Unfortunately in an accompanying article she told of the case of a 22 month old Aboriginal child that had been found in a house in Surry Hills inhabited by drunks, drug addicts and a prostitute. The child had been stabbed, and was naked, bruised and bitten. To make things worse, because the child was Aboriginal, her case had previously been handed over to Gullama Aboriginal Services Centre by the Department of Community Services. Fortunately DOCS has now relieved Gullama of its child welfare responsibilities.


In addition to what was said in our editorial we have gleaned quite a few statistics and other details about Australias population and immigration levels. These come from the press, the ABS Internet site and ABS publications. Some unfortunately are contradictory but hopefully readers will be able to make some sense of them anyway.

Figures from the ABS net site show Australias population at the end of June 1997 as 18,532,200. It had increased by 1.21% over the previous twelve months. The increase was made up of a net permanent and long-term movement of 94,400, category jumpers totalling 1,400 and natural increase of 125,800,000, giving a total increase in numbers of 221,500,000. This was slightly down on the figure for the previous twelve months of 238,900,000 due to a drop in immigration that was not offset by a slight increase in the birth rate.

Year Book Australia 1998 gives some international comparisons of rates of growth for the twelve months ended 30 June 1996. Australia's rate was 1.4%, which was similar to the USA (1.00%), Indonesia (1.5%) and China (1.00%), well below Malaysia (2.1%) and New Guinea (2.3%), but well above Britain (0.2%), Germany (0.7%) and Japan (0.2%). The rate of growth for the world was estimated to be 1.5%. Our population is projected to grow to 22.9 million by 2021 and 26.1 million by 2051.

An ABS publication, Australian Demographic Statistics 3101.0 September 1999, gives some figures for 1998. The figure for net permanent and long-term overseas movement is 88,781 and the figure for category jumping is 22,819. In the same year the figure for settler arrivals was 81,065. Places of birth are given for these settlers. The main ones are Oceania (19,952), Europe and the former USSR (20,338), the Middle East (5,748), Southeast Asia (9,817), Northeast Asia (10,480), Southern Asia (5,075) and Africa (7,075). No details are given on the origins of category jumpers. A figure of 84,143 is given for the number of permanent settler arrivals in the financial year 1998-1999 (which obviously does not include change of category cases).

An article in the Sydney Morning Herald (1/3/00) advised that the ABS had given a figure of 117,335 for net overseas migration during the previous financial year. This was the highest number since 1989-90 and an increase of 41,000 on the previous year. The article says 84,100 people migrated to Australia permanently last year, an increase of 9% on the previous (ie 1997-98) financial year. (This figure is almost the same as in the ABS publication quoted above and presumably was rounded to the nearest hundred.) Of these 22.2% were New Zealanders, 10.4% from the UK, 7% were born in China, 6% from South Africa, 3.9% from the Philippines, and 3.5% from former Yugoslavia.

An article in The Australian (11-12/3/00) by Richard McGregor details the changing focus in recent year from family migration to skilled migration. In 1995-96 those under the family category made up almost 70% of migrants while the skilled were barely 30%. By 1998-99 the figures were below 50% for the family category and over 50% for the skilled group. The article also claims that unauthorised arrivals by air during 1998-99 outnumbered those coming by boat by two to one. Phillip Ruddock is quoted as saying skilled migrants have unemployment rates half the national average but family stream migrants have a rate twice the average.

Obviously from the above it can be seen that obtaining accurate numbers on immigration is very difficult. The matter is made more confusing by the different categories of migrants, the change of status cases (category jumping) and non-visaed migrants. It is also obvious that the government did not stick to its proposed number of 82,000 immigrants last financial year and no doubt will exceed this quota in 1999-2000.

On the brighter side it looks as though the government is doing more to vet possible over-stayers among temporary visitors (SMH 19/5/00). There has been an increase in the number of visa applications refused. The ethnic lobby has whinged because of a list of nationalities used to target the high-risk groups. The most over-stayers come from the UK and the US but these countries are not considered high-risk. The actual proportion of visitors from these countries who over-stay is quite small, its about 0.1% for the UK visitors. The non-return rate for Pakistanis is between 8 and 26% depending on the age group. Its estimated that 4.9% of visitors from Tonga, 3.2% from Colombia and 2.9% from Macedonia no longer have valid visas.


In a recent issue of People and Place (Vol.8 No.1 2000) Bob Birrell looks at intermarriage in Australia. Using information developed by Charles Price he claims that 60% of Australians are ethnically mixed while 20% have at least four district ancestries. Most children of migrants marry outside their ethnic group hence making Australia a sort of melting pot of cultures. Exactly whether only similar groups are inter-marrying (eg German and English) or whether diverse groups are also inter-marrying is not stated.

There is some evidence that religious differences deter the level of intermixing. There is not a great deal of out-marriage among Jews, Moslems and Greek Orthodox. Only 14.1% of Jews, 5.9% of Muslims and 14.1% of Greek Orthodox who were married were married to someone from another religion.

Birrell however is more concerned with intermixing between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. He points out that in the United States over 90% of married blacks are married to other blacks. This is not the case with Australia's Aborigines.

The Aboriginal population increased by 33% between 1991 and 1996. Part of the reason for the big increase in Aboriginal numbers has been intermixing and the tendency to classify anyone with some Aboriginal ancestry as Indigenous. In 1986, 46% of married (legal or de facto) Aboriginals were married to a non-Aboriginal. By 1996 this figure had gone up to 64%. More often than not it is an Aboriginal female that enters into a mixed marriage.

About 40% of Aboriginal families with children are single parent families. Of those that are not, 35% have an Aboriginal mother and non-Aboriginal father, while 29.2% have an Aboriginal father and non-Aboriginal mother. In only 35.8% are both parents Aboriginal.

In 1998, 32.1% of Aboriginal births were to couples where both were black. In 41.7% only the mother was Aboriginal and in 17.1% only the father. In 9.1% the race of one parent was not recorded. In other words about two-thirds of Aboriginal children are being born to mixed race couples.

It would appear that, regardless of what is going on in the political sphere, reconciliation is proceeding apace between the sheets. Assimilation is continuing, both culturally and biologically. This also means that "Indigenous" Australians are increasing in number but decreasing in their amount of black ancestry. This will make any calls for special or separate treatment and benefits seem even sillier.

In an article in the same issue of People and Place, Lyle Allan writes on ethnic branch stacking in the Victorian ALP. He claims that, despite attempts by the National Executive to stop it, ethnic branch stacking is still rife. People recruited by the "stackers" play an important part in the preselection of candidates.

According to Allan, "Party factions have been clear winners from ethnic recruitment. They have of necessity rewarded members of particular ethnic groups. The factions themselves are in large part responsible for the substantial representation of non-Anglo male ethnics among Labor parliamentarians and municipal Councillors endorsed under the ALP banner in Victoria."


"The failure of current civil rights leaders like Jesse Jackson, Kwesi Mfume, and Julian Bond to condemn black racists and black outrages committed against other ethnic communities has been striking in its contrast to the demands these same leaders make on the consciences of whites, not to mention the moral example set by King when he dissociated his movement from the racist preachings of Malcolm X.

This moral abdication of black civil rights leaders is integrally related to, if not fully explained by, their close association with a radical left whose anti-white hatred is a by-product of its anti-Americanism. The attitudes of this left toward blacks are so patronizing that one disillusioned activist was inspired to write a book about them entitled 'Liberal Racism'. As a result of this alliance, ideological hatred of whites is now an expanding industry not only in the African-American community, but among white 'liberals' in elite educational institutions as well. Harvards prestigious W.E.B. Du-Bois African-American Studies Institute, for example, provided an academic platform for lecturer Noel Ignatiev to launch 'Whiteness Studies', an academic field promoting the idea that 'whiteness' is a 'social construct' that is oppressive and must be 'abolished'.

The magazine 'Race Traitor' is the theoretical organ of the academic cult, emblazoned with the motto: 'treason to Whiteness is Loyalty to Humanity'. This is hardly a new theme on the left, echoing, as it does, Susan Sontags perverse claim that 'the white race is the cancer of history'..Consequently, 'the key to solving the social problems of our age is to abolish the white race'. This new racism expresses itself in slogans lifted right out of the radical 1960s. According to the Whiteness Studies revolutionaries, 'the abolition of whiteness' must be accompanied 'by any means necessary'. To underscore that this slogan means exactly what it says, the editors of 'Race Traitor' have explicitly embraced the military strategy of American neo-Nazis and the militia movement in calling for a John Brown-style insurrection that would trigger a second American civil war and destroy the symbolic (and oppressive) order of whiteness.

Unlike anti-black attitudes, which are universally decried and would trigger the expulsion of their purveyors from any liberal institution in America, this racism is not only permitted but encouraged, especially in the academic culture responsible for the moral and intellectual education of tomorrows elites."

David Horowitz, "HATING WHITEY" Spence Publishing Company, Dallas 1999

" 'Racism' is a Janus word whose evaluative face predominates; calling someone or something 'racist' automatically condemns him or it. In fact, the fierce emotions accompanying 'racism' suggest that its core meaning is 'grossly improper race consciousness'. Yet at the same time 'racism"' is freely used of an enormous range of beliefs, attitudes and practices, many of which seem in no way grossly improper, or improper at all. That is why the word serves only to obscure.

The chief problem the word creates is that of begged questions. Precisely because things racist are bad by definition, it is tempting to try to force condemnation of an attitude or practice by labeling it 'racist', when in point of logic the attitude or practice in question must first be shown to be bad by some independent standard before it can be so labeled. In legal language, 'racism' is conclusory, and cannot be used as a premise. Yet, because incessant denunciations of 'racism' has made the epithet unchallengeable, that is often just how it is used.

Natural Janus-words, which inherit their evaluative force from a social consensus about the value of their referents, do not lend themselves to this kind of abuse. Since everyone agrees and is known to agree about what sort of butter is fit to eat, no one would try to condemn perfectly fresh butter by calling it 'rancid'. But 'racism' as currently used did not inherit its negative force from a universal dislike of its referent. It might once have denoted Hitlerian racial beliefs while also encoding rejection of those beliefs and when it did, less egregious racial offences were called 'bigotry' or 'prejudice'. In that usage, racism was a systematic theory, this theory entailed certain attitudes and modes of behavior, but those attitudes and behaviors did not by themselves constitute racism. By contrast, today's 'racism' was coined for the purpose of condemnation (in part summoning up emotions evoked by the old word), and for the condemnation of anything belonging to almost any category. I trust the reader will agree that all he can conclude when he hears 'racist' employed today is that its referent is something to do with race that the speaker dislikes. 'Racism' is not so much uttered as shouted; its conversational function is to shut conversation down. This torrent of unpleasantness saturates whatever the word is attached to, however arbitrary the attachment. What has created an aversion to 'racism' is less disapproval of what the word denotes than a wish to avoid anti-racist wrath."

Michael Levin, "WHY RACE MATTERS" Praeger, Westport 1997



"YOUR RIGHTS 2000" by John Bennett, Published by John Bennett for the ACLU (Price $5.95)


John Bennett, President of the Australian Civil Liberties Union has produced the twenty-sixth edition of "Your Rights". These booklets have been produced since 1974, a new edition coming out every year or so.

"Your Rights 2000" gives advice on many legal matters ranging from dealing with neighbours to consumer rights, family law, buying a house and tenants rights. There is even a short guide to the GST.

In this latest edition there is a section dealing with the tribulations of David Irving, Fred Toben and Konrad Kalejs. Kalejs was alleged to have participated in war crimes in Latvia during World War II, although at the moment insufficient evidence has been found to have him tried. Nevertheless the Australian government is negotiating an extradition treaty with the Latvian government. Other sections of the booklet deal with the republic debate, whistle blowers, freedom of speech, and the dangers of racial vilification legislation.

"Your Rights 2000" is a handy and readable guide to the law. If you need a copy and have trouble obtaining a copy locally, contact ACLU at PO Box 1137, Carlton, Vic 3053.


"PAVED WITH GOOD INTENTIONS : The Failure of Race Relations in Contemporary America" by Jared Taylor, Carroll and Graf Publishers, New York 1992

On the 3 March, 1991 police in the American city of Los Angeles noticed a driver speeding and driving his vehicle recklessly. They pursued the driver and when he was finally stopped he further resisted arrest, spat at police and acted erratically. The drivers name was Rodney King, a black parolee just out of prison who was both drunk and affected by drugs. After King hit one of the police officers they tried to pacify him with a stun gun, but when this failed they forced him to the ground with their nightsticks. King refused to stay on the ground and the police clubbed him again. King suffered minor injuries but these came mainly from him rolling on the ground. He still struggled with medics as he was taken to the hospital.

The incident would probably not come to further notice except for two things. Rodney King was black and the four policemen who used their nightsticks were reported as white (in actual fact three were white and one was Hispanic). Worse still, the incidents, or at least eighty seconds of it were caught on video. Part of the video, that showing King being beaten, not the part showing him resisting arrest, was shown on television and the cry of racism resounded around the world. At the time King did not claim race had anything to do with it and two black friends who were in the car at the time did not claim to have been assaulted. Nevertheless, the four policemen were charged with assault and in 1992 they came up for trial. The jury did not find the men guilty but the media seemed to think otherwise and so did the black population of Los Angeles. One of the worst riots in Americas history followed; 5,300 buildings were burned, 2,300 people were injured and 58 died.

A number of killings were overtly racist murders of whites by blacks. In fact nine white men and one white woman died in the riots in Los Angeles. Whites were also attacked in other American cities. With the exception of the attack on truck driver, Reginald Denny, none of these acts drew much in the way of media attention. This was in stark contrast to the exposure given to the arrest of Rodney King.

These double standards in the media form the subject of one chapter of Jared Taylors book. The book however takes a broader look at race relations in America and the failure that followed the civil rights movement of the sixties.

Statistics draw a bleak picture of Americas black community. From 1983 to 1988 the homicide rate for young white males hardly changed but the rate for young black males rose by two thirds. At about the time that Taylor wrote his book, homicide had become the leading cause of death for black men under age 45. Murder had lowered the average life expectancy of blacks in Harlem. Homicide and imprisonment rates across America were about ten times higher for blacks than for whites.

The problems were not restricted to crime rates. From 1985 to 1990 syphilis rates for black men rose by 126% and by 231% for black women. Infant mortality rates for blacks were twice those of whites, black children were four times as likely as whites to be living in poverty, and illegitimacy rates were more than three times as high for blacks than for whites. Black household incomes were two thirds that of white households and blacks were four times more likely to be on welfare. And this was after more than two decades of affirmative action.

Despite the obvious failure, thinking about race had become a closed book and outdated assumptions were rarely questioned. Racism was still pointed out as the reason for black inadequacies and those who questioned current dogma were vilified.

If we look at the success of immigrant blacks in America the charge of racism does not hold. While American blacks earn about 60% of the average income, black migrants from the West Indies earn about 94%. Their children actually earn higher incomes than the average American does. If racism was so entrenched how could this happen?

Further evidence against the existence of entrenched white racism is the success of many Asians in America. Black racism on the other hand is another matter. Koreans have opened successful grocery stores in both black and white neighbourhoods. At one stage Koreans owned three times as many businesses as did blacks in Harlems main commercial avenue. The Koreans tended to be welcome in white neighbourhoods but in black neighbourhoods they suffered harassment, boycotts and crime. In Washington, D.C. Korean owned shops were firebombed and in Los Angeles 1,839 Korean owned businesses were burned or looted during the 1992 riots. Needless to say if whites had done a fraction of what the blacks did the U.S. would be in convulsions.

Part of the black prejudice against Asians may have been due to their having succeeded without affirmative action. Very shortly after civil rights legislation was enacted came calls for affirmative action in employment. These often took the form of set asides whereby a quota of blacks were employed even though they scored to low on aptitude tests to succeed in open competition with whites. Similar quotes were introduced for entry into tertiary institutions. Blacks tended to score considerably lower in college entrance tests hence smart whites often missed out when not-so-smart blacks were accepted. Not surprisingly many blacks dropped out while those that didnt tended to get the poorest grades.

Another form of affirmative action involved bussing school children to schools well away from where they lived to ensure "racial balance" in the classroom. This led to quite a bit of opposition and had very little support among either whites or blacks. A large proportion of white people took their children out of the public school system and sent them to private schools. As the public system deteriorated many blacks did the same. Meanwhile black children still fell well behind whites in academic performance.

Affirmative action has cost the American taxpayer billions of dollars. It has often involved incompetent blacks gaining and keeping jobs while whites, often from poor backgrounds, had to miss out. Overall this must have had a serious negative effect on the American economy. Furthermore, civil rights and affirmative action failed to stop the growth of a large black underclass. A black middle class has developed but growing more rapidly was a class of impoverished blacks characterised by high welfare dependency, high dropout rates, drug problems and an incredible level of crime. At one stage a young black man in Michigan was 770 times more likely to be murdered than a male of similar age in Austria. In 1986, black children were five times more likely to be killed than white children. Poor blacks had a noticeably higher birth rate than middle class blacks.

While most violent crime was intra-racial, where it was inter-racial (ie involving blacks and whites) the blacks were more often the assailants and the white was the victim. Some of the worst examples of this problem actually occur in prisons where black prisoners inflict a high rate of assault and rape on white prisoners. Many young offenders were gang raped during their first night in prison. Not that blacks had it all their own way. At one stage a fifth of all murders in U.S. prisons involved whites killing blacks who had raped them.

As Taylor demonstrates well, policies based on white guilt and reverse racism failed terribly. The book was written in 1992 but things dont appear to have improved since that time. Americas murder rate has dropped a little but the proportion of murders committed by blacks seems to have increased. Blacks still commit a disproportionate amount of other crimes including rape. America has a long way to go before its race problems are solved.


"THE REAL AMERICAN DILEMMA : Race, Immigration and the Future of America", edited by Jared Taylor, published by New Century Foundation, Virginia 1998

"The Real American Dilemma" is based on talks and papers from the 1998 conference of American Renaissance. It contains material delivered by people brave enough to talk on the controversial subject of race. These people included controversial Canadian psychologist Philippe Rushton, philosophy professor Michael Levin, Wayne Lutton and Glayde Whitney.

Perhaps the best way to illustrate the contents of the book is by a few quotes from the book itself. The first one is from the introduction by Jared Taylor:

".If the United States has a problem of real, visceral racial hatred, it is not one of whites hating blacks, but of blacks hating whites.

.It is borne out in the cold statistics of inter-racial crime. When blacks commit violence they choose white victims more than half the time, which means there is more black-on-white crime than black-on-black. Violent white offenders choose black victims only 2.5 percent of the time. For every black mugged by a white, 24 whites are mugged by a black, and for every black woman raped by a white man, 200 white women are raped by black men. On a per capita basis, blacks commit four to five times as many of what are officially classified as "hate" crimes as whites. Statistics like these carry an alarming message: There may be violent consequences when society promotes hostility towards whites by insisting that "racism" is the cause of black failure."

In a chapter called "The American Dilemma in World Perspective" Philippe Rushton writes:

"In 1944, the Swedish economist Gunnar Myrdal wrote a momentous book on race relations called "An American Dilemma". In it, Myrdal blamed the underachievement of black people on prejudice and discrimination by white people. Political support for Myrdals analysis swept away hereditarian hypotheses and helped outlaw segregation in the 1954 Supreme Court Decision of Brown v Board of Education. Myrdals ideas also fueled the 1964 Civil Rights Act leading to school busing and affirmative action and to the War on Poverty, including Head Start programs. Whatever benefits may have resulted from this transformation of American society, blacks and whites have not equalized in IQ scores

Although the historical record shows an African cultural disadvantage has existed, relative to Europeans and Asians, ever since Europeans first made contact over 2,000 years ago, it was possible to argue, until recently, that "reasonable doubt" existed about the genetic basis of black/white differences. Today, however, the evidence overwhelmingly favors the view that genes are required to explain the data. Surveys of experts in psychological testing and behavioral genetics show that most judge the race differences in IQ to be genetic in origin.

Recognizing that the pattern in achievement, crime, and family organization is not unique to the United States but occurs internationally shows the need for a more general (genetic-evolutionary) theory that the particularized explanations typically provided. The behavioral profile of blacks in America is like those for blacks in Africa and the Caribbean and so cannot be due to "white racism" or other cultural features unique to the U.S. Similarly, whites and Asians in America behave like their counterparts elsewhere in the world. Traditional environmental explanations based on Asian family strength and African poverty are themselves explained by an evolutionary perspective."

Jared Taylor writes in "Race and Nation":

".there are prison blocks in Texas and California that are in a constant state of lock down because whenever the prisoners are allowed to leave their cells the blacks and Hispanics go at each others throats. Racial segregation would, of course, solve this problem but no one dares propose it.

But to return to the present, in the United States today, there is not a drop of public sympathy for whites who are being displaced by non-whites. Were supposed to feel morally superior to anyone who escapes to the suburbs when the neighborhood turns black or Mexican. The theory is that only ignorant bigots do this, but the fact is that people with money never have to face the problem. As someone once put it, the purpose of a college education is to give people the right attitudes about minorities and the means to live as far away from them as possible

Of course, the idea that racial diversity is a strength is so obviously stupid that only very intelligent people could have thought it up. There is not one multi-racial anything in America that doesnt suffer from racial friction. Our country has established a gigantic, convoluted system of laws, diversity commissions, racial watchdog groups, EEO officers, and outreach committees as part of a huge, clanking mechanism to regulate and try to control racial diversity something that was supposed to be a great source of strength but that has turned out to be horribly volatile and difficult to manage. People are so exhausted by this alleged source of strength that they run from it at the first chance they get. That is why families, churches, clubs, and private parties. are so racially homogenous..

The worlds most successful exporting nations are Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and even China, none of which has even heard of "diversity"..


"Racial diversity," therefore, is a one way street. Only whites are ever expected to practice it or benefit from it. The ultimate insult is to expect whites to celebrate diversity. This is nothing less than asking them to rejoice in their own capitulation their dwindling numbers and declining influence. And the astonishing thing is that so many whites have been browbeaten into at least pretending to be happy about this.

..The same process of dispossession is at work in Europe, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. The racial picture is always the same. Whites have built successful, desirable societies the most successful and desirable in the history of the world. Desperate people from failed, non-white societies are willing to risk nearly everything. for a chance to live in these societies.

But this means that whites face a unique crisis. They are only about fifteen percent of the worlds population and are having only about seven percent of the babies. If they let non-whites continue to move into their countries, they will be swept away. Failure to act will ensure oblivion. No other racial group faces this prospect."

Michael Levin has contributed a chapter called, "Recent Fallacies in Discussions of Race", the first paragraph reads:

"It is an embarrassment to defenders of the intellectual parity of the races that all the evidence goes against them. Black children fall behind white children in school from the earliest grades. No black society has ever produced a written language or mathematics, while whites and Asians have done so many times. Whites consistently outscore blacks on IQ scores."


While "The Real American Dilemma" is written largely by and for Americans, much that it contains will resonate with the thoughts of Australians. Unfortunately the book is not readily available in this country. While we do not, as yet, have a large Negro population the way our immigration is going we can expect the proportion of non-whites in this country to grow and the problems we now face will accelerate. Hopefully some sanity will come into our ideas on race and the future of Australia. America on the other hand may be too close to the brink to be retrieved even with the bravery of Jared Taylor and his associates.


"THE LUCIFER PRINCIPLE : A Scientific Expedition in the Forces of History" by Howard Bloom, Allen and Unwin, St Leonards 1995 (ISBN 1-86373-984-X)


Howard Bloom uses biology and a knowledge of both animal and human behaviour to explain history and society. He exposes a complex of natural rules that can frighten and appal us. Mother Nature not only creates but also destroys. Death, pain and fury are all part of Natures plan and we are just the pawns in her scheme.

Take for instance the concept of a pecking order, so called because it is so easily observed in poultry. A hierarchy is developed with the bird at the top getting the largest share of the food and the one at the bottom not only getting the least food but also suffering the most pecks. Obviously it is healthier to be at the top of the pecking order regardless of whether you are bird, primate or human.

Observations of chimpanzee behaviour revealed that fights to be top chimp can be extremely violent, the losers often end up dead. Chimpanzees, which as a species are genetically very similar to humans, are also very tribal. The ethnic rivalries and conflict we see among humans is mirrored in chimpanzee behaviour. Groups of chimpanzees engage in violent warfare, sometimes taken to the point of genocide.

Human culture is of course more complex than chimpanzee society. Human groups can be based on race, nationality, religion, political belief or social class. The quest for dominance still goes on, although the violence may be less obvious than among animals in the jungle. Despite what appears an innate desire for human violence Bloom is optimistic. He points out that if modern humans killed each other at the same rate as their Stone Age ancestors did, we would wipe out 700 million people each generation.

Blooms book is an interesting combination of ideas and disciplines, and an original look at human history. It is readable and highly recommended.

Enter supporting content here