The federal government is seeking applicants who are mentally ill, mentally retarded or both to work as lawyers in the Justice Department. Specifically, a job announcement for “up to 10 experienced attorneys for the position of Trial Attorney in the Voting Section in Washington, D.C.” contains the following language:

The Civil Rights Division encourages qualified applicants with targeted disabilities to apply. Targeted disabilities are deafness, blindness, missing extremities, partial or complete paralysis, convulsive disorder, mental retardation, mental illness, severe distortion of limbs and/or spine. Applicants who meet the qualification requirements and are able to perform the essential functions of the position with or without reasonable accommodation are encouraged to identify targeted disabilities in response to the questions in the Avue application system seeking that information.

Overlawyered.com, February 4, 2010

Perhaps they should adopt a sassy black child.

“No, We Can’t: The Impossibility of a Black British Head of State”
Peter Tatchell
The Huffington Post, January 20, 2010

As President Barack Obama celebrates his first year in the Oval Office, it is clear that the vast majority of the US public are relaxed and comfortable about having an African American head of state. Many dispute his policies but his race is no longer really an issue — which is how it should be.

In Britain, however, we can only dream of a black head of state. It isn’t going to happen any time soon because the UK system is rigged against a black leader. Black and Asian Britons are effectively barred by the system of hereditary monarchy.

For the foreseeable future, as in centuries past, no African, Asian, Arab, Caribbean or Latino Briton is eligible to assume role of British head of state.

Under Britain’s constitutional system, the head of state is the monarch – at present Queen Elizabeth II, head of the House of Windsor. The position of monarch and head of state is inherited through the Windsor family line. The Windsors are white and only their descendants are eligible to be monarch and British head of state. The result is a de facto race bar. . . . For more swill, click here.

National Public Radio has always struck me as a highly-polished jewel in the crown of hard-left, Jewish-dominated media. On my drive home from work, I listen to Robert Siegel, a quintessential liberal Jewish male, and Michele Norris, a quintessential liberal Black female, co-hosts of All Things Considered, the nightly news reflections program.

All Things Considered is a laughable title, given that the only things NPR will consider are jazz, the Holocaust, and the plight of the yellow-breasted Amazonian snail darter. The voices ooze with calm contempt for the White suckers whose tax dollars pay their salaries — a uniquely twisted form of White dispossession.

I once called it Not So Fresh Air.

So I had a chuckle when I heard about the recent firing of Greg Peppers, a long-time Black news producer for NPR, and the reaction it caused. Reportedly, Peppers had to be escorted from the building.

A Black media blogger, Richard Prince, reported the firing, and the reaction of the National Association of Black Journalists.

Neither Prince nor the NABJ, of course, is actually interested in whether the firing was justified. Any time a Black person is fired, by their standards, it’s because of “racism.”

I personally have no idea. If you do, send me an email.

NPR’s response is predictably apologetic about not having enough non-Whites, NPR President Vivian Schiller stating, “I couldn’t agree more that NPR must increase the diversity of its staff — particularly in management and editorial.”

Surprisingly, the response pointedly notes that listenership for NPR’s flagship programs is made up of a much lower percentage of Blacks and Latinos (5% and 4% respectively) than their percentage of the population — even though these groups constitute 18% and 25% of the entire radio audience.

It’s not clear why they point this out, but the most obvious interpretation is that they are suggesting that NPR management ought to reflect the ethnic composition of its listenership, not the population at large.

This would be rather obviously illiberal for such a far left outfit. Imagine what that might do for, say, sports management where one could argue that the management of the National Basketball Association should reflect the audience, not the percentage of Black players. Networks that appeal primarily to Whites would be able to have White management. Companies that sold products mainly to White people wouldn’t have to worry about diversity quotas.

Sounds like leftist Whites (and Jews) in the media are starting to get worried about all that diversity they are pushing on the rest of us.

I have only speculation about Peppers’ firing. In my journalism experience, Blacks were erratic and profoundly incompetent. The notorious Jayson Blair was less of an aberration from Blacks than Stephen Glass was from Jews. (In general, Jews — hostility to Whites aside — are amazingly hard-working journalists). The Black journalists I came across made mistakes, didn’t put in much effort, and generally put out lousy work-product. Inappropriate behavior wasn’t uncommon.

One of their arguments was that only Blacks could properly cover Blacks, an argument that, if consistency reigned, would mean that only Whites can properly cover Whites.

As recounted in books like Coloring the News: How Political Correctness Has Corrupted American Journalism, loading the paper with Blacks often meant that criminal Black politicians, like Washington, D.C. mayor Marion Barry, got cover-ups instead of coverage.

Yet Blacks demanded to be anywhere and everywhere, and could rely on the bullying of racial interest groups like the NABJ to get their way. Blacks would be promoted over much harder-working — and much more talented — Whites on a regular basis.

All of which created a particularly sticky problem for American journalism, dedicated to multiculturalism and liberalism as it is. It desperately wants to hammer Whites and elevate Blacks, but it ran into the problem of actually executing this plan internally because of Black incompetence.

NPR, I’m sure, would love to have dozens of smart and talented Black reporters and producers. But they don’t, for the simple reason that the talent pool isn’t there. And NPR is not about to squander its reputation as a left-wing media powerhouse in order to indulge the demands of Blacks. Viewed more broadly, NPR is a deadlier weapon against Whites when controlled by smart liberal Jews than incompetent, erratic Blacks.

I have this fantasy (which I do not intend to act upon) of breaking in to the NPR studios in the middle of a story about Afghanistan troop levels, grabbing the microphone, and reading some key passages from The Israel Lobby.

It’ll never happen.

But it’s comforting to know that the racial reality NPR hides from listeners can be found right there in its own building — the raucous and uncomfortable clash between Blacks and Whites (or Jews) clamoring down the stairway, soundproofed out of the studio where Michele Norris’ warm voice smothers us with notions of multiracial harmony. It’s enough to make me want to make my pledge.

All my life, said Voltaire, I have had but one prayer: “O Lord, make my enemies look ridiculous. And God granted it.”

In awarding the Nobel Prize for Peace to Barack Obama, the Nobel committee has just made itself look ridiculous.

Consider. Though they had lead roles in ending a Cold War lasting half a century, between a nuclear-armed Soviet Empire and the West, neither Ronald Reagan nor John Paul II ever got a Nobel Prize.

In 1987, Reagan negotiated the greatest arms reduction treaty in modern time, the INF agreement removing all Soviet SS-20s and all U.S. Pershing and cruise missiles from Europe.

Other than hosting the “Beer Summit” between Sgt. James Crowley of the Cambridge Police and Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates, what has Obama done to compare with what these statesmen did to make ours a more peaceful and better world?

What has Obama accomplished to compare with what the other sitting presidents to receive the Nobel Prize accomplished? . . . Read the whole article.

Let’s celebrate diversity! In Division 1-A college football, 19 of the top 20 players in rushing yards are—as sports fans expect—black. Yet, the #1 rusher is a white guy.

Toby Gerhart, Stanford’s 235-pound tailback, has piled up 650 yards on the ground to power lowly Stanford to a 4-1 overall record and a Pac-10 leading 3-0 conference mark. He had 134 yards on the ground in Stanford’s victory Saturday over 4-0 UCLA, which had been ranked 9th in the country in defense against the run. The previous week Gerhart had rushed for 200 yards in beating Washington, conqueror of USC.

Gerhart has been the most valuable running back in college football so far this season because Stanford doesn’t have much else going for it. Every defense knows Gerhart will be coming at them, but they haven’t stopped him yet.

Still, while surprising as Gerhart’s success may seem to casual sports fans (in the NFL, for example, whites have started only a handful of games at tailback all decade), it can’t be shocking to the young man himself. Gerhart set Stanford’s rushing record last with 1,136 yards and 15 touchdowns. He had played big school prep football in Southern California’s Inland Empire, where he passed Dallas Cowboy Hall of Famer Emmitt Smith for 3rd place on the all-time national high school rushing rankings with 9,662 career yards.

Of course, there are many white running backs who shine in high school. At the high school level, the game remains much less racially stratified by position. State champions tend to be Catholic schools or exurban public schools with mostly white players, some with star black running backs, some even without. (Football is an expensive and complicated business, and inner city public schools tend to be longer on talent than on resources and organization.) . . . Read the Whole Story.

At the college level, however, white players in nontraditional positions are found mostly at either remote colleges, such as Wyoming, or at academically elite schools that take their admissions requirements fairly seriously, such as the service academies. Stanford and Northwestern both start 15 whites out of 22. Gerhart, for example, scored 1810 out of 2400 on the three-part SAT—not enough to get him into Stanford as a non-athlete but a lot higher than most college tailbacks.

Caste Football has the numbers of white starters for each Division 1-A team for 2009. Some of the blackest teams tend to be private colleges willing to walk close to the edge of NCAA recruiting trouble, such asUSC and Miami. . . . Read the Whole Article.

Editor’s Note: See our own J. B. Cash’s “The Racial Caste System in Sports.”

Affirmative Action is one such “Potemkin” program.

Advocates claim Affirmative Action remedies racial inequality: specifically, it addresses the fact that blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians are “under-represented” at the top of American society (in higher education, the professions, the upper classes, etc.) and “over-represented” at the bottom of society (in menial and manual jobs, slums, prisons, etc.)

They claim that all ethnic groups would be “represented” at all levels of society proportionate to their percentage of the population, were it not for insidious “discrimination” on the part of whites. If blacks comprise twelve percent of the population, then they should also comprise twelve percent of the doctors, lawyers, and university professors and no more than twelve percent of the murderers, rapists, and thieves. Any discrepancy is blamed on white racism. Whites, we are asked to believe, exclude blacks from colleges simply because they are black, and they put blacks in prison simply because they are black. And the same goes for Hispanics and American Indians.

While I do not deny that some such discrimination is real, massive evidence suggests it does not explain all, or even most, of the problems of blacks and other racial groups.

First of all, Congress banned overt discrimination in the sixties. But it soon became clear that black achievement would not rise on its own. Thus Affirmative Action, i.e., overt discrimination in favor of blacks, was adopted.

Second, racial discrimination never prevented Jews, Chinese, Japanese, and East Indians from being “over-represented” at the top of American society and “under-represented” at the bottom. (And conversely, no matter how much money and effort are poured into Affirmative Action, Head Start, and other programs, they are not sufficient to prevent blacks and other racial groups from failing.)

Third, the discrimination theory simply ignores genetic explanations of inequality. A vast array of scientific evidence indicates that, on average, blacks are genetically less intelligent and more prone to violence than whites. So even if there were no anti-black discrimination at all, blacks would still be “under-represented” in colleges and “over-represented” in prisons.

Egalitarians ignore genetic explanations because genes can’t be changed (at least with present technology) but social institutions can—assuming we give the government enough money and power to meddle in our lives. If genetic inequality is recognized as the chief cause of social inequality, then the “equality industry”—and its legions of bureaucrats, mollycoddlers, excuse-makers, brainwashers, and bullies—would be out of business.

Thus egalitarians go to absurd lengths to avoid genetic explanations. They continually add new epicycles to the vast, creaking apparatus of social constructionism. One week we hear that low black achievement results from low teacher expectations. (Teachers tend to expect high achievement from Asians—and some Asians claim this constitutes a form of oppression.) The next week they blame black underachievement on the fact that black parents talk to their children less than white parents. (In California, the state even has an advertising campaign to persuade blacks to talk to their children.) The week after, they blame “micronutrient” deficiencies. (Your tax dollars are going to rectify that problem as well.)

But let’s just accept the egalitarian argument for a minute. Let’s forget notions of procedural and legal equality. Let’s forget the social costs of not training the best possible people to be doctors and lawyers. Let’s just accept that the races are by nature equal. Let’s accept that the causes of inequality are entirely social, and that these can be changed. Affirmative Action still does not follow, because Affirmative Action still does not change any of the alleged causes of inequality. Even by egalitarian standards, it is a failure.

When a black with an SAT score of 900 is admitted to college instead of a hite with an SAT score of 1,200, we have not created a world free of the white ill will that allegedly keeps blacks down. In fact, Affirmative Action creates more White ill will. Affirmative Action does not create a world in which black children get all the “micronutrients” and parental care and high expectations and quality education that white children get, so that blacks and whites can compete for college admissions on a level playing field. No, all Affirmative Action creates is a world that looks like the causes of inequality have been eliminated, a world of Potemkin equality.

Faced with the phoniness of Affirmative Action, egalitarians tell us that, by equalizing social outcomes, we will eventually equalize the factors that cause inequality. By changing the effect, we will change the cause. Nay, by faking the effect, we will change the cause. In short, they appeal to magic.

But wouldn’t the artificial prosperity of Affirmative Action beneficiaries help their children to close the achievement gap? There is no evidence to support this theory. Even in identical environments, blacks and Hispanics consistently perform poorer on average than whites and Asians. The children of wealthy blacks still perform less well than white children of all social classes.

Affirmative Action can create only the illusion of equality. Thus the higher echelons of our society are becoming a Potemkin village increasingly populated by non-whites who, regardless of their real merits, have been promoted a rung or two above those merits because of their race. Television and the movies portray a fantasy world filled with dumb blondes and black doctors, lawyers, judges, inventors, and computer geniuses. But behind the façade hides a vast, squalid reality of false promises, false hopes, and outright falsehoods about race—all premised on the refusal to accept racial inequality as a natural fact.

I’ve seen this kind of talk amongst race realists before.  Asians suffer from affirmative action and NAM [non-Asian minority -- Ed.] crime, do well in school, and as an economically successful group are losers under any economic redistributionist regime.

Unfortunately, besides the mentioned article there’s no indication that liberals dislike Asians or vice versa.  The clearest way to see this is by looking at voting patterns.  In both 2004 and 2008 the Democratic presidential candidate won the Asian vote by about two to one.  In 1996 61% of California Asians voted against ending affirmative action.

How to explain this supposed paradox?   Interestingly, Asians as a group supported George H. W. Bush and Bob Dole during their losing campaigns of 1992 and 1996 respectively.  When you realize that voting is at least as much about making a statement as it is rational self interest these patterns make a lot more sense.

Before we can understand Asians, we have to take a look at American political culture in general and how it’s changed in just the last two decades.  For a few generations now, the elites had certain ideas about the direction they wanted the country to go.  The only problem was that the voters wouldn’t cooperate.  They came to hate the masses more and more.  But immigration continued, and without ever consciously planning it in recent years the liberals have found themselves as a group in permanent control no longer needing the consent of the majority they detest.  This disgust that they’ve built up has been given free reign. We now have New York Times articles explicitly celebrating the death of White America.  This would’ve been unthinkable in 1990.

I’ve seen the anti-white cultural trends in shows and comedians I grew up with.  In the late 90s I enjoyed watching comedian Bill Maher on his TV show Politically Incorrect.  He would describe himself as a libertarian and voted Dole in 1996.  I don’t remember him talking much about race, but his views on sex were certainly un-PC.  Today, he’s a standard liberal and foams at the mouth when talking about conservative whites.  The Simpsons used to be a great show, with actual characters that you cared about.  Today, Homer, Lisa, Mr. Burns, and the rest have morphed into political representations of what the writers like or dislike.

To be a Republican in 2008 doesn’t mean the same thing that it did in 1992.  Back then, voting with the conservative party said something about your economic views.  Today, it’s taking a cultural stand. The most prestigious institutions in society have heaped so much mockery and scorn on traditionalist whites that people of other races have gotten the hint.  White America has fought for the freedom of Korea and Vietnam, to feed Somalians, bombed Serbia and Sudan, liberated Kuwait, helped bring down the Soviet Union, and tried to build democracy in Haiti, Afghanistan, and Iraq, but didn’t lift a finger to stop themselves from being on their way to becoming a hated minority in their own country.  Who would want to be associated with these losers?

What’s true for the Asian masses holds especially true for the elites.  Particularly disturbing is the invention of the term “People of Color” (we should know by now to be on the guard for any new terminology or victim groups liberals create.  How long was it from the time “homophobia” came into the English language to when it became one of the ultimate sins?).  It was bad enough when blacks organized as blacks, Hispanic as Hispanics, etc. without whites being allowed to do the same.  Now, nonwhites aren’t just organizing based on what they are, but what they’re not (white).  Pat Buchanan wrote about one such group before the 2008 election:

On Sunday, 6,800 folks showed in Chicago for the 2008 quadrennial convention of UNITY: Journalists of Color. McCain declined an invitation. Bush had been booed at UNITY 2004, while John Kerry got a standing ovation. Featured speaker: Barack. Major concern of the journalists running the show: that their colleagues would lift the roof off the McCormick Place convention center when Barack arrived.

Said Luis Villareal, a producer of NBC’s “Dateline,” “I don’t think it’s such a bad thing if for 15 minutes you take off your reporter hat and respond to (Obama) as a human being at an event where you’re surrounded by people of color and you’re here for a united cause.”

And exactly what “cause” might the 10,000 members of UNITY be united behind? The hiring and advancement of journalists of color in all major news organizations in America.

For, as its emblem depicts, UNITY comprises four alliances: the Asian American Journalists Association, the National Association of Hispanic Journalists, the Native American Journalists Association and the National Association of Black Journalists.

“A New Journalism for a Changing World” is UNITY’s motto.

And the title of its July 22 press release reveals what the “new journalism” is all about. “Aim of New UNITY Initiative Is More Diversity in Top Media Management.”

“With more than 50 percent of the population projected to be people of color in less than a generation,” says UNITY President Karen Lincoln Michel, “the nation’s news organizations continue to generate dismal diversity numbers year after year. . . . ‘Ten by 2010′ is a significant step in the right direction.”

UNITY is demanding that 10 major U.S. news organizations, by mid-2010, elevate to a senior management position in the newsroom at least one journalist of color and provide “customized training to help prepare them.”

Notice how by 2004 being an educated PoC meant booing the Republican and cheering the Democrat.  And if businesses are forced to hire more nonwhites, and any nonwhites will do, what group can expect to benefit the most if not the one with the highest IQ?  Jared Taylor has written on Asians getting into the racial spoils system and calling for quotas in areas where they’re underrepresented.  If they’re allowed to partake in identity politics, we can’t expect them to resist.

Having been to college, educated Asians don’t only vote for liberal ideas but believe in them.  I used to be less afraid of bringing up HBD in front of Orientals than other minorities because the data flatters them.  Most, however, have been more shocked than the typical white college graduate. (Interestingly Arabs have been the most accepting.  I’ve never talked to an East Indian about these issues, but there seem to be a lot of them in the HBD blogosphere.)  This itself if evidence of HBD.  Asians are natural conformists.  They internalize PC dogma better than anyone else.  In their anti-whiteness they are more white than whites.

Asian American studies programs now exist at a handful of major universities and seek to institutionalize the cult of victimhood. The following is from the Wikipedia article entitled “Model Minority.”

While some Asian Americans hold pride in the model minority image, the consensus in academia and the field of Asian American studies is that the Model Minority Myth is detrimental to the Asian Pacific American (APA) community, used to justify the exclusion of needy APA communities in the distribution of assistance programs, public and private, and understate or slight the achievements of APA individuals. Communities that are especially affected are South East Asian communities, e.g. Cambodian-American, and the Pacific Islander community, e.g. persons with origins in Guam and Micronesia; these communities have much lower education rates and higher poverty rates. Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Filipino and Indian Americans are over twice as likely to graduate with a bachelor’s degree than most members of other Asian-American groups. The Model Minority myth relies on the aggregation of success indicators, hiding the plight of recent first-generation immigrants under the high success rate of more established Asian communities.

Big surprise there.  An academic field of study that grew out of identity politics reaches politically correct consensuses.  Wikipedia will also teach you that all those who have studied “white privilege” agree that it exists.

If Asians have been too successful to be victims, they’ll associate themselves with less intelligent races in order to play the game.  In the backwards world of academia, failure brings prestige.  I thought the concept of Asian/Pacific Islander only existed as a census option but apparently it’s now a “community.”   Isn’t it strange how people who share nothing in common (genes, language, history, SES) are seeing themselves as a bloc (at least in academia) based on how some white government bureaucrats decided to divide up the races decades ago?  The Carter administration (or whoever) probably just thought that API sounded better than “miscellaneous.” (The Census Bureau in recent years has split Asians and PIs up.  The term still exists though, and there’s even a Pacific Asian Heritage Month.)

If the People of Color needs leadership, Asians are naturals to fill the role.  Take a look at the blog Racialicious, a meeting ground for spouters of every PC cliché there is.  The founder is half-white and half-Asian.  She saw that there was a market for anti-white propaganda, that the competition for the top slots wasn’t all that impressive, and she was intelligent enough to take advantage.  In the future, we can expect to see more members of the “model minority” doing the same.

From HBD Books, August 7, 2009

The brouhaha over the arrest of Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr. has had an effect that has proved to be surprising to those with a vested interest in the antiwhite racial status quo in America. Gates was arrested after screaming abuse at a police officer in Cambridge, Massachusetts, sparking a heated controversy which drew the attentions of no less an august personage than the president himself. The spectacle was indeed a “teachable moment,” as Barack Obama arrogantly proclaimed, though not in the sense that he meant it. The “moment” taught white people that they don’t have to meekly accept being racially vilified as they have been for decades, and that “diversity,” far from being about fairness and equality, is a code word for institutionalized contempt of European Americans. In the aftermath of “Gatesgate” Obama’s once stellar approval ratings took the first of what will become many plunges. According to a Gallup Poll, Obama’s “support among Whites and Hispanics also declined, with only 48 percent of white Americans approving of the president’s performance–that marks the first time in July that a majority of white Americans did not support the president.”

Obama was elected largely because liberal whites in states with comparatively low black populations enjoyed a kind of self-righteous pleasure in conforming to the blanket “mainstream media” support of Obama and decades of compounded ideological white guilt to vote for the man who would become “America’s first black president.” The same kind of affirmative action that put Obama in the Oval Office is the same kind of thinking that gave Henry Louis Gates, Jr. his job at Harvard. But the kind of hubris such gifts instill in many blacks covers the reality that whites, in exchange for their largess, expect something in return, namely that the blacks they help will reciprocate by at least paying lip service to the ideals of “equality” and “tolerance” which everyone politely pretends to agree is the achievable goal. Instead, more and more whites see that what they get is usually demands for more, couched in defiant and abusive language. With a black man now holding the “highest office in the land,” that’s not going to go over as well as it once did at Starbucks and Whole Foods.

This is starting to dawn on Obama and his handlers, who still seem to think that the fawning press reflects real-world opinion and that their social engineering has worked. For the first time a “black leader” actually backpedaled from demagogic histrionics, with Obama attempting to “clarify” his earlier remark about the Cambridge Police Department’s arrest of the belligerent Gates being “stupid.” In the face of widespread outcry from police and citizens alike, the Obama “reversal,” however tame, was significant, especially since there are indications that Obama had actually prepared the comment earlier and expected the question from his pet press corps.

The protected status of nonwhites has spawned a parallel world that exists artificially and thrives in intentional environments like college campuses and the halls of power, bounded by speech codes, hate laws, hiring quotas, a complacent press…and a flash mob once in a while on those rare occasions when whites get out of line. When exposed to the real world, however, the artificiality is often seen as the hoax it is. In the virtual world, though, Professor Gates himself is lionized as “America’s greatest living black scholar,” not because he competes in an objective field like, say, physics, but because he rules the racial scholarship roost as Director of the W. E. B. Du Bois Institute for African and African American Research at Harvard, itself a sheltered incubator that has swapped the political correctness of its Puritan founders for a new religion of “diversity” and “tolerance,” albeit with a fervor that would have made those Puritans seem liberal in comparison. Gates is well-known, alright…to viewers of the federal government’s taxpayer funded party-line Public Broadcasting Network, which is about as objective as the Brezhnev-era’s Izvestia. On PBS Gates presented two elaborate PBS miniseries called African American Lives which delve deeply into Gates’ racial obsessions with the well worn myths of white perfidy and black greatness. His numerous books populate library shelves and required-course reading lists, and dying liberal dead-tree media like The Nation snap his one-note articles up.

Cocooned in a climate where anything less than abject praise for Gates and his ideology is not only unthinkable but potentially fatal to careers and reputations, it is no surprise that Gates unleashed an abusive, uncontrolled and irrational rant at Officer Crowley, the Cambridge cop who would arrest him. Apart from making a snide remark about Crowley’s mother and scorn for Crowley’s role as a white, institutionally racist oppressor of “black men in America,” Gates had a point when he screamed at Crowley that he didn’t “know who you’re messing with!” Gates’ supercilious reaction was the end result of decades of artificial entitlement masquerading as achievement and carrying the whole might of the state behind it.

While the Old Media could be depended on to protect the status quo, that pesky internet upset the show again, with The Smoking Gun site releasing the police report online. The document was in need to some heavy PBS edits, painting Gates as an arrogant racist bully seeking to Mau-Mau this white cop who had evidently forgotten his lowly station and dared to question the great Harvard Professor, Doctor Henry Louis Gates, Jr. Unexpectedly, the Cambridge police, brass as well as beat cops like a black officer who witnessed the Gates bust and vowed that “I won’t vote for Obama again,” closed ranks behind Crowley. So the hounding of the poor woman whose call to the police over what she thought was a break-in initiated the incident, began. Press attention was relentless, and numerous threats of violence caused her to fear for her safety and to go into hiding. . . . Read the rest of the article.

The following quotes are taken from a sensationalistic paperback exposé of the nation’s capital, Washington Confidential by Jack Lait and Lee Mortimer, published more than half a century ago (New York: Dell, 1951):

No Negro is ever fired from a government job if it can possibly be helped. When necessary to cut down a staff, the whites go first . . . .

If they can’t do their work, whites are hired to do it for them. An instance, typical of thousands, occurred in the Bureau of the Census, where five Negro women were so inefficient that their department head requested permission to discharge them. His immediate superior almost had a stroke . . . .

The upshot of the matter was that the section head was told to keep the five colored women and to hire five white girls to do the work over for them, on the night shift . . . . (pp. 41-42)

There is a daily [newspaper] in Washington (as there are others in principal cities) which never identifies a Negro as such unless he wins a Nobel prize or is selected the rookie of the year . . . . (p.46)

Of every four felonies and other breaches of the law [committed in the District] in the grades where a defendant has the right of trial by jury, more than three are committed by Negroes . . . .

Arrests for Part Two felonies (less serious) and important misdemeanors showed an even higher incidence of Negro crime.

Estimating the Negro population at 50 percent, this means half the people commit 85 percent of all the crimes . . . . (pp. 46-47)

We have indicated that many white women-especially government workers-are receptive to sexual attentions of Negro men. But the comparative ease with which a black man can get a white girl, even a so-called respectable one, does not seem to deter colored men from committing rape on women of their own race and whites . . . . (p. 53)

One of [organized crime's] favorite tactics is to buy in the open market enough stock of a company to create a nuisance value. They organize a minority stockholders’ committee and dig up proxies. They have no real intention of trying to get control, but some time before the stockholders’ meeting, they approach the management and offer to sell it at a premium, usually three or four times above the market listing. This is cold blackmail . . . . (p. 179)

Wives of high officials, members of Congress, and society dames . . . fork over sums to astrologers, palmists, psychics, clairvoyants, and other miracle mongers. Many government officials furtively consult fortune-fakers . . . . (p. 278).

Now how about some change we can believe in?

Charles Bolden

I don’t think my previous column could have been more timely. Titled On the Visual Displacement of the White Race, it appeared May 15. One week later, major news media reported that President Obama had chosen a former astronaut and Marine general to lead NASA.

This move certainly bolsters my point about the displacement of White men in positions that combine excellence in both technical innovation and high status: aeronautics. I showed an ad that Microsoft ran in The Atlantic Monthly — two pages with an unmistakably clear message: White males need not apply to future rocket programs, as engineers or astronauts. The future in this field—as the photo shows—belongs to the usual multicultural hopefuls—women, Hispanics, Asians and most particularly Black males.

The nominee for NASA administrator is Charles Bolden, who has four shuttle missions under his belt, including two as mission commander.

Interestingly, Obama chose a White woman as Deputy NASA Administrator Lori Garver, blocking out any White men at the very top of America’s space program. This comes in stark contrast to the historical make-up of all levels of NASA going back to the 1950s. The Gemini and Apollo programs were essentially White male preserves, from the Mission Control Specialists to the astronauts themselves. . . . More

There seems to be no slaking Western man’s thirst for spectator sports. The “bread and circuses” of the Roman Empire seem almost trivial by comparison. American culture is awash in worship of sports teams and professional athletes. Even those who excel in activities that feature very little “athleticism,” like golf and motor sports, achieve the kind of fame and fortune once reserved for kings.

Every newspaper in the country devotes a large section to daily sporting events. Every local television newscast devotes a sizable chunk of valuable airtime to sports coverage. There are entire TV networks devoted wholly to sports: ESPN, ESPN 2, the Golf Channel, the NFL (National Football League) Network, the NHL (National Hockey League) Network, and the Tennis Channel. There are pay-per-view sports events on the major cable networks such as Home Box Office and Showtime. Fox has regional sports channels in many of its larger markets. Nearly every sizable radio market has one or two stations that feature 100 percent sports coverage. From the NFL to NASCAR (National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing), from the NBA (National Basketball Association) to the PGA (Professional Golfers Association), each and every sports niche is covered in minute detail.

The average citizen is likely to know the names, salaries, performance records, and even the personal lives of local and national sports celebrities, but not those of his local political representatives. Sports figures who have little bearing on the day-to-day existence of fans are followed closely, while the politicians who wield real power operate in relative obscurity.

The same is true in Europe and other parts of the Western world. The games may differ: there is soccer rather than football, cricket rather than baseball, Grand Prix racing rather than NASCAR. But the attitudes are the same.

* * *

In themselves, sports are not a bad thing. First and foremost, they are fun, and fun needs no justification. It is part of what makes life livable. Beyond that, playing sports can build up one’s body, character, and community. Spectator sports can also build community and provide inspiring images of individual and collective excellence. A desire to be “on the winning team,” or to cheer it on, is undoubtedly part of the human psyche, if not human DNA. In excess, of course, sports can become bad, but that is true of everything. Excess is a particular danger today, because of affluence and leisure in amounts unheard of in past societies.

But the real problem with sports today is who controls them and what they are used for. The popularity of sports makes them an irresistible target of those who manipulate popular culture to shape society.

Professional and major college sports are controlled by the same people who control nearly all the levers of power in our society: the same people who control the nightly news, the daily newspaper, most internet sites, the schools, government, religion, the movies and television, and publishing. Nearly to a man, they think alike on matters of morality and public policy. It’s no surprise of course, since they are all educated by the same system, a system that has formulated a rigid dogma and turned it into the ruling paradigm. They are either blissfully unaware or enthusiastically supportive of that particular way of thinking. Since they are handsomely rewarded for submission and severely punished if they stray from the program, cooperation is ensured and dissent squelched. Thus the sporting events and coverage produced by today’s system are inevitably stamped with the same ideology as the rest of its products.

There are various names for the ideology of the elite. Some call it “political correctness.” Others call it “Cultural Marxism.” But the labels don’t matter as long as one understands what is going on: the ruling elites are waging a cultural and racial war against Western values, Western civilization, and particularly Western man, i.e., the white man. In the name of the feel-good mantras of diversity and multiculturalism, all the values of traditional white civilization have been declared bad and everything opposed to them declared good. Every idea, attitude, and institution that protects the white race and promotes its continued existence is being destroyed, as a precondition for the physical destruction of the race itself. No arena of life is spared this agenda’s icy grip. Every movie, television show, news story, book, and sermon must advance it, under the watchful eye of an army of censors and snitches demanding unyielding fidelity to the agenda. No argument or evidence is allowed to challenge it.

Racial Integration and Affirmative Action in Sports

How has the once proud world of athletics fared in this climate? Sports have been especially vulnerable to racial integration and affirmative action because, while not every race has evolved the mental faculties necessary to create modern technological civilizations, every race has evolved the physical qualities necessary to sustain life. Thus it stands to reason that sports can be devised in which every race is suited to excel.

For nearly fifty years, football and other sports have allowed universities to add non-whites to their student bodies. It is easier to find blacks who can excel on the basketball court or the football field than in the physics department or the Air Force Academy. Educators find it easier to motivate blacks to play games than to study engineering. Furthermore, although the laws of mathematics cannot be adjusted in order to improve black performance, the rules of games can. There are more potential black basketball players than classics majors, and there are reduced academic requirements for student athletes. Standardized testing and grade point averages can be bypassed in the name of improving the football team. But standards are not reduced solely for student athletes, because their disruptive and retarding presence in the classroom creates a downward drag on educational quality across the board.

Professional sports have also been racially integrated, and they provide an important ideological prop for racial integration and multiculturalism throughout society. The multiculturalist agenda demands successful non-whites, and professional sports and the entertainment industry are the only sectors of the economy that reliably provide them.

Affirmative action makes many whites skeptical of the qualifications of black doctors or lawyers, for under affirmative action, even highly talented non-whites are often promoted into positions above their level of competence. But the very same whites are not skeptical of the qualifications of black professional athletes. And when blacks are massively overrepresented on sports teams, whites are wont to think that, since professional sports is a meritocracy, blacks simply must be superior athletes. Even those Whites who believe in genetic determinism and racial differences, and thus reject racial egalitarianism and affirmative action, often embrace black athletic superiority because it affirms their underlying worldview and gives them an opportunity to sincerely praise non-whites.

Thus in America and much of the West, a rigid stereotype has taken hold: of white inferiority to non-whites (with the exception of Asians) in athletics. This stereotype has created a kind of “caste system” in sports, with blacks on top, whites next, and Asians last. But a careful examination of the facts leads to very different conclusions: the stereotype of white athletic inferiority is false, and black dominance of some college and professional sports is created by systematic discrimination against white athletes.

Caste Football

A website has been created to document discrimination against and negative stereotyping of white athletes. It’s titled appropriately: Caste Football (www.castefootball.us). Owned and operated by Don Wassall, who is Editor of The Nationalist Times monthly newspaper and executive director of the American Nationalist Union, Caste Football has become a clearinghouse for information regarding anti-white bias in American football and the rest of the sports world.

The initial emphasis of Caste Football was on American professional and major collegiate football, but the same anti-white bias is seen in nearly all forms of athletics. And while some sports such as baseball remain doggedly white-dominated (despite Major League Baseball’s infatuation with Hispanics), football has become much more popular and long ago surpassed baseball as “America’s pastime.”

Football is more than just a multi-billion dollar industry. It has become a quasi-state religion, with millions of members worshipping every Sunday in state built “temples” and spending the rest of the week in deep emotional involvement with the game. With high television ratings for games, super-sized ratings for the Super Bowl, and non-stop fawning print and electronic media coverage of every angle of the sport, the country is awash in football 24 hours a day, not only during the increasingly long seasons but year round thanks to the rise of the NFL Network and other corporate media outlets devoted to promoting America’s secular religion.

And the powers that be have made football a showcase for black athletic ability. They have changed the rules to favor things that blacks do well; they have ignored talented and deserving white players; and, like everything else in American public life that involves race, they refuse to discuss what is happening openly and honestly.

Consider this: in high school football, all-white or predominantly white suburban and rural teams regularly defeat their all-black and predominantly black urban opponents. This is a matter of record. Anyone involved with prep sports knows this to be true. When an all-white school meets an all-black school, the all-white school will usually win. They win with running backs that gain more yards, with receivers that catch more touchdowns, with cornerbacks that intercept more passes. When the statistics are totaled at the end of the year, the white running backs and receivers playing at the same level as the black ones do just as well. When the kids are timed and tested on their physical performance and attributes, the results are usually about the same. Thus white players win games, accumulate similar gaudy statistics, and test the same in standard drills.

Yet what happens when the big colleges start looking for players?

The colleges aggressively recruit black players and ignore white ones. No amount of success by a white running back in high school will get him a scholarship offer to play at a big Division I-A program, which feed the NFL nearly all of its players. The Caste Football website has chronicled many instances of white players who were told flat-out they were the wrong race to play a position in college, as such admissions sometimes make it through media censorship and into print. Such racial prejudices against blacks would, of course, result in media outrage and government intervention.

In an article from the Chicago Sun-Times, on December 17, 1999 by Taylor Bell titled “Questions continue to lurk under surface of recruiting,” the author questioned the racial bias in college recruiting:

I’m not saying the only reason the two best running backs in the Chicago area aren’t being recruited by major colleges is because they are white. But you’d have a hard time convincing anyone who saw the Class 6A championship game that Naperville Central’s Ryan Clifford hasn’t got the moves, quickness, and toughness to play in Division I. Until Clifford took off like a rocket, scoring a state-record 51 touchdowns, most observers targeted Hinsdale Central’s Mike Mangan as the leading ball-carrier in the state.

Neither of them is drawing much interest from big-time recruiters. Both have been invited to visit Ball State. Maryland is considering Mangan. Illinois dropped Clifford from its shopping list, but Indiana made a last-minute call and invited him to visit this weekend.

Are they too slow, too small, or too white? It is a taboo subject among college coaches. Even high school coaches don’t want to talk about skin tones. It reminds of 20 to 25 years ago, when black quarterbacks were a controversial issue in college and professional football.

The same author broached the subject again in the Chicago Times March 5, 2006 issue in a story titled “Some gray in black-white issue”:

Several weeks ago, a college recruiter called Aurora Christian coach Don Beebe to inquire about running back Matt Russell.

“Is he black or white?” the recruiter asked.

Russell is white. He is a 5-10, 184-pounder with 4.59-second speed in the 40-yard dash who has virtually no chance of scooting around a sizable barrier that saw only one white tailback starting in Division I and none in the NFL during the 2005 season.

“I know how it feels,” said Beebe, a 1983 Kaneland [High School] graduate, who played in the NFL for nine seasons. “I was a white kid from a small school, and I had to prove I could play with the big boys. I was a wide receiver who had to take a long route to the NFL. I had to prove myself.

“We live in a society where black athletes definitely are going to get the better look. I tell scouts: Look at the numbers. Look at the 10- or 40-yard dash. Look at agility, vision in the open field. Look at the tape. Evaluate a kid not by the color of his skin but by his talent. That’s what I said about Russell. What does color matter?”

This is from a column by Bob West in the Sunday, February 11, 2007 Port Arthur News:

If you’re wondering why North Texas was the only school willing to sign Nederland’s talented Micah Mosley as an offensive player, here’s the fact you will never get anybody to admit. Most college coaches won’t recruit a white running back, even one as good as Mosley.

Here is an excerpt from the Herald News of May 1, 2006, “Are white RBs [running backs] not given a fair shake or are they simply not good enough?” by Adam Zagoria:

Wayne Hills running back Ray Van Peenen was named first-team All-State last winter after leading New Jersey in rushing touchdowns and total points scored. Displaying tremendous toughness and an ability to run over defenders, the 5-foot-10, 180-pound Van Peenen led the Patriots to the second of back-to-back North 1, Group 3 championships and is on pace to become the leading scorer in the program’s storied history.

“Ray’s the best back in the state,” Patriots coach Chris Olsen said unequivocally. Yet as Van Peenen prepares to compete in today’s Elite College Combine at the Indoor Sports Pavilion in Randolph, he has just one firm college scholarship offer: from Minnesota. Rutgers, Boston College, Louisville, Temple, Connecticut, and others have also expressed interest.

Why is that? Is it because he’s too slow? Not tough enough? Not big enough? Or does it have something to do with the fact that Van Peenen is white?

Some experts say yes.

“I really believe that if this Van Peenen kid, for instance, was a different color, he would have 20 offers right now,” said Nick Lubischer of EliteRecruits.com, who has been working in the recruiting business for close to a decade and is white. “I really believe that. And I don’t blame anybody except the way things have happened over the years. If I was a Division I college coach, I would offer him a scholarship. I wouldn’t have seen color, but I think a lot of these guys do.”

This isn’t news to Van Peenen, the 2005 Herald News Offensive Player of the Year. He’s heard it before. “I get it a lot, actually,” he said. “It doesn’t really bother me. I don’t let that stuff bother me because I know how I can play. If they don’t recruit me because of that I guess it would be hurting them.”

Since whites at most positions in football are intentionally ignored and not recruited to play for the major college programs, there is virtually no chance for them to play professionally. Thus the bigotry against whites expressed during college football recruiting season is extended to the professional level (the NFL), where there are not enough white candidates to compete for the skill/ball-handling positions.

Even when the few whites who are allowed to play excel, they are often ignored. In 2001 white running back Luke Staley of Brigham Young University won the Doak Walker Award, given annually to the player considered the best college running back in the country. But when he entered the NFL Draft he wasn’t selected until the final round, a throwaway pick. He was given little chance to play and was quickly out of the league. Every black player who has won the Doak Walker Award has been drafted in the first two rounds by the NFL and gone on to sign multi-million dollar contracts.

In 2005 Mike Hass of Oregon State won the Biletnikoff Award, given to the best wide receiver in the country. As with running back Staley, Hass was drafted very late and has yet to be given a chance to play in the NFL. Every black wide receiver who has won the Biletnikoff Award over the past dozen years was drafted in either the first or second round and given years and years of opportunity to develop. The disgraceful treatment of Staley and Hass is a microcosm of the institutionalized discrimination that prevents nearly all white football players from receiving the same opportunities as black players.

This egregious double standard is a fixture in the NFL and in college football, which has long shunned white players as anything but quarterbacks and offensive linemen. Almost as rare as the white running back and white receiver is the white defensive player, as it is more and more common for college and professional teams to fill all eleven starting positions on defense with blacks. Even when whites excel as wide receivers or on defense, little consideration is given to finding more whites who can play.

White-Dominated Sports

Given this sort of systematic discrimination, it is little wonder that the perception that white men are poor athletes has become ingrained in the public mind. A closer look shows that this is not true. Whites dominate the Winter and Summer Olympics and dominate the vast majority of popular and not-so-popular sports.

In boxing for example, most of the top fighters are white. Whites currently hold 12 championship belts out of a total of 20 from the middleweight division up. The heavyweight division especially is dominated by white fighters from Eastern Europe. You will never hear the mainstream press report on the white domination of boxing. Wladimir Klitschko, the heavyweight champion from Ukraine, routinely destroys one American “Great Black Hope” after another, which the corporate media greets with a collective yawn. The only discussion of the domination of white boxers focuses on how “bad” the heavyweight division is (because no American blacks are able to compete).

The Olympic decathlon winner is generally considered the best all-round athlete in the world. That person is nearly always white. Frequently all the top decathletes are white. Yet this fact never seems to seep into the consciousness of a society shaped by movies like White Men Can’t Jump.

Even in sports like basketball, where blacks are the majority in the United States, white players are among the best. Steve Nash has won multiple Most Valuable Player awards. Dirk Nowitski is one of the best players in the NBA. In international play in recent years, the usually all-black USA team is routinely beaten by Italian and Argentinean basketball teams made up almost entirely of white players. In America tens of thousands of white kids are enthusiastic high school and college basketball players. If the best black basketball players in the NBA are being regularly beaten by white teams in international competition, then why is the NBA 80 percent black year after year?

There are also many sports where only whites succeed. Hockey is perhaps the best-known example, but swimming, gymnastics, powerlifting, and wrestling, to name a few, are virtually all-white endeavors, even though every urban area has ice rinks, swimming pools, and gyms. Even in an area where blacks are said to have genetic advantages such as short sprinting, whites compete, and some white runners, such as Jeremy Wariner in the 400-meters, are the world’s best.

During the 1960s and 1970s whites and blacks competed on a relatively equal basis in football. There were plenty of good white running backs and good black ones, good white receivers and good black ones. There were Russians who won the 100-meter sprint and black Americans who won. However, since the take-over of public discourse by the virulent anti-white agenda that dominates US society, much of the American sports world has been turned over to non-whites.

Athletes as Idols

White athletes are not the only victims of the racial caste system in sports. All whites are victims. This is because athletes are widely idolized and seen as role models. The dispossession of white athletes by non-white athletes therefore reinforces white dispossession throughout society.

White boys are particularly hard-hit. Sports play a large role in the lives of most boys. Thus sports figures often serve as models of masculinity and achievement. There is nothing wrong with this, in a healthy white society. Sports have deep roots in the Western tradition. The ancient Greeks introduced the pentathlon at Olympia in 708 bc, and the Olympic games continued every fourth year for almost eleven centuries. The traditional meaning of athletic competition was to train youth not just in physical achievement, but also in the values of honor, achievement, sportsmanship, team play, rule-following, and the ability to win and lose gracefully. Sports were also seen as a training ground for war and statesmanship, famously expressed by the claim that the British victory at Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton.

But the idolization of athletes is quite a different matter in a multiracial society ruled by the agenda of white dispossession. A generation of white children has now grown up hearing at every opportunity that their race is weak and physically inferior. For role models, white children have been provided an endless stream of black men.

And look at the quality! It was one thing to grow up admiring Willie Mays and Joe Louis: their public image was identical to that of their white counterparts like Joe DiMaggio and Rocky Marciano, because white athletes still set the standards of behavior.

But the black athlete of today? Black athletes now set the standards of behavior in many sports. In the game, there is trash talking, preening and showboating, and poor sportsmanship. Outside the game, there is profligacy, degeneracy, misogyny, and crime. Many black athletes are also openly disdainful of white culture and values, and of whites themselves. White boys now have “role models” who hate the kind of men their fathers are, the kind of men they will grow up to be. Should we then be surprised by white self-hatred?

Even at the height of segregation and anti-black discrimination in America there was never a white athlete with a public image of virulent anti-black sentiment. And if there were one, the black community would not have rewarded him with honors, awards, millions of dollars, and uncritical acclaim. No one would have expected the parents of young black boys to enthusiastically cheer him on. They would not have been expected to assist their children in idolizing him by buying posters, cards, and memorabilia, so as to implant in their children’s minds that this person’s opinion about their race was correct.

But that is exactly what is expected today of whites. They fawn over an endless parade of thuggish, anti-social black athletes and teach their children to do the same.

* * *

Ultimately, the racial caste system in sports cannot be solved without addressing the racial caste system in society as a whole. Western civilization needs new pro-white values and new pro-white leaders, and a top-to-bottom transformation of all of our institutions, including sports. Hopefully the courage to do this still remains among the people who conquered and civilized much of the world. If it does not, the future will be grim, not only for white people but for people of all races.

But what to do in the meantime? It is never too late or too early for individuals to make a difference. We can change the anti-white direction taken by so many major sports, starting today.

The first step is to wake up to the fact that the problem exists. The white race, which has built civilization out of the wilderness on every continent, is not weak. The people who have gone from the depths of the oceans to the surface of the moon are not weak. In fact there is no greater people in matters of physical ability. The notion that whites are poor athletes is a ridiculous slur, a slur that needs to be refuted along with all the others. That is the purpose of Caste Football. Like The Occidental Quarterly, it is an oasis of truth in the desert of political correctness, bringing truth and reason to a world short on both.

But knowledge is not enough. Men and women of courage have to take action. You have to insist on fairness in recruiting and player selection. You have to insist that sports maintain white standards of behavior, even for non-white athletes. Better yet, racially conscious whites, especially you who have children, need to switch off sports dominated by non-whites and cultivate an interest in sports still dominated by whites. You need to vocally oppose calls for racial integration and affirmative action in white-dominated sports like NASCAR.

But perhaps the most subversive thing you as an individual or a family can do is switch off the tube altogether, get off the couch, and actually have fun while building body, character, and community.

A revolution in society begins with a revolution in the heart. Average people need to understand that race is important, and they need to understand it in terms of the things that matter most to them today. One of those things is sports. That is why our enemies have taken them over, and that is why we need to take them back.

J. B. Cash is the pen name of a freelance writer on sports and race featured at the Caste Football web site, www.castefootball.us, a project he has worked with closely since its inception. His writings have also appeared in The Nationalist Times magazine and on the American Renaissance website, www.amren.com.