The Study of Racialism

My God, how shocking is this? An avowed white nationalist/racist Tom Metzger's once powerful White Aryan resistance (WAR) has this to say about mixed race persons. It is really a sad day when a group like WAR is more cognizant of mixed race people than "American Liberals"....
Read on:

Those Racism-by-Denial Racists

G e n e P i r a c y

- Is she black, white or other? -

On page C5 of the April 10th issue of The Washington Times is found an article about Henriette Delille, "First U.S. black woman considered for sainthood," along with her picture. But the photo of the would-be saint isn't of a black woman but a white-appearing one.

Another example is the photo and story of Charles R. Drew, so-called "black inventor" of blood plasma and blood-banking innovations--Washington Times, March 3, 1996, page B5. Mr. Drew appears white not black, having Caucasian features.

Then there is the August 22nd, 1999, review of "Homelands And Waterways: The American Journey Of The Bond Family," which book is about a black Englishman who became an American--a "black" man who just happened to have a white mother.

Or one might read the August 29th review of "Love Across Color Lines: Ottilie Assing and Frederick Douglass," which fails to mention that the always-hunting-white-women Douglas was biracial, and which fact makes examination of "crossing the color line" an exercise in deception.

Or consider the 4x5 picture of a white-appearing man, Michael Gray, who is referred to as a "Blackfoot and Chippewaree Indian," in a September 1st article, "Census Bureau makes effort to count American Indians."

Or one might count the number of light-skinned and Caucasian-featured "blacks" passing as Negroid in many TV ads. Why aren't true blacks protesting the ruse and demanding more Negroid faces in ads?—maybe because any re-definition of "black" shifts the definition of "Negroid" (read my essay, "The 'One-Drop Rule' as Two-Edged Sword").

Excluding The Non-Negroid Parent Is Racist

The Negroid race is gradually shifting the historical/anthropological meaning of "Negroid" through gene piracy--calling people born from mixed-race parentage "black" when they have no logical or legitimate claim to that identity (examine the many photos of "black" inventors, military officers, scientists, authors, physicians, etc., to discover the degree of gene piracy perpetrated by racism-by-denial racists).

By purposely excluding the race of the non-Negroid parent -- partly by embracing the "one-drop rule" used in the past by whites to identify those having any African heritage -- blacks rob whites of their contributing heritage and, ergo, commit gene piracy through racism-by-denial.

[Note: Some argue that all humanity has its origins through a black African ancestor, which argument is falsely used to claim that we're all Africans, and which illogical argument could be used to call ourselves "primordial slime." Whites are not Africans nor primordial slime but a distinct race]

Do Blacks Come In All Colors?

Racism-by-denial is widespread in America, where, as Oprah Winfrey proclaimed on one of her emotion- drenched shows, "Blacks come in all colors!" Examples of the absurd degree to which racism-by-denial can be practiced are found within the Native American cultures, where white-appearing "Indians" travel about the country giving lectures on Indian culture and tout their Indian pride and heritage, exhibiting no discernible Indian heritage except their braided -- sometimes black-dyed -- hair and their Indian jewelry.

Do Whites Come In All Colors, Too?

Why don't whites come in all colors? Because whites aren't scrambling to practice gene piracy, lacking any need to uplift the historical/ anthropological record of their race through racism-by-denial.

Coveting Heritable Talents

Racism-by-denial in America is for uplifting the meaning of "black African"--by attributing to that race the talents and abilities heretofore not generally exhibited by them, so that any unusual talents (particularly intellectual ones) displayed by anyone having any black (or any other minority) heritage are called anything but "white" (a majority of mixed-race couples is of black men and white women. Why? Black males' racism against black women? Why wouldn't black men prefer white women?).

Doesn't the white parent of a mixed-race child have as much claim to demonstrable talents in the child as the black or Latino or Asian or Indian parent? Or does the one-drop rule still protect the white race from dysgenic mongrelization--from loss of the white race?

Breeding Different Racial Types

So where do racism-by-denial racists get off excluding a child's white heritage?

Such a child can't be called "black" or "Latino" or "white" or "Asian" or "Indian" because he/she is none of those. Such a mongrel child represents the beginning of a different racial type, the beginning of a unique breed capable of passing along unique heritable qualities in physicality, intelligence, temperament and character.

Racism-by-denial has protected the Big Lie about prominent "blacks" from the time of the talented anti-slave lecturer Frederick W. Douglass to present day "first black U.S. governor" Douglas Wilder (both biracial and silent about their white heritage, to showcase their "African" talents).

Racists' Naming Game

Now why would a mixed-race person not demand that he/she be called, say, "human"?

In America today, having any minority status affords one great emotional and monetary capital--from liberals' deep sympathy for historical wrongs to resulting welfare benefits and affirmative-action quotas (used to displace whites in their own civilization) to the I'd-be-successful-if-not-for-racism excuses, which keep whites chained to nation-and culture-destroying social policies (especially immigration from the Third World, which purpose is for diluting and supplanting white civil society by giving minority men access to white women, whom they lust after).

Talented golfer Tiger Woods is keenly aware of the racism-by-denial naming game by not excluding his black or Asian heritage when asked about his ancestry, preferring just to be himself—which position infuriates all of those racist-by-denial "black" Africans.

Racial Mongrelization Kills Good Civilization

All civilizations are built upon racial homogeneity, shared religion and common language. After rumors spread in the known world about any rise of high-culture civilization, other tribes try scrambling to get there.

That leads to racial mongrelization and a resulting loss of those race-specific talents that produced the high culture civilization in the first place.

So white Western democracies are in a terminal condition, as the cycle of the rise and fall of civilizations through d y s g e n i c breeding proceeds apace within them.

I agree that it is ironic that White supremacists recognize multiracial people. But it seems to me that this essay's specific thesis is struck down by its own internal inconsistency. Even granting the implict assumption that bio-races exist (a bad assumption, but grant it anyway), it presents a number of successful multiracials who have contributed to society. It also notes that many White citizens of the richest, most powerful nation on earth (the United States) have recent African ancestry (true). From this it concludes that intermarriage destroys civilization. (?!)

Yes, the sad thing about the article is that Metzger even admits their is talent etc then comes back with the complete contradiction insofar as indicating that "race-mixing" "destroys"........Go Figure.

Oh duh!

You can go to any of their sites and the ultimate evil are corporate Jews brainwashing young, innocent White girls with MTV to date Black men and have little (worthless) Mulatto children that they'll have to raise alone.

lol.

And of course they recognize Multiracials!!!!! To them Multiracials ARE the products of (evil) RACE-MIXING, which will ultimately DESTROY the White Race and eventually turn the US into a 3rd world country/hellhole like every other mongrelized country in Latin America!

One of the excuses that black-identified folks give for endorsing the "one drop" myth is that "whites" will supposedly be so impressed by the achievements of people like Charles Drew, Daniel Hale Williams, Alexander Pushkin, Alexandre Dumas, Capt. Michael Healy, Henriette Delille, etc. that they will conclude that "blacks" must not be "inferior" after all. It actually appears to "prove" the opposite since "whites" and everybody else start to wonder why "black genes" can't seem to stand on their own. Why are blacks parading all these mulattoes and mixed whites as the pride of their "race" instead of the "real blacks"? Instead of whining that antebellum white males "raped" them and "forced" white genes on them, should they instead pay the white race a stud fee (sarcasm). ?

You can be sure that many liberal and ordinary whites and other non-blacks are thinking the same thing, but are much too polite and/or intimidated to say anything in public. Ironically, that leaves open white racists to openly discuss the topics forbidden to other whites.


The white supremacist web site American Renaissance discusses this issue quite frequently:

http://www.amren.com/965issue/965issue.html


http://www.amren.com/9911issue/9911issue.html#article2

http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/miscegenation/index.php

http://www.amren.com/0104issue/0104issue.htm

http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2004/09/the_black_white.php

In a 1966 Playboy interview with Alex Haley, American Nazi leader George Lincoln Rockwell also noted that most prominent "blacks" were really mulattoes. He considered this evidence of black genetic inferiority. Haley did not respond to his accusation.

Rockwell: I know you're going to say you can show me thousands of intelligent niggers and stupid white men. I'm well aware that there are exceptions on both sides. All I'm saying is that the average of your people is below the average of my people; and the pure-black ones are even further below us. I have living evidence of this sitting right in front of me.

Playboy: If you mean me, I'm far from pure black -- as you can see.

Rockwell: That's just it: You're an intelligent person; I enjoy talking to you. But, you're not pure black like your ancestors in the Congo. Now, this may insult you, but we're not here to throw pansies at each other: There had to be some white people in your background somewhere, or you wouldn't be brown instead of black. Right?

Playboy: Right.

Rockwell: Well, I'm saying that your intelligence comes from the blood of my people. Whenever they trot out some smart nigger and say, "See? Look how brilliant niggers are," what they usually show you is a part-white man with some nigger blood in him. This doesn't prove that niggers are great. On the contrary; it proves that white blood can make a part-nigger more intelligent.

Playboy: That's not proof, Commander. Can you offer any authoritative documentation to support your view?

Rockwell: A psychologist named G.O. Ferguson made a definitive study of the connection between the amount of white blood and intelligence in niggers. He tested all the nigger schoolchildren in Virginia and proved that the pure-black niggers did only about 70 percent as well as the white children. Niggers with one white grandparent did about 75 percent as well as the white children. Niggers with two white grandparents did still better, and niggers with three white grandparents did almost as well as the white kids. Since all of these nigger children shared exactly the same environment as niggers, it's impossible to claim that environment produced these tremendous changes in performance. [Ferguson's study, conducted in 1916, we later learned, has since been discredited by every major authority on genetics and anthropology; they call it a pseudoscientific rationale for racism, based on an inadequate and unrepresentative sampling, predicated on erroneous assumptions, and statistically loaded to prove its point. --Ed.]

Playboy: In his book A Profile of the Negro American, the world-famed sociologist T.F. Pettigrew states flatly that the degree of white ancestry does not relate in any way to Negro I.Q. scores. According to Pettigrew, the brightest Negro yet reported -- with a tested I.Q. of 200 -- had no traceable Caucasian heritage whatever.

Rockwell: The fact that you can show me one very black individual who is superior to me doesn't convince me that the average nigger is superior. The startling fact I see is that the lighter they are, the smarter they are, and the blacker they are, the dumber they are.

Playboy: That's an opinion, Commander, not a fact. Can you back it up with any concrete evidence?

Rockwell: The evidence of lifelong experience. I've never met a black nigger -- I mean a real black one, so black he looks purple -- that can talk, and think as, say, you can. When I do, then maybe I'll change my opinion. All the really black niggers are either what you call Uncle Toms, or they're revolutionists, or they just want to loaf, loot and rape.

Playboy: Most sociologists would agree that the vast majority of Negroes -- dark-skinned or otherwise -- don't fit into any of those categories.

Rockwell: Like I said, there are always exceptions -- but everybody knows that they prove the rule. Evolution shows that in the long run, if the superior mixes with the inferior, the product is halfway between, and inferior to what you started with in the original superior group -- in other words, mongrelized.

Playboy: The words superior and inferior have no meaning to geneticists, Commander -- and neither does mongrelization. Every authority in the field has attested that the world's racial groups are genetically indistinguishable from one another. All men, in other words -- including hybrids -- are created equal.

Rockwell: You're bringing tears to my eyes. Don't you know that all this equality garbage was started by a Jew anthropologist named Franz Boas from Columbia University? Boas was followed by another Jew from Columbia named Gene Weltfish. And our present Jew expert preaching equality is another Jew named Ashley Montagu. Any anthropologist who dares to preach the facts known by any farmer in the barnyard -- that breeds differ in quality -- is simply not allowed to survive in the universities or in publishing, because he can't earn a living. You never hear from that side. But Carleton Putnam has written a wonderful book called Race and Reason, showing that there is plenty of scholarly evidence to back up my contention that the nigger race is inherently inferior to the white race intellectually. [Putnam, a former president of Delta Airlines, has no academic credentials in sociology, anthropology or genetics. Explaining its "Not Recommended" classification for his book -- fully titled Race and Reason: A Yankee View -- Book Review Digest writes: "At no time does the author show himself qualified to speak as a scientist."--Ed.] This equality garbage is straight Soviet, Lysenkian biology -- direct from the Communist Lysenko, who preached that by changing the environment you could grow one plant from another plant's seeds. This is the doctrine that's destroying our society -- because it's not true. You can't grow wheat from corn by changing the environment.

Whites who make this argument still have to explain how these “light-skinned blacks” were able to achieve the education and prominence they did, despite the obstacles they faced in this society. If miscegenation between blacks and whites leads to dysgenics, a relationship that produces offspring superior to blacks and beneath whites and ultimately destructive to society, how were these people able to live the lives they lived?

Their levels of education, occupations, behavior, etc., were often on par with middle class whites. How was this possible if they should be on average beneath whites in intelligence? The success of many “part white niggers” in this country undermines the notion of biological inferiority of blacks. White blood is simply not that strong to overcome all that supposedly inferior black blood. Consequently, other non-biological explanations are needed to explain how people like Charles Drew, Thurgood Marshall, and other black-identified elites gained and maintained their positions in society.

Having a white supremacist acknowledge and not revile mixed raced individuals is a VERY recent occurrance!

IMHO, it has been a *very* recent phenomenon that the average so-called "white people" aren't throwing mixed race individuals into the "black" group. Some still do!!

While I agree that currently it's the "black supremacists" that are the ones trying to claim us as "black", for far much longer have "whites" tried to deny our existence and push us into the "black" group.

I think it may depend on who you hang out with and how far back you look.

If you hang out with Brazilians and folks from the Spanish Caribbean, you would have to be very dark indeed to be considered "black" (prieto). Indeed, if you have any noticeable European traits (and middle-class socioeconomic status), you will be classified as "white" (or a gradation of white).

And if you look historically back to before the Civil War, people (of every shade) in the lower South legally and socially saw three "races": White, Black, and Colored (mixed). At the same time, people (of every shade) in the North and the upper South legally and socially saw the two "races" that most Americans see today: White and Black (where Black includes mixed). [For details, see Antebellum Louisiana and Alabama: Two Color Lines, Three Endogamous Groups].

100% right. I just got done reading Ashley Montageau's "Race: Man's most dangerous fallacy" and this is one of the descriptors which Montageau uses in talking about ODR