Recent News

Last summer, I wrote an essay for VDARE.com about my personal journey from liberalism, with a Jewish bent, to the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche. The essay inspired many emails, some of which raised very interesting points. VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow has suggested that I respond to some of the most provocative comments.

First, my essay’s salient points:

(See also: Cecilia Munoz: The Minority Occupation Government Tightens Grip) 

With public attention focused on the GOP primaries, the White House quietly promoted another self-dealing lobbyist to serve as President Obama's top domestic policy adviser. Promises? What broken promises? 

Cecilia Munoz, the current director of intergovernmental affairs at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., will now serve as head of the Domestic Policy Council. She'll wield heightened influence at Obama's daily morning briefings and expand her reach from immigration issues to education, health care and beyond.

Gushing headlines heralded the advancement of Obama's top Hispanic civil rights "advocate" as a win for the "middle class." But Munoz is a veteran member of the Beltway lobbyist class whose former organization is reaping a taxpayer-funded windfall as she climbs the government ladder.

Before joining Team Obama, Munoz spent two decades as chief registered lobbyist

I used to know a man who had the annoying habit of saying that people who differed from him might claim X, “but the reality is…”.

This was annoying because he had no better hold on reality than anyone else. And frequently what he called “the reality” is what the rest of us call “the conventional wisdom.”

I was reminded of that when I saw a story headed Immigration: Rhetoric vs. reality, [by Chris Kromm [Email him], The Institute for Southern Studies, January 10, 2011]

The Institute for Southern Studies, founded “in 1970 by veterans of the civil rights movement,” describes itself as promoting “A New Vision for a Changing South,” which means that it’s sort of an anti-VDARE.com. (A lot better funded—please send us money.)

Recently, it’s promoting a vision of a new, this time more Mexican, South by attacking Republicans for caring about immigration.

The reason it’s wrong to care about immigration? Because “the reality is” that immigration has all stopped! There aren’t any immigrants!

Kromm writes:

Just as immigration is growing as a hot political topic in the South and country, the number of immigrants is in steep decline.

A new study from Princeton's Mexican Migration Project finds that,

“Immigration Overload” is my term for America’s plight. But the special pleadings just keep coming. The latest cry for importing more cheap labor comes from virtually everyone associated with agriculture:

I am told there has been relatively little coverage of the Stephen Lawrence case in the U.S.  (although the Wall Street Journal has just carried an Op Ed arguing that “Racism and other prejudices would not survive in a police system subject to market forces” [Competing to Be Impartial, by Jamie Whyte, January 10, 2012])

But the circus that was enabled by Lawrence’s murder and has been running for nearly two decades now has reached its climax with the conviction of the alleged killers, after what amounted to a political show trial. So it is worth giving a more or less unadorned recital of the facts.

Stephen Lawrence was a black youth who died from a knife wound given on a South London street in April 1993. A few months later, five white youths were arrested in connection with the death. In April 1994, the Crown Prosecution Service decided there was too little evidence to justify murder charges.

Every “anti-racist” activist in the country promptly set up a shrill cry about the alleged worthlessness of black life. And someone whose best-known photograph shows him giving a black power salute began a posthumous rise in England to stand between Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther King.

Because the Authorities had given up on the case, the Lawrence family began a private prosecution (very rarely allowed in Britain) against three of the white youths—Neil Acourt, Gary Dobson and Luke Knight. In April 1996, the trial judge ruled that the evidence given by Duwayne Brooks, the main prosecution witness, was hopelessly unreliable, and instructed the jury to acquit. This did not prevent an inquest jury from ruling, a year later, that Stephen Lawrence had been “unlawfully killed” by five white youths—a finding that exceeded their instructions.

By now, there was a Labour Government in Britain, and it was no longer necessary for Ministers to be led by the bureaucracy and the Main Stream Media. Instead, the Ministers themselves were determined to bring about an irreversible shift in law and public discourse. Though not quite a crime, even questioning whether England should become  a state-imposed  multicultural love feast was to be made dangerous.

The Home Secretary of the day, Jack Straw, set up an enquiry under William Macpherson, a retired judge. Published in 1999, the Macpherson Report unveiled the concept of “institutional racism,” and made various recommendations, including a dangerously broad definition of a racial incident as “any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person”, that would effectively make the police an enforcement agency of the race relations bureaucracy.

The Macpherson Report also suggested that the men acquitted in the Lawrence case should be retried, once the little matter of the 800-year-old double jeopardy rule had been swept aside.

The law was accordingly changed, by the Criminal Justice Act 2003. Acquittals could now be overturned for murder if “significant new evidence” of guilt could be found.

It took another six years after this for the required new evidence to be produced. Eventually, though, Gary Dobson was put on trial for a second time, and he was joined in the dock by David Norris, who had been arrested in 1993, but never charged. Both were found guilty of murder on January 3 2012, and sentenced to long spells in prison.

Britain’s Main Stream Media went into a long and simultaneous orgasm. People keep telling me that their own dissenting comments have been deleted from the newspaper websites.

Now, what to say about all this?

Bluntly, it strikes me as reasonable to suppose that the two men were framed. They had been demonized and reviled ever since they were first arrested, and I doubt if

Just Do It!

This simple phrase is the slogan for one of most ubiquitous global corporations: Nike, Inc. Relying on slave labor in the Third World to produce shoes at low costs, aiming to keep profit margins high so CEO Phil Knight can keep making massive gifts to the University of Oregon, Nike is the perfect shoe outfitter for the post-manufacturing, service-based economy that America has become.

Just Do It!

This simple phrase was on the mind of thousands of black people

This December jobs number—a gain of 200,000 according to survey of business establishments—was hailed as a sign that the economic recovery has finally built up a head of steam. The downtick in unemployment, to 8.5% from November’s revised 8.7%, added to the euphoria gripping the MSM.

Reality check, please.

2011 Articles: I, II, III , IV, V VI [Blog posts]

See also: War Against Christmas 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000, 1999  

 [Peter Brimelow writes: Twelfth Night, the night of January 5, is traditionally the end of Christmas. Appropriately, our good friend Tom Piatak who has written regular essays on the War Against Christmas for us (See here and here, etc), here reviews the conflict ten years after he first joined it.]

When I first wrote about the War On/ Against Christmas ten Christmases ago, there was very little public discussion of the phenomenon. Now each Christmas brings much discussion of the War on Christmas, as well as fresh examples of that war.

Of course, there’s now also War On Christmas Denial—each year, many commentators insist that there is no War On Christmas, in an effort to persuade those who of us who object to the downgrading of Christmas to return to the passivity that used to mark efforts to rename Christmas trees “holiday trees” and the like.

But that passivity is disappearing,