american renaissance · american renaissance - 1 ... throughout the ottoman empire. dmitri...

American Renaissance - 1 - December 2005

Continued on page 3

There is not a truth existing which I fear or would wish unknown to the whole world. — Thomas Jefferson

Vol. 16 No. 12 December 2005

Race in Scandinavia—an Update

American Renaissance

The Nordic pot continuesto boil.

by Mikael Widmark

Since my first article onrace and immigration inScandinavia in the De-

cember 2003 issue, the over-all picture has not changedsignificantly: Sweden bad,Norway mixed, Denmarkgood. Sweden’s restrictionistshave yet to achieve a break-through. In Norway, the Pro-gress Party recently won arecord 22.1 percent of thevote, but real influence andreal immigration reform willhave to wait. In Denmark, themajor parties are still commit-ted to immigration control,but the lefties are hard at work. Never-theless, there have been many interest-ing developments in all three countries.

Sweden

Public debate in Sweden has recentlyfocused on unemployment. The officialunemployment rate isn’t particularlyhigh at 5-6 percent, but if you includeeveryone who is paid by the governmentnot to work (job-training courses, sub-sidized trainee jobs, people on sickleave, etc.) the real unemployment rateis 20-25 percent. Needless to say, un-employment is particularly high amongimmigrants, with non-whites having anofficial unemployment rate of 15 percentand a real unemployment rate of over50 percent.

There have been the typical right-leftarguments over the problem, but thereis an obvious solution: stop immigrationand repatriate the foreigners who arehere. Any country with unemploymentis only making things worse by import-

ing unskilled foreigners, but this elemen-tary insight is completely absent fromthe mainstream public debate.

Still, the politics of immigrationbubble beneath the surface—and withpotentially interesting lessons for Ameri-

cans. The left is learning that what ap-peals to their current darlings, the im-migrants, does not appeal to their tradi-tional base. The governing Social Demo-crats, for example, have discovered thatworking-class whites do not like immi-

gration. They have noticed that in Nor-way and Denmark, tough immigrationcontrol finds it strongest support in thewhite working class—the very peoplethe Social Democrats have alwayscounted on.

There are hints of the same thing inSweden. In Malmö, where there are

many immigrants, small anti-immigra-tion parties like the Sweden Democratsand the Skanepartiet enjoy their stron-gest support, largely at the expense ofthe Social Democrats. In Malmö, the im-migration-control parties won nearly

eight percent of the vote ver-sus 1.5 percent in Sweden asa whole. In the white, work-ing-class areas in Malmöclosest to the infamousRosengard immigrant ghetto,the total support for the Swe-den Democrats and Skane-partiet was around 20 per-cent, once again, mostly atthe expense of the SocialDemocrats. The closer theylive to immigrants, the morelikely Swedes are to vote forimmigration control.

Social Democratic strate-gists are very afraid of a

breakthrough by the Sweden Democrats.They therefore want to seem somewhat“xenophobic” so as to please the base,but not too “xenophobic,” lest they loseleftist white intellectual voters. To makesure immigrants stay loyal to the SocialDemocrats even as they edge towards amore restrictive immigration policy thanthe other established parties, they makesure to give immigrants lots of moneyfrom the welfare state. To most immi-grants, this is more attractive than the“conservative” opposition idea of lettingin more immigrants but limiting benefits.Thus, despite a more restrictive immi-gration policy than other established par-ties, the Social Democrats enjoy over-whelming support among immigrantvoters. While the Social Democrats gotless than 40 percent of the votes in thelatest election, they got more than 60 per-cent of the votes of non-white immi-grants. Together with the Communistsand the Green Party, they got more than85 percent.

The Storting: where Norwegians will—orwill not—vote for their own survival.

The main reason immi-grants are loyal to the leftis because the left is good

at taking money fromwhitey and giving it to

them.


Letters from ReadersSir — As I read Jared Taylor’s review

of Identifying Race and TransformingWhiteness in the Classroom in the lastissue, I found myself wanting to bothlaugh and cry. Multiculturalism and po-litical correctness always seem to havemore ground to break, and this stuffkeeps getting more and more stupid ev-ery day.

I can remember a friend’s reaction toDinesh D’Souza’s 1990 book, IlliberalEducation: “It is worse than I thoughton the college campuses.” What Mr.D’Souza described—affirmative actionofficers on campus, Jesse Jackson lead-ing choruses of “Hey, hey, ho, ho, West-ern Culture’s got to go,” etc., are mildcompared to what Mr. Taylor found inTransforming Whiteness. These womenseem to be pushing an American formof Maoism, complete with public self-flagellation. The only difference I cansee is that they are not being forced todo it as the Chinese academics were dur-ing the Cultural Revolution. They arevolunteers, which somehow seems evenworse.

I disagree with Mr. Taylor when hewrites that this movement “doesn’t do alick of good for their precious people ofcolor.” In fact, non-whites probably de-rive considerable emotional satisfactionfrom being encouraged to humiliatewhites who are stuck in the same class-rooms.

Jack Judson, Downers Grove, Ill.

Sir — I believe the story of white sla-very during the Ottoman era, as told byRobert C. Davis in Christian Slaves,Muslim Masters and reviewed by Tho-mas Jackson in the August issue, merits

an addendum. Prof. Davis limits his taleto the exploits of the Barbary pirates, butthere was also a flourishing overlandtrade in the same merchandise.

The master white slavers wereCrimean Tatars, and their man-catchingraids ravaged vast territories. Urban lifein the Ukraine and eastern Poland virtu-ally came to a standstill, as desperatepeople fled into forests and marshes toescape the terrible horsemen. The Tatarshearded captives south to slave ware-houses at Jaffa, in Palestine. At the heightof the Tatar invasions in the 16th and17th centuries, about 10,000 slaves werebrought to Jaffa each year, to be shippedthroughout the Ottoman Empire.

Dmitri Cantemir, a Moldavian noblewho spent 22 years in Istanbul, in hisHistory of the Turks (published in 1714-16) described the trade through Turkisheyes. Male Russians and Poles made finegalley slaves and lasted several yearsbefore wearing out and being tossedoverboard. Venetians, Hungarians, andGermans were dismissed contemptu-ously as “incapable of all drudgery, byreason of the softness of their Bodies,and the women of giving pleasure properto their Sex by the hardness of theirs.”Because of their graceful figures,Circassians were always in demand. Ata slave auction a male Circassian couldhave sold for a thousand imperialcrowns, while a Venetian or German ofsimilar age and size fetched barely aquarter that amount. The Empire’s ap-petite for white slaves was insatiable, andeventually breeding farms were estab-lished in the Caucasus where slaves wereraised like cattle.

There was one major difference in theslavery at each end of the Mediterranean.For all of their misery, the slaves of theWest were not without hope. Prof. Davis

mentions redemption organizations andthe possibility of ransom. There wasnothing like this in the East, where raidsturned the region into a wasteland. More-over, after 1240, when the Mongols de-stroyed Kiev, there was no local Ukrai-nian authority capable of conductingnegotiations. Victims of Tatar raids weresimply livestock with whom their own-ers did as they pleased. When SultanIbrahim (ruled 1640-48) decided toclean out his harem, he had all thewomen in it—a thousand or so—sewnalive into sacks and tossed into theBosphorus. The bundles contained mem-bers of practically every race, culture,nationality and religion extant in the OldWorld, but no one objected to that madhorror. The women were, after all, hisproperty.

For Eastern Europe, the slavery night-mare ended only in the 18th centurywhen Prince Eugene’s Hapsburg troopsin a series of victories dispelled foreverthe myth of Ottoman invincibility, andRussia crushed the Tatar Khanate andseized Crimea. The Tatar raids were fi-nally over, but the ghosts still linger. Amajor branch of Indo-Europeans stillcarries in its name the memory: “Slav”is derived from “sclavus”—slave inMedieval Latin.

It is only whites who forget what theyhave suffered, as we bomb Serbs, pro-tect Muslims in the Balkans, and wel-come Turks into the heart of Europe.

Sidney Krupicka, Paris, Tenn.

Sir — Will the French learn their les-son? Will they finally realize that non-whites will not—cannot—assimilate? Inote that French commentators and poli-ticians are already saying exactly whatTed Kennedy or Hillary Clinton wouldsay: that “racism” and “oppression”drive the poor dears to violence. Howmuch damage and how many deaths willit take before the French realize that theirAfricans hate them and will never beFrenchmen?

The initial impulse of whites every-where is to take the blame when non-whites are unhappy. Even when there areno whites in sight, as in Haiti or Rwanda/Burundi, whites somehow caused themayhem and misery from afar. I hate tosay this, but I hope France burns untilthe French finally see the truth. I justhope there is something left for themafterwards.

Susan Anderson, Lexington, Ky.


American Renaissance is published monthly by theNew Century Foundation. NCF is governed by section501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code; contributionsto it are tax deductible.

Subscriptions to American Renaissance are $24.00 per year. First-class postage isan additional $8.00. Subscriptions to Canada (first class) are $36.00. Subscriptionsoutside Canada and the U.S. (air mail) are $40.00. Back issues are $3.00 each. Foreignsubscribers should send U.S. dollars or equivalent in convertible bank notes.

Please make checks payable to: American Renaissance, P.O. Box 527, Oakton, VA22124. ISSN No. 1086-9905, Telephone: (703) 716-0900, Facsimile: (703) 716-0932,Web Page Address: www.AmRen.com

Continued from page 1The message here is an important one,

and Americans should take notice. Themain reason immigrants are loyal to theleft is not because they are afraid of im-migration restrictions from the right, butbecause the left is better at taking moneyfrom whitey and giving it to them. In theUS, the Democrats could play the samegame: hold on to immigrant voters de-spite being more restrictive than theRepublicans. Even if she continues totalk tough on illegal immigration, HillaryClinton could keep the Hispanic vote,even if the Republicans choose an open-borders fanatic like John McCain orRudy Giuliani. The only way Republi-cans can win the Hispanic vote is by out-pandering the Democrats on the issue ofshifting money from whites.

Further underlining this lesson is theexample of the Liberal Party, which takesa libertarian stance. It is the most con-sistently pro-open-borders party in Swe-den, favoring both asylum-seekers andjob-seekers. At the same time, it wantsto get tough on immigrants who commitcrime or are on welfare. The LiberalParty has therefore proposed that everyimmigrant on the dole be forced to work,and that all criminal immigrants be ex-pelled. Immigrants don’t like the idea ofgetting tough on welfare sponges andcriminals, despite the call for more im-migration.

In this context, there was an interest-ing example of poetic justice in localelections in Stockholm. The leader of thecity’s Conservative Party, Kristina Axén-Olin is one of the most vocal and zeal-ous supporters of open borders withinthe party. And while the ConservativeParty, together with their two center-rightcoalition partners, the Liberal Party and

the Christian Democrats, got a comfort-able majority of ethnic Swedish votes,they still lost because the leftist partiesgot some 85 percent of the immigrantvote. Again, it is clear that once they arein the country and can vote, immigrantswant a comfortable berth, not open bor-ders.

There now appears to be somethingof a split within the Social Democraticleadership between those who want tokeep catering to immigrants andthose who don’t want to lose thewhite working-class. In this con-text, the Social Democrats havebeen under pressure from theMayors of Gothenburg andMalmö —Göran Johansson andIllmar Reepalu—whose citiesare flooded with immigrants.The government sends asylumseekers to rural counties, butthey usually move to the big cit-ies, where they can find co-ethnics and meat prepared ac-cording to the Muslim halalritual. The result has been sucha large inflow that Gothenburgand Malmö cannot keep up with hous-ing, schools, jobs and welfare. The may-ors have not called for less immigration;only that immigrants who refuse to stayin rural areas be cut off from welfare.They are merely calling for the joys ofdiversity to be more evenly spreadaround the country, but they have, ofcourse, been condemned by immigrationenthusiasts; one called Göran Johansson“the Le Pen of Gothenburg.”

Needless to say, ordinary Swedeswant big-city officials to be muchtougher, and some have cracked underthe strain. Recently, a police commanderin Malmö, Bengt Lindström, was furi-

ous to learn the authorities had denied a98-year old man a place in a retirementhome in Malmö because it would costtoo much. In a letter to Mayor Reepaluand the Social Democrats he was admit-tedly intemperate: “Withdraw your gi-gantic support for all those goddamntowel-heads in Malmö (i.e. Rosengard)and let Swedes who have worked hardtheir entire lives to build Sweden takepart of our wealth . . . . God how I hateyou and your f***ing Social DemocraticParty. . . . I demand that you take part ofthe money that you and your f***ingSocial Democratic colleagues give tocriminal Mohammed in Rosengard andgive it to our Swedish retirees instead.”

The officer was immediately sus-pended, and tried for “incitement of eth-nic hatred.” In October, to the surpriseof most observers, he was acquitted onthe ground that his message was not in-tended for a wider audience. He will not,however, get his job back.

Meanwhile, net immigration of non-whites continues at about 20,000 peryear, but there has been an interestingshift in the people we are getting. Whilethe Iraq war has been bad for America,

it has been good for us. Before the war,Sweden let in almost all asylum seekersfrom the parts of Iraq Saddam Husseincontrolled (the Kurdish north was con-sidered de facto independent), and Ira-qis quickly became the single largestimmigrant group, at roughly 7,000 ayear. After the fall of Saddam Hussein,Iraqis could no longer claim to be per-secuted. In 2004, net immigration fellto 2,600, mostly through marriage to Ira-qis already here rather than asylum.

However, increases from other coun-tries have made up for the drop in Ira-qis. Probably because they are tired of

Malmö, Sweden: Muslims are sure to fit in.

American RenaissanceJared Taylor, Editor

Stephen Webster, Assistant EditorIan Jobling, Web Site Editor


Swedish feminists, more and more menmarry mail-order brides—some whitesfrom Russia and Ukraine, but many non-whites from Thailand and the Philip-pines. Most immigrant groups have afairly even distribution of men andwomen or a slight preponderance ofmen, but more than 75 percent of theThais and Filipinos are women. Of lastyear’s 2,000 immigrants from Thailand,no fewer than 90 percent were women.Meanwhile, mostly due to adoptions,immigration from China increased from800 in 2001 to 1,100 in 2004.

The genuinely nationalist anti-immi-gration groups have made no realprogress during the past two years. Themost important is the Sweden Demo-crats, but their vote tallies are below twopercent—under half the four percentnecessary for representation in parlia-ment. Although there is certainly morethan enough support to get them intoparliament, until they manage a bettershowing, potential supporters will hesi-tate to “waste their vote.” The Demo-crats have wisely chosen to replace theirdull leader Mikael Jansson with theyounger, more dynamic Jimmie Akes-son, but this so far hasn’t done themmuch good, since he has practically noaccess to the media (see the next storyfor an assessment of how the Swedishmedia covered Hurricane Katrina).

Denmark

Denmark, the great success story inScandinavia, is now more or less themirror image of Sweden: Restrictionistsof varying degrees of rigor have a firmgrip on power. Immigration laws havebeen so successful that net non-whiteimmigration may have fallen belowzero—more are leaving than coming.

Like the Swedes, the Danes havestopped letting in asylum-seekers fromAfghanistan and Iraq. For a while, thequestion was what to do with a few thou-sand Iraqi and Afghan refugees from theold regimes who had temporary but notpermanent residency. The center-rightcoalition government was willing to letthem stay, but the Danish People’s Party(DPP)—always solid on immigration—demanded that they be deported. TheDPP even threatened to leave the coali-tion and bring down the government onthis issue, and in the end, every last Iraqiand Afghan without permanent residencywas deported.

The DPP supported the Iraq war

mainly because it would stop the flowof Iraqis and justify deporting the oneswho had already come. They didn’t caremuch about “weapons of mass destruc-tion” or “links to al-Qaeda.” Theywanted Saddam Hussein gone becausehe was an excuse for asylum.

An increasing number of immigrantsare leaving Denmark on their own, cit-ing a hostile political atmosphere. This

is particularly true of Somalis, which nodoubt pleases most Danes, since Soma-lis have the highest birth rates, crimerates, and welfare dependency rates ofany immigrant group, and are least likelyto be employed. They are also the mostracially and culturally alien, practicinga strict form of Islam that includes fe-male genital mutilation.

One Somali leader explained thatpeople were leaving because they feelinsulted by blunt public discussion abouthow troublesome they are. The Jyllands-Posten had one editorial in particularabout “the Somali problem” that pointedout things would only get worse becausetheir birth rate is three times the Danishlevel and that their median age of 18 isabout half that of Danes. Unfortunately,

few of the Somalis go back to Somalia;most go to England, and a good numberto Sweden and Norway.

Despite this generally rosy picture forthe Danes, they face three threats: Tur-key, Sweden and domestic immigrationenthusiasts. First, Turkey. At more thanone percent, Turks are a larger share ofthe population than in any other Euro-pean country except Germany, Austriaand Holland. Thanks to the new laws,net immigration of Turks has fallen tonear zero, but if Turkey joins the Euro-pean Union that would change dramati-cally. Denmark would get a dispropor-tionate share of Turks because it alreadyhas a sizeable Turkish population and isone of the richest countries in Europe.The multiple of gross domestic productper capita (adjusted for differences inpurchasing power) for Denmark and Tur-key is even greater than for the UnitedStates and Mexico: 4.5 as opposed to4.0. Moving from Turkey to Denmarktherefore represents an even greater leapin living standards than moving fromMexico to the US.

Needless to say, the DPP is com-pletely opposed to admitting Turkey,arguing that the European Union mustbe Christian, and that there would bemass immigration of poor Turks. Some-what surprisingly, the supposedly restric-tionist government is enthusiastic aboutadmitting Turkey. After having all buthalted immigration from Turkey, theynow propose opening the door to mil-lions of Turks. Their stated reasons arethe typical foolishness that passes formodern political analysis: that Europemust support moderate Islam, and thatadmitting Turkey will show that the Westcan cooperate with the East for the ben-efit of both, blah, blah, etc.

Realistically, though, the Turkishthreat is probably low. There is strongpopular opposition to admitting Turkey,and France and Austria have both prom-ised referenda on the issue. Austria is notlikely to undo the results of the Battle ofVienna in 1683, when the Turkish inva-sion of Europe was finally stopped.

A more realistic but less serious threatare the relatively open borders of neigh-boring Sweden. Denmark does not letcitizens bring in spouses from outsidethe EU, but Sweden offers a solution. Aliberal Danish organization called “LoveWithout Borders” settles Danish citizensin Sweden, where they can bring in non-EU partners under the far more liberalSwedish rules. After two years in Swe-

The Danish People’s Party wants to keepDenmark for the Danes.

Somalis are leaving Den-mark because they feelinsulted by the blunt

public discussion of howmuch trouble they cause.


den, the couple can become Swedishcitizens, which under current EU lawmeans Denmark can’t keep them out.Swedish authorities estimate that morethan 1,000 “Danes” use this dodge ev-ery year, and the number seems to begrowing. However, it is unclear just howmany will return to “racist” Denmark.

The indefatigable DPP says that un-less Sweden closes this loophole, Den-mark should leave the EU and closedown the Oresund bridge that links thetwo countries. The ruling coalitionagrees, saying Sweden is fosteringforced marriages, but the DPP’s partnerswould never dream of leaving the EU.The Swedish government says the Daneswant to pass “laws against love.”

Despite the generally healthy climate,domestic immigration enthusiasts con-stitute a third threat. A typical unholyalliance of big business, libertarian/lib-eral/socialist intellectuals, and non-whiteactivists has licked its wounds after thedefeat in the 2001 elections and gone onthe offensive. Within the two governingcenter-right parties—the ConservativePeople’s Party and the Venstre Party—there are a lot of people who are appalledby the restrictionist policy they put to-gether with the DPP, and the youthgroups of both parties are run by liber-tarian intellectuals who want open bor-ders. So far, party leaders have held outagainst this pressure because they knowthat if they give in, they not only risklosing seats in future elections, but theirgovernment would be immediatelybrought down by the DPP. Once again,we see how even a single party that isrock solid on immigration—even if it gotonly 13.3 percent of the vote in the lastelection—can keep the entire country ona sensible course.

On the left, the Social Democrats facethe same problem as their Swedish coun-terparts: the working class supports re-striction while the lefty intellectuals andnon-white activists want more immigra-tion. On the far left—the Radicals as wellas the Socialist People’s Party and thecommunist Unity List—immigrationenthusiasts are in charge.

The Radicals have been particularlyvociferous. In the election earlier thisyear they campaigned hard against lawsagainst marriage-related immigration.They circulated sob stories about peoplewho fell in love with non-EU citizens,but they chose completely unrealisticexamples: Danes who married white,non-EU citizens from places like the

United States or Russia. Of course, be-fore the new restrictions went in, mostmarriage immigrants were Muslims.

The immigration minister, BertelHaarder (among Scandinavian immigra-tion restrictionists the saying is: “Thinkyou can’t stop immigration? Just try a

little Haarder!”) pointed out this decep-tion. The DPP added that the law shouldbe changed specifically to keep outMuslims but let in Westerners. The gov-ernment refused, saying this would vio-late international treaties against racialdiscrimination. The DPP, staunch asever, replied that if treaties keep thecountry from passing the laws it needs,Denmark should opt out of them, buttheir coalition partners are anxious toappear respectable in internationalcircles.

With the pro-immigration parties get-ting less than 20 percent of the vote, andwith the large mainstream parties fear-ful of the DPP, it would seem there islittle risk that immigration controls willbe repealed. Still, the enemies of a sen-sible policy are hard at work and mustbe watched.

Norway

In Norway, the restrictionist ProgressParty is stronger than ever, but has stillfailed to get a significant tightening ofthe law. For some time, the ProgressParty has had even greater electoral sup-port than its closest Danish equivalent,the DPP. Unfortunately for Norway, theProgress Party faces a much tougherenvironment. While immigration restric-

tionists aren’t considered as much of apariah as in Sweden, they are not con-sidered mainstream as they are in Den-mark, and the respectable right keepsProgress out of government. And unlikeDenmark, where the main parties havetried to reduce losses to the DPP byadopting a moderate version of theirimmigration platform, the main Norwe-gian parties have agreed only to sym-bolic restrictions.

The Progress Party therefore hasn’tbeen able to pressure the centre-rightgovernment coalition into restrictingimmigration. Instead, the three centre-right parties—the Conservatives, theChristian Democrats, and the Liberals—have told Progress it should feel luckythey are talking to it at all, and that itsexclusion from any influence on immi-gration policy is non-negotiable. TheChristian Democrats are particularlyadamant about the pariah treatment.They and the Liberal Party have made itclear they would rather cooperate withthe left than give in to “xenophobia.”

The Norwegian Christian Democratsare just like the Swedish ChristianDemocrats: typical guilt-ridden leftistChristians who think it is their religiousduty to share Norway’s wealth with theworld’s poor. This means both letting ina lot of Third-Worlders and giving awayas much foreign aid as possible.

There was a dramatic developmentjust before last September’s elections.Progress Party leader Carl Hagen said itwas unreasonable for him to be kept outof government when his party gets 20percent of the vote, while the Christian

Democrats get only 12 percent. He saidthat if the right won, and Progress got20 percent or more, he would insist onjoining the government. Otherwise, hewould withdraw his support and bringdown the government. The ChristianDemocrats emphatically rejected this de-mand, saying they would have nothing

Bertel ‘try a little’ Haarder.

Progress Party symbol.


to do with Progress, and that there wouldbe parliamentary chaos if the right won.

The dominant issue of the electioncampaign was what to do with Norway’sgrowing oil wealth, which has created abudget surplus of 15 percent of GDP (the

equivalent of a $1.8 trillion annual sur-plus in the US!), but Progress insistedon making immigration an issue as well.

The party had a choice point on whichto campaign. When the US tried to jus-tify its invasion of Iraq, it pointed to ashady Kurdish Islamic terror organiza-tion called Ansar-al-Islam, which theAmericans claimed had friendly ties withboth Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda; thiswas supposed to prove Iraq was an allyof al-Qaeda. As it turned out, Ansar-al-Islam’s leader, Mulla Krekar, did not livein Kurdistan or Baghdad or Afghanistanor some other Muslim country. He livedin an apartment in Oslo! In 1991 he cameto Norway as an asylum seeker fromIraq, and was running Ansar al-Islam

from the safety of Oslo. As Progressspokesmen repeatedly pointed out, if youbring in Muslims, some will be terror-ists.

When the election results came in, theleft-wing bloc had squeaked by with arazor-thin margin, but Progress polled22.1 percent of the vote, a new record,and up 7.4 points from 2001. The Chris-tian Democrats plummeted from 12.7percent to 6.8 percent. It may be that theprospect of parliamentary chaos in thewake of a victory by the right wasenough to give the left a win. Somepeople therefore say Progress lost in thiselection despite its record share of thevote. They argue that the left-wing vic-tory means Progress has no influence atall, since the new government snubs theentire party.

That is a short-term view. First, evenwith a right-wing government, Progresshad no influence on the most importantissue: immigration. At the same time, itsarch-nemesis on the non-socialist side,the Christian Democrats, suffered aspectalular loss, effectively neutralizingthem. This means Progress, along withthe Conservatives, leads the opposition.

The typical pattern in Norwegianpolitics is that parties tend to lose sup-port while they are in power. If this pat-tern holds, Progress could advance to 30percent or more by the next election. Andif it gains a majority together with theConservatives—who, unlike the Chris-tian Democrats, would be willing toshare power with them—there could bea pure, right-wing government thatwould finally pass serious immigrationrestrictions. While the Conservatives arenot really in favor of this, they wouldprobably agree to at least a watered-down version of the immigration restric-

tions Progress wants, as long as they gettheir pet cause, which is large tax cuts.

This rosy scenario faces one bigthreat: Progress leader Carl I. Hagen hasannounced that after an astonishing 28years as party leader he will resign in

2006. His incredible skills as a leader,organizer, and agitator have been a vitalpart of the success of his party. The likelysuccessor is a 36-year-old woman namedSiv Jensen who has worked herself upto become the leader of the parliamen-tary group. Pia Kjaersgaard in Denmarkhas proven conclusively that a womancan lead a successful nationalist party,but whether Miss Jensen will be as goodas her Danish counterpart remains to beseen.

Mikael Widmark is the pen name ofan economist who lives in northern Swe-den.

Can Siv Jensen do for Norway . . .

. . . what Pia Kjaersgaard has done forDenmark?

How the Swedes Saw Katrina

The coverage in the Swedish me-dia of the aftermath of HurricaneKatrina held important lessons,

both regarding how biased and anti-white the Swedish media are, and howthe taboo on racial differences disarmsthe right and plays into the hands of left-ists.

Initially, reporting from New Orleanswas surprisingly good (i.e. surprisinglyhonest). While the media of course didnot explicitly say “blacks looted, rapedand shot at rescue helicopters” they did

report on the disorder. It was clear fromthe video sequences—which oftenlooked as though they were shot in Af-rica—that it was blacks who committedthese barbaric acts. At some point, how-ever, media bosses must have decidedthis was likely to reinforce “prejudice,”and they shifted the focus to “white rac-ism.”

The media started to report as fact theclaim that the Bush administration de-layed rescue operations for “racist” rea-sons, or at least offered it as a highly

plausible theory. This was used as fur-ther evidence of how oppressed blacksare by racist, white America, and this inturn justified the looting.

Left-wing pundits quickly added thatNew Orleans has a high poverty rate, andsince it goes without saying that the racesare equal, this was obviously caused bybrutal American capitalism and evilwhite racism. Because blacks have beencondemned to poverty by whites, andsince the racist white government wasnow trying to kill them by delaying res-

ΩΩΩΩΩ


cue operations, it was perfectly under-standable that blacks would react as theydid. Many left-wing pundits used theworst black behavior as clear evidenceof how oppressed they are. Since no civi-lized persons do what they did, and sincethe races are equal, blacks are clearlytraumatized by racist-capitalist oppres-sion.

It is worth pointing out that in Swe-den, as in many other European coun-tries, America is a symbol of naked, un-bridled capitalism, where the poor haveno social safety net. Of course, Americahas a welfare state and many other formsof government intervention, but that iswhat people think: America is the freemarket gone wild. Left-wingers thereforehate America and everything about it,while right-wing pundits love America.On the right, this includes love formultiracialism, since “conservatives”tend to favor open borders. The lefttherefore constantly tries to portrayAmerica as hell on earth, while the main-stream right insists it is heaven on earth.

The pictures from New Orleans wereof course a great triumph for the left:Capitalism and limited government cre-ate the poverty and desperation that ex-plained black behavior. Social Demo-cratic Prime Minister Göran Perssoneven used this argument in a debate withthe center-right opposition, saying thatany reduction in welfare benefits wouldcreate the kind of problems plaguingNew Orleans.

Right-wing pundits were obviouslytroubled by how the left used Katrina toargue for a bigger welfare state, so they

stupidly began to deny that Americanblacks were poor. Capitalism, they said,had been great for blacks, who were nowbetter off than Swedes. Needless to say,this strategy was doomed to fail. Oneright-wing blogger named RolandPoirier Martinsson wrote an op-ed ar-ticle in Sweden’s second biggest news-paper, Expressen, in which he said theSwedish media were “anti-American,”and that the American poverty thresh-old of $39,000 is higher than the aver-age Swedish household income. TheAmerican poor, both black and white,therefore have it as good as the averageSwede. This article quickly became cel-ebrated in the right-wing Swedishblogosphere, and nearly every right-wing blogger linked to it. The claim thatAmerican capitalism creates povertyappeared to have been soundly defeated.

A left-wing journalist named AndersHolmberg struck back with a reply in thesame newspaper two days later. Hechecked the facts and found that, first ofall, average Swedish household incomeis nearly 400,000 Swedish Kronor,which is more than $50,000. Second, hefound that the $39,000 threshold is for ahousehold of nine or more. For a familyof four, the poverty threshold is $19,157,dramatically lower than average Swed-ish income levels.

The right was silenced, and the leftgot away with blaming American pov-erty and the New Orleans mayhem oncapitalism and limited government. Theproblem, of course, was that the right hasadopted the same view of race as the left.It was therefore unable to argue that theproblem was not government—large orsmall—but black racial characteristics.

Japan’s welfare state is even smallerthan America’s, yet Japan doesn’t havethe same kind of poverty. When a pow-erful earthquake hit Kobe in 1995, therewas only minimal looting and no rapesor attacks on rescue teams. Many peoplepointed out that poor white areas in Loui-siana were also severely hit by Katrinabut did not descend into chaos. How-ever, since the mainstream right in bothSweden and America refuses to recog-

nize racial reality, it cannot point to thereal causes of black misbehavior. Ameri-cans are no doubt surprised to learn thatat least in Sweden the aftermath ofKatrina became an argument for evenmore welfare!

Katrina and the USMedia

by Jared Taylor

The cover story of the October is-sue of AR was a lengthy accountof the chaos into which New Or-

leans descended in the aftermath of Hur-ricane Katrina. It now appears that someof the reports of mayhem in the Con-vention Center and at the Superdomewere exaggerated. Although the totalsmay still be subject to change, state of-ficials say 10 people died at the Super-dome, and 24 in and around the Con-vention Center. The autopsy reports havenot all been released, but so far one per-son at each location is known to havebeen shot. Police cannot confirm manyaccounts of rape.

What accounts for what now appearsto have been considerable exaggeration?The first factor is human nature. In anyemergency or catastrophe, rumors be-come facts and facts multiply into myth.People love to claim to have seen ex-traordinary things or to have enduredgreat hardship.

What is more important is that virtu-ally everyone—even reporters from themost liberal papers—passed on grue-some accounts as entirely plausible.Would they have done this if disaster hadstruck New Hampshire or Iowa? No.They did so in New Orleans becauseeveryone knew the Superdome and theConvention Center were filled withblacks. Even writers for the New YorkTimes believe crowds of blacks can eas-ily run amok.

Blacks—and they should knowbest—believe it, too. On Sept. 6, PoliceChief Eddie Compass told the OprahWinfrey program that “some of the littlebabies (are) getting raped” in theSuperdome. Mayor Ray Nagin told thesame program about “hundreds of armedgang members” killing and raping insidethe Superdome, and said the crowd hadreverted to an “almost animalistic state.”The two blacks who presumably knowthe city best—the mayor and the policechief—found these accounts entirely

Swedish Prime Minister says New Orleans’problems were due to inadequate social

programs.

Many left-wing punditsused the worst blackbehavior as clear evi-

dence of how oppressedblacks are.


believable.It is good news if the people at

the Convention Center and theSuperdome were not as badlybehaved as everyone thought, butthat does not change the lessonsto be learned from Katrina. TheCenter and the Dome werestripped clean by looters. Therewere robberies and intimidation.The small number of whites inthese places were subject to ter-rifying abuse. There was wide-spread looting in the city. Twohundred police officers—mostlyblack—deserted. The Louisiana attorneygeneral is investigating the department

on looting charges. Would conditionshave been different if the city were white ΩΩΩΩΩ

rather than black? Yes, and by ac-cepting reports about backs theywould have rejected about whites,the press implicitly agrees.

We will never know the com-plete truth about attacks on rescueboats, shots fired at helicopters,hijacked ambulances, and lootedhospitals. Some of this—maybemost of it—probably happened asit was originally reported. Butwhatever took place in New Or-leans, both the events themselvesand the country’s willingness tobelieve the worst, make a mock-

ery of the official view that race does notmatter, and that all groups are equal.

A Curious Madness‘Gilded honour shameful-ly misplaced.’

by Jared Taylor

Acurious state of madness des-cended on the country on Octo-ber 24, and began to dissipate

only by the first week of November.Americans lavished the praise and honorreserved only for supreme heroes on a

woman whose sole achievement was torefuse to give up her seat on a bus.

From the moment Rosa Parks died atthe age of 92, until she was buried ninedays later, virtually every politician andorgan of the media competed to see whocould heap the most praise on a womaninvariably referred to as a “civil rightsicon.” She became only the 30th per-

son—and the first woman—to lie in statein the Capitol rotunda, where PresidentGeorge Bush laid a wreath. Her casketwas accompanied by a military honorguard for memorial services in Washing-ton, before she was buried on Novem-ber 2 in a seven-hour funeral in Detroit.The President ordered that all flags overfederal buildings and bases fly at halfmast. It was an astonishing tribute to awoman whose lifetime of achievementbegan and ended in one afternoon.

The myth that has grown uparound Rosa Parks is of an ex-hausted Birmingham seamstresswho, in 1955, was too tired togive up her seat and move to thecolored section so a white mancould sit down. According to themyth, this spontaneous actsparked the Montgomery busboycott and launched the civilrights movement. In the miles ofcolumn inches that greeted thenews of her death, there wereonly hints of what really hap-pened.

In fact, Parks’s decision tokeep her seat was carefully

planned by the NAACP, for which shehad worked for 10 years as a secretary.Her arrest did help start the bus boycott,but she played no role in organizing it.And though the boycott has gone downin folklore as a great blow for freedom,it did not even succeed; it was a courtorder that integrated Birmingham’sbuses.

Several black women had already

done exactly what Parks later did. Theywere arrested and charged with minorinfractions. Parks’s best known prede-cessor was Claudette Colvin, a 15-year-old high school student who refused togive up her seat on March 2, 1955. Shewas arrested and taken off the bus kick-ing and screaming. Police say she wasscreaming obscenities; she later claimed

she was screaming that her constitutionalrights were being violated. Not evenMiss Colvin’s case was the spontaneousact for which Parks is now generally re-membered. The girl had been active inthe NAACP Youth Council, and hadeven discussed strategy with Rosa Parksherself.

The NAACP considered basing a de-segregation case on the basis of Miss

High heroism.


Colvin’s arrest but soon decided she wasnot an attractive plaintiff. She was dark,and many blacks wanted a lighter-

skinned spokesman. The NAACP alsolearned she was several months pregnantby a married man, and discovered herhabit of breaking out in volleys of curses.This was not a girl conservative blackchurch-goers would support.

As E.D. Nixon, then a leader of theMontgomery chapter of the NAACP, ex-plained years later, “I had to be sure thatI had somebody I could win with.” RosaParks was far more promising: “morallyclean, reliable, nobody had nothing onher.”

The NAACP had been planning a busboycott for years, and was waiting onlyfor the right person to act as figurehead.Far from being an accidental hero, Parkswas carefully groomed for her role. Awhite integrationist, Virginia Durr, hadpaid for Parks to attend civil rightsstrategy seminars at the High-lander Folk School in Tennessee.The school, known to be rife withCommunist sympathizers, was un-der FBI surveillance.

Moreover, Parks’s role wasstrictly limited: keep her seat andhold her tongue. Others swunginto action immediately to orga-nize the boycott. The very day shewas arrested—it was a Thurs-day—an English professor at all-black Alabama State Collegenamed Jo Ann Robinson stayed upall night mimeographing 35,000 leafletscalling for a one-day bus boycott the fol-lowing Monday. On Friday, she and herstudents secretly leafleted elementaryand high schools. As part of a coordi-nated effort, Montgomery’s blackpreachers met and agreed to endorse theMonday boycott from their pulpits, and

to hold a mass meeting Monday night atHolt Street Baptist Church to assess theresults. That evening, after a surprisingly

successful boycott, thousands ofblacks crowded into and around thechurch to hear 26-year-old MartinLuther King give his first publicspeech. The boycott lasted for morethan a year, with both the blacks andthe bus company more stubborn thananyone had expected. Blacks orga-nized carpools that even the CitizensCouncil had to admit operated with“military precision.” Parks played norole in any of this.

It was not the boycott that eventu-ally brought integration, but a courtcase—and one in which Rosa Parkswas not even a plaintiff. In Browder

v. Gayle—one of the four plaintiffswas foul-mouthed Claudette Colvin—a three-panel district court in Birming-ham ruled on June 19, 1956 that seg-regated buses were as much a viola-tion of the 14th Amendment as segre-gated schools. The Supreme Court up-held the decision in December. Then,and only then, did Montgomery agreeto integrate its buses.

It can be argued, therefore, that theboycott was both a failure and unnec-essary. Rosa Parks was a catalyst in or-ganizing what turned into an impressivedemonstration of black solidarity, butvirtually anyone presentable would haveserved equally well. Rosa Parks did notrisk death. She did not face fire hoses orpolice dogs. She did not even face hu-miliation. She knew very well that if she

was polite and cooperated with the po-lice she would be treated courteously.She also knew that the NAACP and herwhite friends would immediately bail herout of jail.

After court-ordered integration.

It is impossible, even by the mostsympathetic reading, to see Rosa Parksas anything but an unimportant actor ina drama that was not even necessary. Notonce, in the intervening 50 years, did shedo anything of the slightest importance.Black congressman John Conyers gaveher a job in his Detroit office, apparentlymore out of courtesy than because of herabilities. As she grew older, she misman-aged her finances, and depended on alocal church to pay her rent. Eventually,her landlord simply stopped charging.

Rosa Parks has dined out—and be-come a hero of American history—onthe basis of a single half hour of immo-

bility. Surely, never in the history of theworld, has so small an act won suchpraise.

The last few years have been build-ing up to the extraordinary excesses wehave just witnessed. In 1996, President

William Clinton presented Parkswith the Presidential Medal ofFreedom, and in 1999, Congressvoted her its Gold Medal. These,too, are exalted honors.

Blacks are not likely to com-plain if whites make a demigod ofan unimportant woman, but whydo whites bow their heads beforesuch transparent fraud? There isno satisfactory answer. Americansare never happier than when glo-rifying non-whites who have de-nounced the alleged sins of whites.The adulation of Rosa Parks is just

another chapter in the lemming-like rushto destruction whites everywhere appearto have joined. If a still-majority-whiteCongress and Senate can vote by accla-mation to make Rosa Parks the firstwoman to lie in state in the rotunda, anyact of racial self-mortification is pos-sible.

Said to be the very bus itself—now ondisplay in a Detroit museum.

ΩΩΩΩΩ

The ‘mother of the civil rights movement’makes a stylish exit.


Race Realism Takes a Step ForwardMore strong evidence forthe genetics of intelligence.

by Chris Brand

The moment the anti-racists andegalitarians have dreaded has nowarrived. In September, University

of Chicago geneticists published data inthe prestigious journal Science that linkstwo sets of genetic variations (alleles)to brain size, race, and spurts in humanevolution. In particular, these geneticvariations—arguably responsible forgreater intelligence—were relativelycommon in Europe and Asia, but mark-edly less common in sub-Saharan Africa.Previously, the same researchers hadshown these variations to be much morefrequent in man than in other mammals,though our closest relatives, the chim-panzees, showed levels that suggest

some evolution in the direction of hu-mans.

This excellent new Chicago work hasbeen carried out under the direction of ayoung Chinese, Dr. Bruce Lahn. Histeam had studied the prevalence of vari-ants of two genes that are disabled or

damaged in human cases of severe mi-crocephaly, in which the brain developsto only 30 percent its normal size. Thefact that they are damaged in microc-ephalics suggests they are necessary fornormal brain growth.

Dr. Lahn’s researchers examined theDNA of 1,184 people around theworld—though not in racially mixed ar-eas like North America, Russia and Aus-tralia. They estimated that one undam-aged variation, microcephalin haplo-group D (let us call it variation one, orV1) first appeared around 40,000 BCand has since spread to some 70 percentof humans. It is more common in Eu-rope, Asia, South America and LatinAmerica than in black Africa. At threepercent, it is especially infrequent inCongo pygmies, whom black Africanscommonly regard as inferior.

A second variant of the gene, abnor-mal spindle-like microcephaly-associ-ated haplogroup D (let us call it V2), ar-rived more recently, around 6,000 BC,and has since spread to 30 percent ofhumans. It is most common in Europeand the Middle East, somewhat lesscommon in Asia, and distinctly rare inblack Africa.

Dr. Lahn and colleagues noted that thearrival of V1 coincided roughly with thefirst signs of human habitation and agri-culture; V2 appeared about the time ofthe first cities and the development ofwritten language. The Chicago team be-lieves these new alleles gave rise to theseimportant developments, and that theirpossessors reproduced quickly by occu-pying the new niches offered by agricul-ture and written language.

Geneticists can estimate the age of anallele by observing the number of muta-tions found in it and calculating back towhen the allele first appeared in the mostrecent common ancestor. Mutations ariseat predictable rates, and are consideredto be a reasonably accurate measure ofrelatively short periods of evolution. Itis by this method that scientists estimateit has been five to six million years sincehumans and chimpanzee had a commonancestor.

Needless to say, the Chicago scien-tists went to great pains not to pose toogreat a challenge to modern sensitivitiesabout race and genes. At their press con-

ference, they insisted there was “not nec-essarily” a connection between thesegene variations and brain size. However,they found that sub-Saharan blacks werethe most distinct of the racial groups theystudied, in that they had a markedlylower frequency of both variants. Thisis consistent with the distinct black Af-rican profile of smaller brains and lowerIQ.

The Chicago results are exactly whatwe would expect from the work of Pro-fessor Phil Rushton of University ofWestern Ontario, who has used modernbrain scanning methods to establish acorrelation as high as .40 between brainsize and IQ. Needless to say, the Chi-cago researchers could not mention Prof.Rushton’s name for fear of jeopardizingfurther funding. Some suspect they al-ready have data in the pipeline linkingthese genetic variations directly to IQ,and that when they hold another pressconference to announce these findingsthey want someone to attend.

Naturally, the authors wrote only of“geographical” and not of racial differ-ences in the frequency of these alleles,but no one is fooled by this piety. Theyassured the press that their V work doesnot mean black Africans have a low IQor any other disadvantage. At the sametime, Dr. Lahn implied the oppositewhen he volunteered that Africans couldwell turn out to be blessed with still othervariations that might be shown one dayto give them advantages of their own. Inother words, it may have been purely byaccident that the advantage in Europe-

Bruce Lahn.

Microcephalin haplogroup D is rare inPygmies.


ans and Asians had come to light first.The findings came hard on the heels

of work in Brisbane by Professor NickMartin, who has found sizeable IQ dif-ferences within families associated withvariations in the DNA on chromosomes2 and 6. His work did not look for racedifferences in the distribution of thesevariations, but that would be an obviousarea of research. At the same time, theOctober 24 issue of New York Magazinedevoted eight pages to Gregory Cochranand Henry Harpending’s theory that highrates of sphingolipid genetic diseaseslike Tay-Sachs in Ashkenazi Jews may

be associated with a substantial advan-tage in IQ (their work originally ap-peared in the June issue of the BritishJournal of Biosocial Science).

The media and even the scientiststhemselves can hedge and fudge all theylike, but their favorite “post-modern”pretense that there is no such thing asrace is looking sillier all the time. TheWest’s anti-racists have succeeded insuppressing most references to the g(general intelligence) factor and the Lon-don School that discovered and devel-oped the concept, but they now face anassault from an unexpected quarter. Dr.

Bruce Lahn may be more the diplomatthan one normally finds in nature vs.nurture debates, but he got his first tasteof dissent as a student rebel in his hometown of Peking during the TianenmenSquare demonstrations. This suggests hehas a strong dislike for Communism’styrannical and useless environmental-ism, and that he may have principles thatwill soon see him linked to his naturalallies in the London School.

Chris Brand, formerly of EdinburghUniversity, is the author of The g Factor(reviewed in “Whys and Wherefores ofIntelligence,” AR, July, 1996).

ΩΩΩΩΩ

Betrayals of Office

Third-World habits driftnorth.

by Ian Jobling

One of the reasons for law-lessness in LatinAmerica is that many po-

lice are on the side of the crimi-nals. In some jurisdictions, po-lice corruption is more the normthan the exception. In June, forexample, Mexican federal au-thorities arrested 700 of the1,200 officers in Nuevo Laredofor suspected involvement withdrug cartels. [Federal AgentsArrest Hundreds of Police inCorrupt Border City, KHOU(Houston), June 13, 2005.]

Hispanics do not seem tochange when they come to the UnitedStates, and government employees of-ten break the laws they have sworn toenforce. In the past few years, dozens ofHispanic officials have been arrested fordrug smuggling, migrant smuggling, andcreating false IDs for illegal entrants.

Operation “Lively Green,” an FBIsting designed to uncover drug smug-gling by government employees, has sofar led to 33 guilty pleas, with 24 fromHispanics. The smuggling ring includedsoldiers, prison guards, port inspectors,and police officers. FBI agents posingas drug traffickers persuaded officials towave by shipments of cocaine throughports, transport cocaine across statelines, and sell fake citizenship docu-ments. Crooked government officials

used the power of their offices to pre-vent stops and seizures by the BorderPatrol and police.

In one incident in 2002, several gov-ernment workers drove three officialvehicles, including two Humvees be-

longing to the Arizona National Guard,to a secret airstrip in Arizona where theymet an airplane flown by undercoveragents. Then they drove 160 lbs. of co-caine to a hotel in Phoenix, where an-other undercover agent paid them. Alto-gether, they took $300,000 in paymentsfor 1,474 lbs. of cocaine. A newspaperdescribed the 33 criminals as “mostlyblack and Hispanic.” [Michael Marizco,3 ½ Year FBI Coke Sting Catches 21 inUniform, Arizona Daily Star (Tucson),May 13, 2005. Current, Former US Sol-diers and Law Enforcement Agree toPlead Guilty to Participating in Briberyand Extortion Conspiracy, Departmentof Justice, May 12, 2005. FBI Snares 16in Drug Sting, Tucson Citizen, Sept. 1,

2005.]Border Patrol agent Oscar Antonio

Ortiz was indicted in August for smug-gling aliens into the US from the area ofTecate, a Mexican town across the bor-der from California. Wiretapped calls

recorded him discussing logisticsand payments. He and two confed-erates smuggled 30 to 50 immi-grants at a time at $2,000 per head.

Mr. Ortiz proved to be an illegalhimself. The Border Patrol hiredhim on the strength of a fake birthcertificate that claimed he was bornin Chicago. According to T. J.Bonner, president of the union rep-resenting Border Patrol employees,it is “mind-boggling” that an illegalalien could be hired. “I would thinkthat would be the very first thingthey check,” he says. [Onell R. Sotoand Leslie Berestein, Border Agent

Said to Also be Smuggler, San DiegoUnion-Tribune, Aug. 5, 2005. Onell R.Soto, No Bail for Ex-Border Agent inConspiracy, San Diego Union-Tribune,Aug. 6, 2005. Former Border PatrolAgent Indicted on Fraud, SmugglingCharges, San Diego Union-Tribune,Aug. 18, 2005.]

US soldiers Daniel Rosas, VictorPortales, and Kevin G. Irizarry-Melen-dez, who were sent to Colombia to fightdrug smugglers became smugglers them-selves. They put cocaine in coffee boxesand loaded them along with the rest oftheir equipment onto military aircraftback to Texas. In all, they smuggled 169pounds of cocaine, which they sold forabout $300,000. According to Mr.Rosas, the Army “never suspected that

Mexican police: Will they rob you or protect you?


any military or civilian personnel wouldbring back contraband,” and neverchecked their gear. [Kim Housego, HowGreed and Opportunity Turned US Sol-diers into Drug Traffickers, AP, Sept. 3,2005.]

Juan L. Sanchez, who worked as aBorder Patrol agent in Nogales, Arizona,was indicted in June for smuggling twotons of marijuana into the US. He madeat least six trips, at one time stuffing 920lbs. into his Border Patrol vehicle. Hereceived $30,000 for the marijuana and$45,000 in bribes. [Susan Carroll, Bor-der Agent Indicted in Drugs, Weapons,Bribery Case, Arizona Republic (Phoe-nix), June 2, 2005. Michael Marizco,

Border Agent Charged as Smuggler,Arizona Daily Star (Tucson), June 2,2005.]

Another Border Patrol agent, LuisHigareda, who worked near Calexico,California, pled guilty to marijuanasmuggling charges in April. In January,he met smugglers in the border regionand loaded his patrol vehicle with 750lbs. of marijuana with a street value of$600,000. Federal authorities arrestedhim as he was driving the shipment in-land. [News Release, Office of the USAttorney, Southern District of Califor-nia, Feb. 3, 2005. Onell R. Soto, ManEnters Plea on Smuggling Charge, San-Diego Union-Tribune, Apr. 15, 2005.]

Customs and Border Protection offi-cial Fabian Solis pled guilty in April toabetting a human smuggling operation.Mr. Solis was in charge of monitoringtraffic at the port of entry at Rio Grande,Texas. Smugglers paid him $300 per il-legal to allow trucks filled with aliensthrough the border. [Customs and Bor-der Protection Official Arrested for Rolein Alien Smuggling Conspiracy, USAttorney’s Office, Southern District of

Texas, Dec. 9, 2004. Official AdmitsLetting Illegal Immigrants into Texas,AP, Apr. 5, 2005.]

In October 2004, two customs offic-ers in Chicago named Jaime Garcia andAlma Teran were charged with givingconfidential law enforcement informa-tion to Hispanic drug dealers and smug-glers. Criminals paid the two officers atleast $330,000 to look through govern-ment databases and see whether the deal-ers were under investigation. [NatashaKorecki, Customs Cops Tipped DrugRing: U.S., Chicago Sun-Times, Oct. 20,2004.]

In October 2005, Lizandro Martinez,a senior customs inspector, pleaded

guilty to helping a Hispanicsmuggling ring get shipmentsof marijuana past the Texasborder. The leader of the ring,Roberto Dominguez of Hidal-go, Texas, bribed the inspec-tor to let smugglers drive car-goes through the inspectionlane he manned. The payoffsbegan in 2002 and lasted 2½years. Mr. Martinez and Mr.Dominguez face 10 years tolife in prison, and fines of upto $4 million. Former customsinspector Martinez has also

forfeited real estate and vehiclesworth hundreds of thousands of

dollars. [Inspector Convicted of MoneyLaundering, AP, Oct. 5, 2005.]

Also in October, Border Patrol agentRobert Espino was sentenced to eightyears for taking a $5,000 bribe to let ashipment of cocaine pass through aTexas checkpoint. Three more BorderPatrol agents, David Garcia, JesusDelgado, and Aldo Erives, have beencharged in this case as well. Mr. Espinoalso let smugglers sneak 750 illegalsthrough his checkpoint. [Inspector Con-victed of Letting Drugs Cross fromMexico, AP, Oct. 4, 2005. Former Bor-der Patrol Agent Sentenced, KFOX-TV.com (El Paso), Sept. 30, 2005.]

Hispanic officials sometimes violatethe law for reasons of pure ethnic soli-darity. In March 2004, the governmentdeported a number of illegal aliens toMexico. This upset Lizabeth Ramon, a“Latina activist” who worked for thePhoenix Police Department and was thegirlfriend of Assistant Police ChiefSilverio Ontiveros. In June, she tried tosmuggle two of the deported aliens backinto the US in the trunk of her car. Shewas caught and fired from her job, but

avoided jail time through a plea bargain.The Phoenix police found Mr. Ontiveroswas not involved in the smuggling at-tempt, but later transferred him out ofthe department for failing to cooperatefully in the investigation of his girlfriend.[Yvonne Wingett, Police AdvisoryBoard Ousting Latina Activist, ArizonaRepublic (Phoenix), June 18, 2004. JudiVilla and Yvonne Wingett, Phoenix’sAssistant Police Chief Will Get Reas-signment, Arizona Republic, Nov. 25,2004.]

In August 2005, El Paso Border Pa-trol agent Noe Aleman got six monthsin jail for smuggling three of his teen-age nieces from Mexico. Mr. Alemanwanted to adopt the girls, but could notdo so legally. He then gave false testi-mony to an adoption court to enable thegirls to enter the country temporarily toattend court hearings, and did not returnthe girls to Mexico when their time wasup. At sentencing, his tearful wife saidhe was a good man who was trying togive the girls a better life, but the USAttorney said he used fraud and deceitto violate the laws he swore to uphold.[Guillermo Contreras, Border PatrolAgent Convicted on Smuggling Charges,San Antonio Express-News, April 25,2005. Fmr. Border Patrol Agent Sen-tenced to Prison for Immigration Fraud,KVIA (El Paso), Aug. 22, 2005.]

In March 2004, the FBI arrested aborder inspector in El Paso named Fran-

cisco Macias who was letting illegalaliens into the country in exchange forsex. [Daniel Borunda, Agent AllegedlyLet Women Into U.S. in Exchange forSex, El Paso Times, March 30, 2004.]

In July 2005, Border Patrol agentEphraim Cruz, who worked at the Dou-glas, Arizona, station, was charged withbringing an illegal immigrant namedMaria Terrazas-Orozco into the US andgiving her shelter. Mr. Cruz’s motive hasnot been disclosed, but he had a grudgeagainst the Border Patrol. Mr. Cruz hadpreviously protested the patrol’s treat-ment of illegals, saying they werecrowded into cells and deprived of foodfor up to 24 hours. Ray Ybarra of theAmerican Civil Liberties Union says Mr.

Smuggled cocaine: Who helped bring it in?

The smuggling ring in-cluded soldiers, prison

guards, port inspectors,and police officers


Cruz may have been targeted because heis a whistle-blower. [Claudine LoMona-co, Douglas Border Agent Accused of 5Charges, Tucson Citizen, July 9, 2005.]

This year, three more Hispanic Bor-der Patrol agents—Pablo Sergio Berry,Ramon Sanchez, Jr., and Jesus de Jose

Ruiz—have been caught with illegalaliens in their homes. In all cases, theywere the men’s wives or girlfriends.[U.S. Border Agent Indicted, ArizonaDaily Star, March 11, 2005. ClaudineLoMonaco, Border Agent Accused ofHarboring Migrant, Tucson Citizen,

June 23, 2005.]Cases like this are inevitable because

our government ignores the power ofnon-white racial solidarity. No doubtthere are responsible Hispanic bordercontrol agents, but for many, blood willalways be thicker than water. ΩΩΩΩΩ

O Tempora, O MoresFrance Boils Over

As this issue went to press, Muslimviolence in France that began on Oct.27 had entered its second week, thoughwas showing some signs of abating.French President Jacques Chirac had just

declared a state of emergency that wouldauthorize curfews, but had not called upthe army to enforce them. Rioters hadburned more than 5,000 cars and doz-ens of buildings—including schools,churches, businesses, police stations andeven day care centers—and had injuredscores of policemen and firemen. Vio-lence had spread more widely than at anytime in French history, to nearly 300 cit-ies and towns, and had brought destruc-tion at levels not seen since the SecondWorld War. There were reports of copy-cat attacks in Belgium and Germany.Authorities had arrested more than 1,000suspects (invariably referred to in themedia as “disaffected youth”), but hadso far refrained from lethal force. [JameyKeaten, French President Declares Stateof Emergency, AP, Nov. 8 2005.]

On Nov. 7, the rioters claimed theirfirst life, when a gang of Muslims beatto death a 61-year-old Frenchman, Jean-Jacques Le Chenadec. He had alreadybeen badly beaten three days earlier. Theuprising gives the lie to France’s claimthat non-white minorities—mainlyNorth African Muslims and sub-Saharanblacks—have shed their home cultures

and assimilated into French society.[French Riots Hit 274 Towns, SpreadAbroad, MSNBC.com, Nov. 7, 2005.French Riots Claim First Fatality,CNN.com, Nov. 7, 2005.]

The violence began in the low-incomeParis suburb of Clichy-sous-Bois on the

night of Thursday, Oct. 27. Two youngArabs, 15-year-old Bouna Traore and17-year-old Zyed Benna, one Maur-itanian and the other Tunisian, wereelectrocuted at a power sub-stationwhere they tried to hide from police,who they mistakenly thought werechasing them. Rumors quickly spreadthat police ran the boys into the sub-station and left them to die. Violencebroke out that night, with young im-migrants torching cars and local busi-

nesses. By the weekend, rioting hadspread to another immigrant suburb,Aulnay-sous-Bois.

Within three more days theriots had spread to 20 townsaround Paris. Rioters fired onpolice and firemen—unusual inFrance, where there are few pri-vate firearms—and burned atleast 315 cars. They also set fireto a Renault automobile dealer-ship, a supermarket, and a gym-nasium. Authorities had to stoptraffic on a commuter rail linelinking Paris to CharlesDeGaulle Airport after riotersattacked trains, breaking win-dows with rocks, and kicking a conduc-tor off his train. In the northern Parisiansuburb of Sevran a gang threw Molotovcocktails at a city bus, badly burning ahandicapped woman. Rioters severelyinjured a 13-month-old child when theystoned a bus. [Henry Samuel, DeathsSpark Riots in Paris Suburbs, Telegraph(London), Nov. 1, 2005. Fresh ViolenceHits Paris Suburbs, BBC News, Nov. 3,2005. Jamey Keaten, Violence Intensi-fies in Suburbs of Paris, AP, Nov. 3,2005. Woman Attacked as Riots Con-tinue in Paris, AFP, Nov. 4, 2005.

Timeline: French Riots, BBC News,Nov. 7, 2005.]

By Nov. 3, as the rioting entered itssecond week, the violence had spreadto 90 communities around Paris, and toDijon, Marseille, Nice, Toulouse andStrasbourg. On Nov. 5, rioters reachedthe center of Paris itself, where theyburned 35 cars. The next day, hundredsof rioters clashed with police in the cityof Grigny, south of Paris, and for the firsttime, wounded policemen with gunfire.Ten officers were hit by birdshot and twowere injured seriously. Muslims inClichy-sous-Bois, where the rioting be-gan, were pleased at the news. “This isjust the beginning,” said Moussa Diallo,an unemployed 22-year-old French-Af-rican, who predicted policemen woulddie before the rioting ended. [Craig S.Smith, 10 Officers Shot as Riots Worsen

in French Cities, New York Times, Nov.7, 2005.]

By early November, the level of de-struction had grown significantly, as ri-oters moved from burning cars to torch-ing buildings. They were making impro-vised anti-personnel devices by stuffinggasoline bombs with nails or steel balls.On Nov. 6, police discovered a firebombfactory in suburban Paris with 150 ex-plosives under construction, and 50ready to use. They arrested six bombmakers, all of them minors.

One of at least 5,000 cars that burned.

This used to be a warehouse.


“Most of these kids are being coachedby professional petty criminals and gangleaders in the suburbs,” said Jean-Christophe Carne, president of policeunion Action Police CFTC. “In the past,when we have cracked down on thesecriminals in their homes, we founddrugs, grenades and heavy weapons suchas guns. While they haven’t started us-ing these arms yet, there’s also no rea-son to think they wouldn’t.” Before thestate of emergency was declared, Mr.Carne said police were pessimistic thatthe violence would stop any time soon.His organization was already calling forstrict night-time curfews and army troopsto help stop what he said was turninginto “civil war.” Australia, Austria, Brit-ain, Germany, Hungary, Russia and theUnited States advised tourists to be care-ful in France, and warned them away

from violence-hit areas. [Jennifer JoanLee, Paris Police Fear Rioters’ HeavyArms, Washington Times, Nov. 7, 2005.Angela Doland, Rioting Spreads to 300Towns in France, AP, Nov. 7, 2005.French Violence Hits Fresh Peak, BBCNews, Nov. 7, 2005.]

The level of destruction can be judgedby what the French considered to besigns of improvement. On the night ofNov. 7 to 8, vandals burned only 1,173cars, down from 1,408 the night before.Arrests were also down from 395 to 330.The curfews, to be imposed under a 1955law that dates back to the Algerian war,seemed likely to curb the mayhem.

The government was initially bewil-dered by the uprising, split between thehardline approach of Interior MinisterNicolas Sarkozy, who called the rioters“scum,” and Prime Minister Dominiquede Villepin, who prefers diplomacy. Mr.de Villepin wants to approach so-calledcommunity leaders and listen to theyoung rioters’ grievances. Their defend-ers, of whom there are many, say youngArabs and blacks are victims of racism

and economic oppression. Mr. Villepinagrees. In an address to a special ses-sion of the National Assembly called onNov. 8, he explained that racial discrimi-nation is a “daily and repeated infringe-ment of our national ideals,” and that“the struggle against all discriminationsmust become a priority for our nationalcommunity.” [French PM AcknowledgesRacial Divide, AP, Nov. 8, 2005.]

Jacques Chirac appears to be of twominds. After a meeting with his nationalsecurity council on Nov. 6, he said his“absolute priority is to reestablish secu-rity and public order. . . . Those people[the rioters] will be apprehended, judgedand punished.” At the same time, hetalked about addressing the root causesof Muslim disaffection, which he saysincludes an unemployment rate as highas 50 percent in some neighborhoods.

It may be too late for either ap-proach to have much success.France has been ignoring warn-ing signs about its resentful andgrowing black and Muslimunderclass for years, but has notclamped down on immigration.Perhaps this crisis will finallyawaken France to the dangers ofmultiracialism. At least oneFrench paper, the conservativeLe Figaro, has figured out whatwent wrong: a “policy of immi-gration without control.” It wrote

that the “urgent necessity is to controlthe influx of immigrants, both legal andillegal” for fear that “in 15 years, it willbe the children of those arriving todaywho will set fire to the suburbs.” Philippede Villers, a right-wing member ofFrance’s National Assembly who wantsto “stop the Islamization of France,” saysthe riots stem from the “failure of apolicy of massive and uncontrolled im-migration.” [French Press Searches forSolutions, BBC News, Nov. 4, 2005.Jamey Keaten, Violence Intensifies inSuburbs of Paris, AP, Nov. 3, 2005.]

During the first week of riots, Jean-Marie Le Pen of the National Front re-frained from commentary, pointing outthat the facts spoke for themselves farmore eloquently than he could. On No-vember 9, however, he gave an interviewto the Associated Press in which he de-scribed the riots as “just the start” of ten-sions caused by “massive immigrationfrom countries of the Third World thatis threatening not just France but thewhole continent.”

He urged that rioters be stripped of

citizenship and deported to Africa:“Those who got nationality automati-cally, who don’t consider themselvesFrench and who even say publicly thatthey consider France their enemy shouldnot be treated as French.” He added theNational Front was “submerged” withapplications for membership, and that ifhe were to run again for the presidency“my chances would be increased ten-fold.” [John Leicester, Far-Right Leader:Riots Only the Start, AP, Nov. 9, 2005.]

Denmark Getting CloseFrance is not alone. Young Muslims

rioted for three nights in the Danish cityof Aarhus in late October, throwingstones and setting fire to restaurants,stores and other businesses. Firemen hadto be escorted into the area by police.Although 30 to 40 people took part inthe violence each night, police arrestedonly two, including a 16-year-old Somaliimmigrant.

During the day, rioters returned to thearea to celebrate victory—some openlyeating food they looted from restaurantsthe night before. “Spokesmen” for therioters made what one Danish newspa-per called a “clear declaration of war.”“This land belongs to us,” they said.“The police have to stay away. This isour area. We rule here.”

Many of the Muslim rioters say theywere offended by a newspaper printingcartoons they say were disrespectful to-wards Islam and the Prophet Moham-med, and that they had planned the riotsin advance. “We have planned this forthree weeks,” says a spokesman. “Thatis why only two were arrested Saturdaynight. The police will cordon off it all.But we know the ways out.” [ErikThomle, Unge indvandrere amok iÅrhus-byde (Young Immigrants RunAmok in Aarhus), Jyllands-Posten (Viby,Denmark), October 31, 2005.]

Wages of AltruismBetty Blair, a well-respected and

kindly 77-year-old white widow, was anactive member of St. Pius V CatholicChurch in Pasadena, Texas. When thechurch’s Social Services Ministry de-cided to help Katrina refugees, she letthree Louisiana women stay in her homefor a month. After they left, Mrs. Blairdecided to help more refugees. Shestarted paying Jimmy Hoang Le andStephanie Jacobo, both 18, and 43-year-


old Roosevelt Smith for odd jobs on herupscale property. Her neighbors did notlike the look of the men, and one plannedto speak to Mrs. Blair about them, butnever got the chance. On Oct. 28, theyrobbed and strangled Mrs. Blair, andstole her car. Police arrested themlater that night and they were chargedwith capital murder the next day.[Anne Marie Kilday and MonicaGuzman, 3 Hurricane Evacuees Ac-cused of Killing Woman Who HelpedThem, Houston Chronicle, Oct. 30,2005.]

The Sneaky SenateThe Senate has voted to increase

immigration by an estimated 350,000 ayear, as part of the Deficit ReductionOmnibus Bill Reconciliation Act. Thebill passed the Senate on November 3by a margin of 52 to 47, and raises thecap on H-1B visas, which are given tohighly skilled workers, from 65,000 to95,000. Also, it permits all immigrantworkers (including H-1Bs) who come inunder the current quota of 140,000 tobring their spouses and children, whereasdependents now count against the quota.Finally, the bill means employment vi-sas not used in the year granted will notexpire but remain usable for severalyears. The Senate did raise the fee em-ployers have to pay for H-1B visas from$1,685 to $2,185.

Senator Robert Byrd led what mea-ger opposition there was to this massiveimmigration increase. He proposed anamendment that would eliminate the in-crease but raise fees for existing visas.“These are massive and destabilizingimmigration increases,” he said, “andthey are hitching a free ride on this rec-onciliation bill.” Sen. Byrd also ex-pressed amazement that such a momen-tous change in America’s immigrationpolicy would receive only 20 minutes’debate. The AFL-CIO and the immigra-tion enforcement groups NumbersUSAand the Federation for American Immi-gration Reform supported Mr. Byrd’samendment but the Senate voted it downby a crushing 85 to 14. Only three Re-publicans voted for it. [Senate VotesAgainst Byrd Amendment, NumbersUSA, Nov. 3, 2005.]

The Senate bill will now have to bereconciled with the House version,which does not contain immigration in-creases but raises revenue by increasingfees for existing visas, just as the Byrd

amendment did. The House, which ismuch less favorable to mass immigra-tion than the Senate, seems to be readyfor a fight. “This is not the time or placefor controversial immigration provi-sions,” says Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas.

[Stephen Dinan, Budget Bill WouldBoost Green Cards, Washington Times,Oct. 31, 2005. Kenyonna Summers, Im-migration Bill Gets Support, Washing-ton Times, Nov. 4, 2005.]

In the United States, there were hardlyany stories about this proposed majorchange in immigration policy. A Googlesearch on the three days after the votefound only three stories in US papersabout the immigration provisions. InIndia, which would be a major benefi-ciary of the new visas, there were 19 sto-ries in the same period.

The Programmers Guild, an organi-zation of computer programmers, saysemployers are using the visas to lowercosts, rather than remedy a labor short-age. The average wage of a programmerin the US is $67,700, but the averagewage of a H1-B visa-holder is $52,000.The report concludes that “abuse [of vi-sas] is far more common than legitimateuse.” There are now 450,000 H1-B hold-ers working as programmers. One hun-dred thousand American programmersare out of work. [Ephraim Schwartz, TheH1-B Swindle, Info World, Oct. 25,2005. High-Tech Worker Visas,NumbersUSA, http://www.numbersusa.com/interests/hightech.html.]

Kiwi QuandariesWinston Peters, a white-Maori hybrid

who is head of the anti-immigration NewZealand First Party, has been appointedminister for foreign affairs. Mr. Petersraised a ruckus in 2004 when he warnedthat New Zealand could become anAsian colony, and this year he claimedMuslim extremists were entering thecountry. The New Zealand First Party

received only 5.8 percent of the vote andseven seats in parliament but Mr. Petersgot the job because the ruling LabourParty had to put together an awkwardcoalition of small parties in order to keeppower. [Peters is New Zealand’s New

Foreign Minister, Australian Associ-ated Press, Oct. 17, 2005.]

Meanwhile, the conservative Na-tional Party of New Zealand, the mainopposition party, has appointedWayne Mapp, who holds a PhD ininternational law, to the new positionof “Political Correctness Eradicator”in its shadow cabinet. According toDr. Mapp, “A person, an institutionor a government is politically correctwhen they [sic] cease to represent the

interests of the majority and become fo-cused on the cares and concerns of mi-nority sector groups.” Dr. Mapp hashelped defeat a bill to outlaw discrimi-nation against homosexuals and the“transgendered,” and wants to overturnthe ban on smoking in bars and restau-rants. [Mapp’s Plans for Life-Saving

Legislation ‘Bizarre’ Says SmokefreeCoalition, Smokefree Coalition NewZealand, Oct. 31, 2005. PPTA Targetedby Nats’ PC Eradicator, New ZealandPress Association, Oct. 31, 2005.]

Dr. Mapp also dislikes the “coercivepowers” of the New Zealand HumanRights Commission, and says its posi-tions are “divorced from the main-stream.” He thinks the Waitangi Tribu-nal, a body that hears Maori land claims,practices racial advocacy and is tryingto rewrite New Zealand’s history. Act-ing Prime Minister Michael Cullen, whobelongs to the Labour Party, says a po-sition with the name of Political Correct-ness Eradicator is “chillingly fascistsounding.” [Nats’ PC Eradication Trig-gers Debate, New Zealand Press Asso-ciation, Oct. 27, 2005.]

Despite its stance against political

He’s happy to take your job.

The new foreign minister.


correctness, the National Party still doesnot want Mr. Peters in the cabinet. “Ithink putting him as minister of foreignaffairs does huge damage for our inter-national reputation.” [Ainsley Thomp-son, Brash Appoints Political Correct-ness Eradicator, New ZealandHerald (Auckland), Oct. 27, 2005.]

Ready, Set, GrovelLieutenant Tom Molitor, a po-

lice officer for Brown County,Wisconsin, where Green Bay islocated, got in trouble for sayingthat most marijuana drug-runnersare Mexican, and most crackdrug-runners are black. After non-white organizations complained,Lt. Molitor said not all Mexicanswere drug dealers and that diver-sity was “a good thing.” GreenBay Mayor Jim Schmitt apolo-gized for the officer’s commentsand said he should have beenmore careful. “It hurts and it em-barrasses the city a little bit, butwe have to live with that,” headded. One Brown County Super-visor defended Lt. Molitor. “Thisinformation needs to be brokenout and shown to the public,” saidSupervisor Guy Zima, “becauseall we’re getting out of the localnewspaper is, you know, the brightside of diversity, not showing thenegative side.” [Kathryn Bracho,Law Enforcer’s Comments RaiseConcerns Among Minorities,WBAY-TV (Green Bay), Nov. 3,2005.]

Air Force Academy footballcoach Fisher DeBerry explainedat an October press conferencewhy his football team lost a recentgame: The other team “had a lotmore Afro-American players thanwe did and they ran a lot fasterthan we did. It just seems to me tobe that way. Afro-American kidscan run very well.” A week later,he had to apologize—“I havemade a mistake and I ask for everyone’sforgiveness”—but didn’t seem sure whathe was apologizing for. When a reporterasked him what was wrong with sayingblacks run well, he replied, “I don’t thinkthere is anything wrong with that. Wehave some Caucasian players that runvery, very well also. . . . I probably shouldhave said ‘players,’ rather than express-ing a particular ethnic group.” The ath-

letic director, who was also at the con-ference, jumped in and tried to explain:“What we’re talking about is speed.There’s speed that cuts across black,white, gray, blue, whatever. It was justan inappropriate comment and you all

know it was an inappropriate comment.”[Eddie Pells, Air Force Coach Repri-manded After Comments About BlackAthletes, AP, Oct. 26, 2005.]

Getting Tough?Britain has so much racial tension and

division that even liberals worry aboutits effect on national unity. Trevor

Phillips, a black man who heads theCommission for Racial Equality, saysthat “the fragmentation of British soci-ety is a catastrophe for us all.” An ex-ample would be the high levels of seg-regation in immigrant areas. A recent

Sheffield University study foundthat in five areas of London, 45percent of the population was bornabroad. [Richard Woods andDavid Leppard, Are We Sleep-walking Our Way to Apartheid?Times (London), Sept. 18, 2005.]

The British Labour governmenthas decided it must do somethingto ensure British unity, and hasdecided to require candidates fornaturalization to pass a citizenshiptest. The 45-minute “Life in theUK” exam costs £34 and includes24 multiple-choice questions.Exam-takers need to get 75 per-cent of the questions right, but theycan repeat the test as many timesas they like.

Some sample questions: the ageat which one can buy a lotterycard, the type of British court thatuses the jury system, and the volt-age of the British electricity sup-ply. The test also asks where theCockney dialect is spoken, what“MPs” are, and what percentageof British children have single par-ents. Critics say immigrants mayend up knowing more about cer-tain aspects of British life thannatives.

Many people call this the “Brit-ishness” test, but ImmigrationMinister Tony McNulty says it “isnot a test of someone’s ability tobe British . . . . It is a test of theirpreparedness to become citizens.”There are no questions about his-tory. As Mr. McNulty explains, thetest “is about looking forward.”

The race and immigration bu-reaucracies don’t like the test. Thechief executive of the ImmigrationAdvisory Service says it could be“seen as a way of excluding people

from British citizenship.” Trevor Phil-lips, for all his fear of “fragmentation,”opposes any test candidates could fail.[“Britishness” Test Questions Revealed,Telegraph (London), Oct. 31, 2005.Simon Freeman, Citizenship Test RunsInto Flak for Lack of Perspective, Times(London), Oct. 31, 2005. Mary Jordan,It’s Hard to be British, Washington Post,Nov. 1, 2005.]

Three Sculptorsby Marc Zappala

No genius from the Orient comparesTo Europe’s proud interpreters of stone:Bernini, who brought theater to the squaresOf Italy and cast the Papal throneIn sunlight; Michelangelo, whose bareAbility with marble stands aloneAs “David”; and Rodin, whose chisel sparedOne “Thinker” from the mindlessness that dronesThrough every rock. No African has matchedThe least of their achievements, and untilThis changes I, a white man, must dispatchWith sympathy and cultivate the willOf one who reaches deeper, to embraceThe rare, genetic treasures of his race.

Mr. Zappala is a Baltimore-based poet currentlyworking on a book of poems entitled “TheMinotaur.”

ΩΩΩΩΩ

american renaissance · american renaissance - 1 ... throughout the ottoman empire. dmitri...

Documents