Category Archives: Multiculturalism

FRED REED: The Possible Virtues Of A Salutary Distance

Affirmative Action, Conflict, Crime, Education, English, FRED REED, Intelligence, Law, libertarianism, Multiculturalism, Race

By Fred Reed

Most of the profound anger and apparent actual insanity afflicting the United States stem from racial antagonism: The Floyd riots, the tearing down of statues, affirmative action, the renaming of buildings, hostility to everything Confederate, racial attacks on whites by blacks, critical race theory, the fury over trials. Racial policy isn’t working and isn’t going to. America had better find another approach before, one day, the guns come out.

Sez I, a massive step toward racial reconciliation could be achieved simply by deregulating the schools. The races have very, very disparate cultures and want different things. In the integrated schools, either blacks must be forced to learn things of interest only to whites, or whites must be prevented from learning these things. It is hard to see why black students or their parents would have any interest in Jane Austin, Mark Twain, Shakespeare, or Beowulf. Nor is it clear why whites, of either generation, would care more than passingly about Africa. Why, unworkably, force each to do something both alien and of no interest to it?

Many object that the study of mathematics constitutes racism, or is a means of oppressing blacks. Why force math on blacks or, more importantly, prevent white kids from learning them? Similarly, English grammar is now said to be racist. Why should black young of a background having no interest in such things have to be burdened with it?

These difficulties could within an administrative district be remedied by allowing different groups to establish such schools as they chose, for such students as they chose, teaching such material as they chose. Charges of discrimination could be avoided by requiring by law that all students be subsidized at the same per-pupil rate. Further, allow schools to select such students as they choose. If some schools wanted only white students, or black, or racially mixed, so be it. As long as they were given equal resource’s, it would be their business. If some parents preferred schools of mixed race, it would be their business.  Evangelical schools? Fine. Jewish? Equally so. Chinese? Equally.

The right of schools to choose teachers without governmental bureaucracy—most importantly, certification—would be crucial. Certified teachers are often of low quality and always carriers of industrial-strength political correctness. The teachers unions are just that—unions, interested chiefly in the good of the membership, not the students. I would not be allowed to teach either writing or journalism whereas a half-literate political hire would be.

This would also allow parents of very bright kids to use such tests as they chose to find the extraordinarily smart and then to teach them at their level.  Those opposed to testing could avail themselves of schools not engaging in testing. Forcing kids of IQ 140 or better to agonize in classes at the level of “Mommy Beaver had two sticks and Daddy Beaver had two, how many did that have in all” is child abuse. A child in that range in the second grade is reading at the ninth-grade level and school is nothing but an obstacle. Why do this?

In aggregate these measures—we could call them “freedom”—might go far to reduce hostility.

Smaller and seemingly less important matters count in racial relations. Blacks often deprecate other blacks for “acting white.” This is not unreasonable. People naturally want to be around others who share their culture, manners, and ideas of consideration and propriety. I don’t want my children, or people around me, “acting black.” I don’t know what “acting white” means and I don’t care. I don’t want my children wearing their pants below their knees and saying “muggafugga” every second word. These practices do no actual harm, but are extremely disagreeable to most whites. While I do not want to dictate the culture of blacks—it isn’t my business—neither do I want them transgressing mine. Would not separation be the comfortable solution?

Housing is another matter in which less government would be of use. Here again, policy is disastrous. The races obviously do not want to live together. When blacks move into white neighborhoods, the whites leave. When whites move back into the city, “gentrifying,” blacks are enraged. Upon reaching university, blacks often demand dormitories only for blacks, courses only for blacks, student centers only for blacks, and graduations only for blacks. If whites had the same privileges, friction would diminish. By (again) providing these things on a rigid and transparent basis of equal money per student, discrimination could be avoided.

Since the races usually want to live apart, why not simply let them? Those who wanted to live in mixed neighborhoods could, but if a black neighborhood wanted to avoid gentrification, it could vote to do so.

The voluntary separation of races would greatly reduce the very high rates of crime against whites by blacks, and the fear and intensifying hostility caused by this crime. I don’t know how to end crime, but reducing the fear of blacks would go far to encourage racial reconciliation.

Blacks say that white police discriminate against them.  Whether this is true would make no difference if blacks policed black neighborhoods and whites, white. Cities typically burn because white policemen have beaten or shot a black. The blindingly obvious solution is, in racially homogeneous regions, to have the local race do the policing. Friction might in some degree continue between police and policed, but at least it would not be racial.

Further, though it will at first sound strange, I suggest that black and white neighborhoods be permitted to decide what laws to enforce, at least in those matters affecting only the neighborhood. If blacks chose to ignore use of marijuana, drinking in public, selling crack, or driving without a license, why should they not? Do they not know their neighborhood, its needs and problems, better that I? Why are these things my business either way? The result would be vastly fewer arrests of blacks by whites and fewer blacks in prison, both of these contributing greatly to hostility between the races.

I am not recommending the abandonment of black neighborhoods to crime, but rather letting those affected decide. For example, blacks often hate stop-and-frisk policing. Why not let those affected make the decision? This would reduce the impression of the police as an occupying army, often white.

Nor am I suggesting the subjection of blacks to a punitive regime. I believe that all citizens should have access to good medical care, that providing schools with textbooks of their choice is a proper function of government, as is maintenance of streets, water supply, and electric supply. If a black university wants microscopes or a computer, it should get them. And universities should be free to hire any staff they choose, depending only on the willingness of the staff to be hired. The various forms of welfare should be continued as there is no choice other than causing great hardship–even hunger.

Since the races are in America, and none is going to leave, finding a workable approach to amity would seem a good idea. What we have hasn’t worked, is not working, shows no sign that it ever will, and indeed things are getting worse. A little distance might go a long way. If there is ever an explosion of the very real, very deep anger in the country that the media are hiding from themselves, it might make Floyd’s uprising seem trivial. In the Floyd riots, the guns didn’t come out.

 

******************************************

FRED REED describes himself as [previously] a “Washington police reporter, former Washington editor for Harper’s and staff writer for Soldier of Fortune magazine, Marine combat vet from Viet Nam, and former long-haul hitchhiker, part-time sociopath, who once lived in Arlington, Virginia, across the Potomac River from the Yankee Capital.”
His essays “on the collapse of America” Mr. Reed calls “wildly funny, sometimes wacky, always provocative.”
“Fred is the Hunter Thompson of the right,” seconds Thomas E. Ricks in Foreign Policy magazine. His  commentary is “well-written, pungent political incorrectness mixed with smart military commentary and libertarian impulses, topped off with a splash of Third World sunshine and tequila.”

FRED’S BOOKS ARE ON AMAZON, HERE

FRED’S ARTICLES ARCHIVE

NEW COLUMN: Vetting Afghan Immigrants For A Religious Comorbidity (Islam)

Feminism, Foreign Policy, Gender, IMMIGRATION, Islam, Jihad, Multiculturalism, Political Philosophy, Terrorism

NEW COLUMN is “Vetting Afghan Immigrants For A Religious Comorbidity (Islam).” It’s currently on WND, The Unz Review, CNSNews and The New American.

An excerpt:
… The best way, then, to vet immigrants is by the faith they practice. As the data show, young, second-generation Muslims are well-represented among terrorists acting out against their hosts across the West. Second-generation Muslim-Americans are more prone to act out on their faith than their parents.

 

Omar Saddiqui Mateen shot up a Florida gay nightclub, in 2016. He was a second-generation Afghan-American. Although Mateern’s father was an admirer of the Taliban, the moron media concluded that junior was no Jihadist, only a latent, self-hating homosexual, fixated on phallic symbols like big guns.

 

Another proud Afghan-American who’ll be welcoming the hundreds of thousands of Afghans airlifted and funneled into America is Najibullah Zazi, arrested for plotting to blow up stuff stateside, in September 2009. He was released in 2019.

 

Since public policy is aimed at the common good—a cohort that commits more faith-based murders than another, say Christian Afghans, is, on average, unsuitable as a source of immigration to the US.

 

The reason for second-generation terrorism is no mystery. More so than girls, boys need strong men in their lives—men who’ll affirm their masculinity. Young men crave manly mentors with a strong moral message. But in contemporary American culture, men are sissified and feminized and biological boundaries blurred. American boys, K-12, are mired in an estrogen-infused, cloistered world, where strong men in authority are an endangered minority.

 

When a Muslim male, moreover, hears American preachers, parents, pedagogues and politicians pounding on about our country’s Founding Fathers as the archetypal pale, patriarchal oppressors—he quickly learns to reject his adopted country’s heritage and look elsewhere for masculine inspiration, maybe at Muhammad and his acolytes.

 

The fact that there are moderate Muslims doesn’t mean there is a moderate Islam—or that these moderates won’t sire sons who’ll embrace the unreformed Islam.

 

As painful as it is to say, being Muslim is a predisposing characteristic, a risk factor, if you will, for eruptions associated with this religion.

 

By “risk factor,” I mean that Islam predisposes its believers to aggression against The Other. For in Islam, we have a religion that doubles up as a political system counseling conquest, not co-existence. “Islam’s borders are bloody,” cautioned famed historian Samuel Huntington. The data support his prescient and profound analysis. …

… MORE. NEW COLUMN, “Vetting Afghan Immigrants For A Religious Comorbidity (Islam),” is currently on WND, The Unz Review, CNSNews and The New American.

UPDATE II (7/19 No Nuance Allowed) NEW COLUMN: South Africa Shames U.S. Democrats By Uniting Against Criminality

Crime, Democrats, Homeland Security, Justice, Law, Morality, Multiculturalism, Nationalism, Nationhood, South-Africa

NEW COLUMN IS “South Africa Shames U.S. Democrats By Uniting Against Criminality.” It is currently featured on WND.COM, The Unz Review, CNSNews,  Townhall.com and American Renaissance.

I expect to see the column in Junge Freiheit, a German weekly of excellence, which published my column for some years.

This column is quite a departure from my usual gloom about my homeland. However, when juxtaposed against the pervasive degenerate moral tone set by progressives in the USA—South Africa stands out positivity.

As I said in the column’s coda:

“For everything there is a season under the heavens,” Ecclesiastes teaches. “A time to break down, and a time to build up.”

I’ve cried for the beloved country—to conjure Alan Paton’s poignant tale titled “Cry, the Beloved Country” (1948), which was to apartheid South Africa what Harriet Beecher Stowe’s “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” was to antebellum America.

Now is the time to comfort, praise, and build the beloved country up.

An excerpt:  https://tinyurl.com/seh4cyc3

… in 2020, America erupted in race riots. Cities across the republic were sacked, citizens left defenseless. The camera panned out across the country to reveal policemen and guardsmen caving.

Against the backdrop of “Mad Max”-like dystopian destruction–a portend of things to come–American men in uniform all collapsed to the pavements like yogis to the command of their black tormentors. Bringing in the feds was a must since the protection of individual natural rights trumps federalism. However, while the national guard was galvanized, the cavalry was sent to race-riot hotspots to protect not the citizenry, oh no, but federal property.

As bad and as broken as my poor former homeland is, South Africa’s ruling elites came out with powerful declarations of shared moral values. There was no blame game–no allusion to systemic racism. The system of apartheid was not conjured from the past as causality for criminality. Whites were not demonized as the Evil Other. Over 2000 criminals have hitherto been arrested and 117 killed, I imagine, some by cop. Five thousand soldiers are already on the ground.  …

… By the thousands, South African authorities have been arresting rioters, not right-wingers. Stateside, the Federal Bureau of Investigation is proceeding energetically not against our BLM domestic terrorists, but against Trump-voting Deplorables…

… whereas riots make “Sippy Cup Joe (Biden)” weep for the rioters and wail for police reform, not for policing the rioters–Ramaphosa has sent a clear and moral message: “We will stand as one people, united against violence, unanimous in our commitment to peace and to the rule of law.” …

…MORE  South Africa Shames U.S. Democrats By Uniting Against Criminality” is currently featured on WND.COM, The Unz Review, CNSNews,  Townhall.com and American Renaissance.

https://tinyurl.com/drumc543

UPDATE I (7/17/021): No Nuance Allowed:

Here, in “South Africa Shames U.S. Democrats By Uniting Against Criminality,” I didn’t naively praise poor South Africa. I largely compared the moral tenor of the response to riots in South Africa to the moral tenor of the response to riots in the US. South Africa came out on top.

Smart readers welcome nuance, in general—and, in particular, from a writer who has been way ahead of them and their favorite talkers and merciless regarding South Africa for over a decade!

Alas, readers want their dose of mindless monotone. The Second-Handers will you give you that. Here you get the truth. South African authorities have been arresting rioters; American authorities have been arresting right-wingers.

UPDATE II (7/19:021): Experts in America:

 

A Sizeable Number Of White Americans Are Realizing They Too Belong To A Race

America, Democrats, Left-Liberalism, Media, Multiculturalism, Race, Racism, Republicans

“White racial consciousness comes out … in such beliefs as the evil of reverse discrimination—whites being discriminated against because of the colour of their skin. Such views are NOT racist in the classic sense of white superiority.”—The Economist

The Economist, to which I subscribe because of its impeccable, intelligent reporting, offers quite a fair and incisive look into “the souls of white folks,” a glimpse you’ll not find in an American liberal magazine or other parrot-cage liners.  (Palatial parrot cage, in the case of Oscar-Wood)

The story of race in America is usually about African-Americans and, more recently, Hispanics and Asians. But it is also about whites.

I excerpt from The Economist’s “White Americans are beginning to realise that they too belong to a race: Anxiety about their country’s demography is fuelling the politics of racial backlash” (May 22, 2021):

“… When it comes to their own race, white Americans divide into two tribes. As left-leaning whites become more conscious of racism, they also think more about what it means to be white. Six months after Mr Floyd’s death, 30% of whites told a poll run by Ipsos that they had “personally taken actions to understand racial issues in America”. …
widespread is a feeling of some responsibility for the plight of African-Americans. Between 2014 and 2019, the share of whites who thought the government should spend more money on improving the conditions of African-Americans increased from 24% to 46%.

The second white tribe is different. Over the past decade, according to calculations by Bill Frey of the Brookings Institution, a think-tank, the number of Americans who describe themselves as Latino or Hispanic, Asian, African- or Native American (plus those who identify as from two or more races) has risen by 53%. Over the same period America’s white population grew by less than 1%.

When he was running for the Senate in Texas in the mid-1960s, George H.W. Bush opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act because it “was passed to protect 14% of the people”. He said “I’m also worried about the other 86%.” Ronald Reagan took the same line when running for governor of California. Richard Nixon, while pushing policies that benefited African-Americans, said that minorities were “undercutting American greatness”, a familiar refrain. An unease over demographic transformation now plays a similar role in politics to the backlash against civil rights 50 years ago.

By 2005 the Republican Party had disowned its “southern strategy” of prising white Southerners away from the Democrats. “Some Republicans gave up on winning the African-American vote, looking the other way or trying to benefit politically from racial polarisation,” the party chairman told the NAACP pressure-group. “I am here today as the Republican chairman to tell you we were wrong.” Three years later America elected its first black president. Michael Tesler of the University of California, Irvine, notes that Barack Obama’s victory set off a fresh exodus of whites away from the Democrats. “It took the election of the first black president for some white Americans to work out that the Democratic Party is the party of non-whites,” he says. By 2020 the Republican Party’s lead among white men without a college degree was huge: they backed Mr Trump by a margin of 40 points.

These voting patterns did not reflect only fondness for tax cuts or a dislike of immigration, the most recognisable bits of Mr Trump’s pitch. They also reflected a view of race. According to Ashley Jardina of Duke University, 30-40% of whites say their racial identity is “very important”. This is far lower than the share of black or Hispanic Americans saying the same. But this group of race-conscious whites, who also say they have “a lot” or “a great deal” in common with other whites, numbers about 75m people of voting age. That makes them more numerous than any minority.

White racial solidarity has a murderous past. Recently it has been associated with tiki torches, neo-Nazis and the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017. Yet only a tiny fraction of white Americans share such extreme views. The sense of solidarity among whites described by Ms Jardina is broader. In her book “White Identity Politics”, she says that “white identity” is not a polite way of saying “dislike toward other racial or ethnic minorities”. White racial consciousness comes out instead in such beliefs as the evil of reverse discrimination—whites being discriminated against because of the colour of their skin. Such views are not racist in the classic sense of white superiority. Those who hold them reject anti-black stereotypes. But they are likely to discount the effects of past racism, and to believe that African-Americans would catch up with whites if only they worked harder. Like Mr Kroll, the police-union boss, who complained that Democrats accuse those who disagree with them of being racist, or Mr Trump, who claimed to be “the least racist person anywhere in the world”, many are acutely sensitive to accusations of racism.

As America becomes more multiracial, and whites lose the status of dominant group, their sense of racial solidarity may grow and the taboo against white pride may fade. A recent attempt to launch an Anglo-Saxon caucus by Republican House members could be a portent. Already many rural and suburban whites, who in Minnesota might have defined themselves as Swedes or Germans as well as Americans, define themselves as white. They, not Minnesota’s African-Americans, now live in the most racially segregated places of all.

This second white tribe thinks more like a minority than part of the country’s biggest single group. Geographic separation can lead to a reflexive bias that is different from racism in the 1950s but still lethal.”

MORE: “White Americans are beginning to realise that they too belong to a race”

* Image via The Economist.