Resegregation & the Achievement Gap

A Teacher Disciplines a Student at a Resegregated Tuscaloosa School

Former presidential candidate Pat Buchanan argues that the racial desegregation of American public schools has been a monumental failure, and that schools today are becoming more segregated than ever. He addresses the issue of the White/Black achievement gap in academic performance and rightly asserts that it is greater now than ever.

'A Legendary Failure of Liberalism'
Pat Buchanan
Human Events - May 20th 2014

When Brown v. Board of Education, the 9-0 Warren Court ruling came down 60 years ago, desegregating America’s public schools, this writer was a sophomore at Gonzaga in Washington, D.C.

In the shadow of the Capitol, Gonzaga was deep inside the city. And hitchhiking to school every day, one could see the 'for sale' signs marching block by block out to Montgomery County, Maryland.

Democratic and liberal Washington was not resisting integration, just exercising its right to flee its blessings by getting out of town.

The white flight to the Washington suburbs was on.

When this writer graduated in 1956, all-white high schools of 1954 like McKinley Tech, Roosevelt, Coolidge and Anacostia had been desegregated, but were on their way to becoming all black.

Across the South, there was 'massive resistance' to Brown, marked by the 'Dixie Manifesto' of 1956, Gov. Orval Faubus’ effort to keep black students out of Little Rock Central High in 1957, and the defiance of U.S. court orders to desegregate the universities of Mississippi and Alabama by Govs. Ross Barnett and George Wallace.

While he has received little credit, it was Richard Nixon who desegregated Southern schools. When he took office, not one in 10 black children was going to school with whites in the Old Confederacy.

When Nixon left, the figure was close to 70 percent.

For nearly half a century, no black child has been denied entry to his or her neighborhood school because of race. Ought we not then, with Stephan and Abigail Thernstrom in the Wall Street Journal, celebrate Brown 'as a truly heartening American success story'?

Certainly, by striking down state laws segregating school children, Brown advanced the cause of freedom. But as for realizing the hopes of black parents, that their children’s educational progress would now proceed alongside that of their new white classmates, it is not so easy to celebrate.

For despite half a century of desegregation, three in four black and Hispanic children are in schools that are largely black and Hispanic. And the old racial gap in test scores has never been closed.

A May story in the Washington Post reports that not only has there been no gain in U.S. high school test scores in reading and math — the USA has been steadily sinking in rank in international competition — the disparity between black and white students has deepened.

The quadrennial test given in 2013 to 92,000 12th-graders by the National Assessment of Education Progress, the nation’s report card, found that the test scores of Latino students are today as far behind those of whites’ as in 1999. The gap between white and black high school seniors in reading and math has widened.

Speaking in Topeka on the anniversary of Brown, Michelle Obama bemoaned the fact that, 'Today, by some measures, our schools are as segregated as they were back when Dr. King gave his final speech. 'Many districts have actually pared back on efforts to integrate their schools and many communities have become less diverse.'

Ms. Obama is undeniably correct. Yet, there are other realities that folks need to stop denying.

First, as the Thernstroms write, where white children were 80 percent of public school students in 1970, today they are 50 percent and falling. In California and Texas, whites make up 27 and 31 percent respectively of the public school enrollment.

If 74 percent of black kids and 80 percent of Hispanics are in minority-majority schools today, those numbers are inexorably going to rise, as white students become a new national minority.

Second, there is no conclusive research that black kids learn more when sitting beside white kids, just as there is no evidence that Head Start has any positive enduring impact on pupil achievement.

Third, after trillions dumped into education at all levels since the Great Society, with the educational gap persisting between whites and Asians and blacks and Hispanics, it is apparent the education industry has not only failed the nation. It has no idea how to close that gap.

Fourth, while Michelle Obama may cherish diversity, the wealthy white liberals who dominate the D.C. metropolitan area appear to prefer living in predominately white neighborhoods and sending their children to predominantly white schools, be they public or private.

The 60 years since Brown in D.C. have demonstrated another truth. There is no correlation between dollars invested in education and student achievement in schools where the money is spent.

Per capita expenditures for students in D.C.’s schools invariably rank among the nation’s highest, while the test scores those tax dollars produce invariably rank among the nation’s lowest.
And whom should be held accountable?

Since D.C. got the right to vote, no GOP candidate has ever carried its electoral votes. Obama won the city with 93 percent in 2008. And since home rule half a century ago, we have had only black Democratic mayors and liberal Democratic city councils.

This social debacle belongs to liberalism alone.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of “Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025?”

The White Man's Burden - Theodore Rossevelt

Roosevelt on Safari (1909-1910)

Theodore Roosevelt was one of the finest presidents in American history. His face is carved into Mount Rushmore next to Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln.

President Roosevelt ascribed to the White Man's burden. His knowledge that Whites were the natural born leaders of the human species caused him to believe that God had laid upon them the incredible responsibility of teaching and guiding the 'backward races.'

In a 1905 speech Roosevelt told a group of White Americans that by improving the moral behaviors of the Black man the White race could rise even higher, but that if the White race sunk to destroying and abusing the Negro they would debase themselves in the process.

'Lincoln and the Race Problem'
Theodore Roosevelt
New York City Republican Club (Speech) - February 13th 1905

'Every generous impulse in us revolts at the thought of thrusting down instead of helping up such a man. To deny any man the fair treatment granted to others no better than he is to commit a wrong upon him - a wrong sure to react in the long run upon those guilty of such denial.

The only safe principle upon which Americans can act is that of 'all men up,' not that of 'some men down.' If in any community the level of intelligence, morality, and thrift among the colored men can be raised, it is, humanly speaking, sure that the same level among the whites will be raised to an even higher degree; and it is no less sure that the debasement of the blacks will in the end carry with it an attendant debasement of the whites.

The problem is so to adjust the relations between two races of different ethnic type that the rights of neither be abridged nor jeoparded; that the backward race be trained so that it may enter into the possession of true freedom while the forward race is enabled to preserve unharmed the high civilization wrought out by its forefathers.

The working out of this problem must necessarily be slow; it is not possible in offhand fashion to obtain or to confer the priceless boons of freedom, industrial efficiency, political capacity, and domestic morality. Nor is it only necessary to train the colored man; it is quite as necessary to train the white man, for on his shoulders rests a well-nigh unparalleled sociological responsibility. It is a problem demanding the best thought, the utmost patience, the most earnest effort, the broadest charity, of the statesman, the student, the philanthropist; of the leaders of thought in every department of our national life. The Church can be a most important factor fin solving it aright. But above all else we need for its successful solution the sober, kindly, steadfast, unselfish performance of duty by the average plain citizen in his everyday dealings with his fellows.'

{Full Speech}

Many of Roosevelt's predictions have born out.

In 1960, when Blacks were still being regulated by Whites under segregation, the Black illegitimacy rate was only 23%.

With the end of segregation, however, those rates began to rise. Today, Black illegitimacy stands at an astounding 73%!

The debasement of Blacks correlates to that of Whites.

In 1960 the White illegitimacy rate was only 2.3%. Today, it stands at 29%.

White Americans need to take up the White Man's burden once more. Not only to improve the lot of other races, but to fulfill a responsibility to God and our people.

Becoming the New Barbarians - Jack Donavan

Although Jack Donavan's recent NPI talk wasn't specifically discussing Christianity his insights on insular community and subversive counter cultural lifestyle echo many of the Biblical principles used to describe the Church.

Verses that come to mind:

Galatians 6.9-11
'As we therefore have opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto those who are of the household of faith.'

Acts 2.44-45
'And all who believed were together and had all things in common. And they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need.'

Romans 12.10
'[Be] kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honour preferring one another;'

John 15.18-19
'If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.'

John 7.7
'The world cannot hate you, but it hates Me because I testify of it that its works are evil.'

For more information on localized Christian community refer to the blog 'The Benedict Option.'

Blacks Cause Chaos in College Debating

The 2014 Cross Examination Debate Association's national championship was held at Indiana University.
 
The final round featured a 'debate' between two all-Black teams - one male and the other female.
 
Both of the teams relied heavily on unintelligible rhythm and emotional chants. Predictably, logic was nowhere to be found. The whole affair resembled African tribal story telling.

The debate was supposed to be about whether the U.S. president's war powers should be limited, but the two Black women made a one sided decision to change the topic to how the U.S. government was racist against Black communities.
 
At one point, one of the Black males debating the two females was told his time was up. Instead of yielding he screamed 'Fu** the time!'
 
Breitbart News reports that Black participants in college debate have started attacking the rules of the competition as racist:

'... at the 2013 championship, the winners, two black men from Emporia State University, Ryan Walsh and Elijah Smith, also based their strategy on ignoring the stated resolution and attacked the basic framework of collegiate debate, asserting that the format had historically given the edge to straight, white, middle-class students.' 

This trend follows a broader one in which Blacks move into White territory and proceed to attack everything they come into contact with. Often this ends in the destruction of something that was once functional and has been linked to the phenomenon of White flight.
 
Aaron Hardy, a debate coach for Northwestern, hates the recent chaos caused by Black participants:

'We end up… with a large percentage of debates being devoted to arguing about the rules, rather than anything substantive… Judges have been very angry, coaches have screamed and yelled. People have given profanity-laced tirades, thrown furniture, and both sides of the ideological divide have used racial slurs.'

The 2014 'debate' was judged by affirmative action criteria. The four participants had made it to the finals because all were Black. However, because one was male and the other female the rules mandated that the minority female team take the victory.
 
Ironically, the winning team was from Towson University a school whose White students have suggested is saturated with Black crime.
 
Some have claimed that college debate is racist because the logic based format favors high IQ Whites and discriminates against low IQ Black participants.
 
Other have argued that the 100 meter dash is racist because no White person has won the gold medal in that event since 1980.
 
Clips from this year's debate can be seen in the video below.

 

Christians should be concerned about this debate trend.

 

If this kind of chaotic behavior spills over into the Church than Christians will be guilty of violating the apostle Paul's mandate in 1st Corinthians 14.40: 'Let all things be done decently and in order.

The Multiculturalist's God - Gregory Hood

Gregory Hood is a contributor to Radix Journal. In this article he argues that Matthew Heimbach's excommunication from the Orthodox church represents a broader trend in which the Christian Church of the West has morphed into one more institutional purveyor of decadence and multiculturalism.

'The God They Really Believe In'
Gregory Hood
Radix Journal - May 7th 2014
 
'A conservative is someone who identifies with an institution but will not accept the means necessary to create or maintain it.  This especially extends to religion, where modern Christians will adopt the trappings of Sacred Tradition and the heritage of a particular denomination but enthusiastically condemn their own past.  What they want is simply for modernity to suffer them to exist.  What they worship is egalitarianism – and the “god” they invented is simply a marketing scam.
 
Enfant terrible Matt Heimbach and longtime white activist Matt Parrot operate the Traditional Youth Network, an organization that fights for “Traditionalism” with heavy Christian overtones.  Both Matts are converts to Orthodox Christianity, and incorporate their faith into their activism, with explicit role models including the Romanian Iron Guard, the Greek Golden Dawn, and to a lesser extent, Putin’s Russia.  To many reactionaries, Traditionalists, and white advocates, an Orthodox civilization with what Dugin calls the “Byzantine idea of the symphony of powers” is gradually forming a counter-bloc to the post-modern “West,” which seemingly defines itself by multiculturalism and sexual degeneracy.  This may be actually happening -- or it might just be another example of the hard right falling into its classic error of seeing what they want to see.  (Ron and Rand Paul anyone?)
 
Whatever the case, despite the reputation of Heimbach and Parrot as primarily white advocates, much of the TYN’s energy is directed towards restoring a kind of old-fashioned Christian moralism.  They oppose feminism, homosexuality, and the breakdown of the family.  A true organic society, they argue, is opposed to both “rape culture” and “slut culture.”  Thus, a group of TYN activists, featuring a bearded Heimbach sporting an Orthodox cross, protested a “Slutwalk” at Indiana University.  As to be expected, they were attacked by violent leftists, giving us the amusing image of Matt Heimbach, Cross-Bearer, defending his comrades. 
 
Soon afterward, one Father Peter Jon Gillquist issued an “important message” to his congregation saying that Matt Heimbach had been excommunicated.  Normally, this would be private of course, but “as in the present case of Matthew Heinbach” [sic] it was necessary to trumpet his actions to the world.  “Heinbach” apparently was only received into the church because Father Gillquist did not know about Heimbach’s “nationalist, segregationist” views.  And after all, “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:28).” 
 
This is similar to the denunciation of Jewish convert “Brother Nathaniel” by the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia on the same grounds that “there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all (Colossians 3:11).”

Naturally, various “Orthodox bloggers” hastened to make sure they were also counted among the elect.  A Father “Ernesto Obregon” implicitly compared TYN to a pedophile – perhaps an unfortunate insult for priests to be slinging these days.  Obregon also confessed he had a “nightmare” that TYN’s views would be seen as Orthodox.  As terrifying as it sounds,

“They continue to post very pro-White messages on their Facebook page. No, they do not post overtly anti-other ethnic group messages…Nevertheless, one finds direct links to more toxic groups…. one encounters messages very much in favor of each ethnic group being able to maintain its cultural identity, and encouraging people to marry within their ethnic group to preserve that identity and keep each ethnicity separate and clearly identifiable.” 

And we can’t have that.  At least among whites. 
 
Eric Jobe, a Ph.D candidate who mostly “specializes in Hebrew poetry, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and Second Temple Judaism,” offers us some subtle and intellectual rhetoric that it is a “satanic delusion” to believe in racial integrity.  Also, “racism and ethnic nationalism is just such a malignant tumor and an infectious disease that has no place among the holy people of God.”
 
There’s also one Sister Maria Gwyn McDowell.  Sister McDowell is a “feminist [and] a student of liberation theology” with a “doctorate in Theological Ethnics from Boston College.”  She entertains herself by suggesting that the Theotokos is on the side of Pussy Riot and publishing other “anti-kyriarchal” amusements.  A real model of piety – and one who need have no fear of excommunication.
 
The most important response, however, is that of the American Conservative’s Rod Dreher who giggles about getting to use words like “repent” and “heresy” to attack “racism, anti-Semitism, and fascism.”  “When things like this happen in public, the Church must speak clearly and uncompromisingly about them,” Dreher intones.  Dreher also throws in a sneering reference to “neopaganism” for good measure.  No Church Militant for the “Crunchy Con.”
 
Interestingly, many of the self-proclaimed Orthodox Christians critical of TYN do not come from the customary Orthodox background of ethnic communities.  Fr. Gillquist is the son of Archpriest Peter Gillquist, who led a movement of former Protestant evangelicals into the Orthodox Church in America.  Dreher is a former Methodist who converted to Catholicism and then Orthodoxy.  Father Obregon, another convert, is upset about “pro-White messages” but trumpets his Cuban ethnicity in the very name of his blog precisely because it is not a traditional Orthodox community.  And while “McDowell” claims to be a longtime member of the church, her participation in it seems to be characterized by her desire to change everything about it.  Not surprisingly, she writes that members of her family were “Jewish… card-carrying communists.” 
 
Perhaps more than any other Christian denomination (not including the poorly attended “national churches” of Europe), the Orthodox Church is characterized by its close identification with national and cultural boundaries.  The explicit identification of the two is condemned as the heresy of “Phyletism.”  However, formal condemnation does not change the fact that Orthodox Church organizational bodies tend to be rooted in a particular community and even churches in the United States are closely linked to ethnic groups with a strong identity.  Like Mexicans coming to America or Yankees coming to the South, Dreher and his new friends are doing their best to turn their refuge into a carbon copy of the thing they once fled by condemning this.
 
More importantly, as even McDowell admits, the Orthodox Church is not exactly a bastion of egalitarianism.  It could even be called a particularly “kyriachal” institution.  Groups like the Black Hundreds and the Iron Guard were inspired by Orthodoxy and received the blessing of church officials.  St. John of Kronstadt was a member of a nationalist party and expressed his dedication to the Russian Tsar, as highlighted by TYN.  The Church Father St. John Chrysostom’s Adversus Judaeos  explicitly blames the Jews for the crucifixion and suggests that the “chosen people” of God are now Christians – “They became dogs, and we became the children.”
 
Of more relevance is the traditional Eastern Christian unity between church and state.  The Russian government and specifically the Russian Orthodox Church are pushing a new narrative of an Orthodox “Russian world” that will provide an alternative to the decadent West, much to the wailing of the media.  Patriarch Kirill explicitly identifies the mission of his church as a defender of a “Russian world” that is a “distinct civilization” based upon Orthodoxy.  Not surprisingly, possible ecclesiastical divisions among Orthodox communities are becoming a forerunner to possible political divisions in Ukraine. 
 
What is at stake is two differing ways of viewing the church, and in a larger sense, religion.  TYN sees the faith as a one element of a people composed of “faith, biology, and culture.”  A faith may be universally applicable, but it should support a people’s right to maintain its own separate existence.  It is an ordering principle for a people.  Whatever the theological truth of this, this is how most religions develop, particularly the Eastern Christianity characterized by strong links to the state and organized along national lines.  The Russian Orthodox Church of today sees itself in this way. 
 
The second way is to regard religion as a purely abstract creed that can be adopted by anyone.  This is at the heart of Jobe’s chest pounding about a “holy people of God” who may be from any background, but adopt certain beliefs.  It is the “proposition religion.” Jobe, McDowell, Fr. Obregon, and Fr. Gillquist reflect this in their oddly simplistic and emotional pronouncements that Orthodox Christianity mandates the destruction of white ethnic identity. 
 
The reduction of Christianity to “you are neither Jew nor Gentile, man nor woman” seems almost  designed to force non-suicidal whites to adopt explicit Identitarian religion and Neopaganism.  Dreher clearly senses this, hence his attack.  But Dreher is the most dishonest of TYN’s critics because he wants to have it both ways.  Dreher is pursuing what the late Lawrence Auster called an “unprincipled exception” to liberalism.  He wants a conservative denomination that reflects his interest in place and community and allow him a superficial dissent from political correctness once in a while.  However, he will not tolerate anything that has a definitive statement against liberal universalism. 
 
As Dreher’s own life shows us, Catholicism used to be the cliché conversion faith for American conservatives trying to look hard.  After all, it wasn’t that long ago when the Pope was condemning “Americanism” as a heresy.   However, that is increasingly hard to sustain when the contemporary Vicar of Christ tweets profound wisdom like “inequality is the root of social evil.”  Of course, that hasn’t stopped Catholic conservatives from maintaining the proud post-Vatican II tradition that whoever is Pope didn’t actually mean whatever the latest tripe he served.  But it has reduced the Church of Rome’s appeal.  Now the hot new thing is Orthodoxy, but the same hollowing out process has already begun, at least in America.
 
What is called “religion” in the modern world isn’t really religion at all.  It’s simply a collection of empty rituals that serve as variations on the same egalitarian theme.  Absent a direct connection to community, religion is viewed publicly like choosing a sports team or a favorite food – a private preference of little consequence.  The fact that almost all religions are identified with ethnic communities or a past connection to a regime or cultural order simply makes it easier for people to continue to align with it out of shallow nostalgia.  But the linkage is no longer explicit. 
 
As modernity runs its course, the churches actually serve as a necessary safety valve.  They give people the illusion of identity without the substance.  They present the form of Tradition while preaching a doctrine of destruction.  And they carry forward the existence of an institution while hollowing it out from the inside.  Those churches that try to cling to doctrine in the face of this usually fall into the trap of the “unprincipled exception” themselves – for example, hammering on the sin of gay marriage, while fanatically preaching about the evils of racism.  Far from being an obstacle to modernity, the churches are a necessary facilitator, a tool to systematically render would be Traditionalists either impotent or counterproductive.
 
Before long of course, the institutions are exhausted.  What is, after all, the Unitarian Church other than a tax dodge for progressive activists?  What are the mainline Protestant churches but facilitators of mass immigration?  And what is the bulk of the Catholic Church today but yet another ornate temple to social democracy, albeit one that opposes abortion on the grounds of egalitarianism?  Those believers that are left are betrayed by their own shepherds.  Viewing the collapse of American churches, it seems that Orthodoxy is simply a generation behind.  Like American conservatism, American religion is a “game, a way of making a living,” in the words of Joe Sobran, another man who took the heritage of his church seriously and paid for it.
 
Dreher bases his career (such as it is) on the importance of “place,” but peoples create significance and meaning, not tracts of dirt or old buildings.  And peoples sustain a faith or doom it to oblivion.  Whatever the truth of a particular doctrine, once cut off from the ethnic roots that sustain it, a faith will either wither and die or transform into a golem like monstrosity that will choke the life out of the very community that gave it existence.
 
Joseph de Maistre, a great Christian reactionary, wrote that every people gets the government it deserves.  This may be true of the churches as well, as the denominations are drying up in the shallow soil of 21st century America, leaving the real seekers for Truth bereft.  Matt Parrot asks, “What does a man do when his championship of Authority and Tradition results in his traditional authority prohibiting his life’s work immediately and without warning?”  Perhaps the answer is that the authority he bowed to is not a real guardian of Tradition or legitimate authority.  Perhaps it doesn’t even have a stake in its own long term survival.  Perhaps, it doesn’t want to be saved from itself.

It is not for me (of all people) to answer which side “God” is on in this fight.  But I can say this with certainty.  Whatever God TYN’s critics worship, it is not the God of St. John of Kronstadt, St. John Chrysostom, or the soldiers that fought in the name of Holy Russia throughout the centuries.  It is not the God that sustained the monarchies of Eastern Europe, the oppressed Christians groaning under Muslim occupation for centuries, or even the Russian faithful of today. 
 
It’s just the politically correct god of the Market Place, decrying the newly invented sins of “racism, sexism, classism, and homophobia.”  It’s a god who doesn’t offer salvation or even damnation, but just passive aggressive lecturing.  It’s a god our rulers depend on even more than the most tyrannical autocrat of the past depended on his state church.  And if that’s the “God” we’re expected to bow to, I’d rather be a “heretic” – or a heathen.'
 
Link to {Original}

White Flight from Football

Thuggish Stanford 'Graduate' Richard Sherman

The big sports news lately is that the largest youth football organization in the country (Pop Warner) has reported a 10% drop in participation over the last two years.

Some 70% of current NFL players participated in Pop Warner football as children.
 
Forbes magazine's website posted an article entitled: 'Why Is Football Participation Declining? The Answer Isn't Concussions.'

In the article, the author argues that there are a three reasons why football is declining in popularity among American youth:

[1] Increased Sports Specialization - If Kids aren't exceptional at a sport they move on until they find one they might excel at.
 
[2] No Opportunity in College - Football is so saturated with talent it's unlikely a kid will earn a collegiate scholarship.
 
[3] The Growth of Lacrosse - Lacrosse has sucked higher income kids away from football, and employers like kids that have played elite ivy league sports.
 
Although I agree with these three suggestions I think the primary reason is more basic: White flight.
 
Basketball and boxing were once huge sports in America. However, as African-Americans steadily became majorities in these sports Whites simply moved on to other activities. 

Within recent memory football was majority White, today, it is dominated by Blacks. A simple look at the starting lineup of the top teams (Alabama, Ohio State, and Florida State) reveal that they are almost entirely Black.

In addition to this, football has taken on an almost thuggish character. During post-game interviews many of the star players reveal an almost incredible inability to speak proper English. It is hard to imagine that some of them could pass college level course work. 
 
Personally, I have heard from Tuscaloosa students that many of the players at Alabama are simply illiterate. 
 
It doesn't surprise me. 
 
Most of the quality players are covered with tattoos (think Terrell Pryor).
 
The attitudes, showiness, and brutish culture that surrounds modern college football players is enough for any parent to say 'I'm not sending my kid into that locker room!'

Making things worse are the immature NFL players who are always finding new ways to either get arrested or look like idiots.

Just as Whites fled Detroit, South Africa, and other areas when Blacks began to move in so football is experiencing a 'White flight' out of the sport and into more classy suburban middle/upper class safe havens which still retain a respectable culture.

Should Christians Support Multiculturalism?

Dr. Morton H. Smith was a Presbyterian minister and professor at Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary. He is considered one of the most important Presbyterian leaders of the late 20th century. He published this article in the October 1964 issue of the Presbyterian Guardian as the nation faced questions about segregation and race relations.

'The Racial Problem Facing American'

Dr. Morton H. Smith
Presbyterian Guardian - October 1964

'As one studies the origin of man in the Bible it is evident that all men descend from a single pair of first parents...

On the basis of this unity of mankind the integrationist teaches that we are all brothers, and should thus ignore all external differences and mix as one race. There is a plea to forget racial and national differences and simply to amalgamate into one common brotherhood. It should be noted, in passing, that the biblical teaching on brotherhood is not primarily that of physical unity, but rather it is reserved for the spiritual unity that Christians, who know God as Father through Jesus Christ, have with one another.

It is rather striking to see that the very verse used by the integrationist as supporting his position also speaks of the diversity of peoples. The verse reads: “And He made of one every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed seasons, and the bounds of their habitation” (Acts 17:26). Notice that the verse not only teaches the basic unity of the human race, but it also speaks of the diversity of mankind in different nations and groups, whose bounds have been set by God. Granting that this may be speaking primarily of the national distinctions as being under God’s sovereign control, one who believes in God’s sovereignty over the history of the world must also grant that racial distinctions have arisen under his plan and control. . . .
 

It should be observed in connection with the event of the Tower of Babel, that we have a divine intervention which broke up the unity of the people. Mankind was seeking to remain together, thus disobeying the command of God to replenish the whole earth. Prior to the flood the human race had demonstrated what it would become if allowed to develop as a single people. Thus God, by a judicial action, intervened, confused their tongues, and scattered the people. Though this was an act of judgment, it was also gracious on God’s part, for it prevented a repetition of the development of sin by the unified race in the proportions of the pre-flood situation. Thus God, by his common grace intervened, and by his act of judgment intensified the diversity or pluriformity that was inherent in his creation.

If from this we may conclude that ethnic pluriformity is the revealed will of God for the human race in its present situation, it is highly questionable whether the Christian can have part in any program that would seek to erase all ethnic distinctions. That such distinctions may be crossed over by individuals may be granted, but it is at least questionable whether a program designed to wipe out such differences on a mass scale should be endorsed by the Christian. It is this line of argument that the average Christian segregationist uses to back his view. He fears that the real goal of the integrationist is the intermarriage of the races, and therefore the breakdown of the distinctions between them. Many who would be willing to integrate at various lesser levels refuse to do so, simply because they feel that such will inevitably lead to intermarriage of the races, which they consider to be morally wrong. . . .

There is to be found in Paul’s writings a recognition of the continued differences between Jewish and Gentile Christians. Some of the Jewish Christians continued to observe Old Testament practices, such as Sabbath observance and temple worship (Rom. 14:5-6; Acts 18:18; 21:23-29). Paul himself practiced certain Jewish observances at times, thus becoming a Jew to the Jews, and a Gentile to the Gentiles. It seems evident therefore, that Paul does not teach that the church should be a distinctionless mass, but rather the individuality of each person is recognized with all of his diversities. . . .

Again, if diversity is God’s revealed way for mankind, one wonders about any program that advocates the intermarriage of the diverse races in a way which will eradicate the differences that God has established. Though the present writer has been raised in the South, and personally feels that the intermarriage of persons of two races is something most undesirable, he must admit that he is not able to find any clear teaching of the Scripture that would condemn individual intermarriage as such, except between the Christian and the non-Christian. (The practice of endogamy is Scripturally normative. Dr. Smith would have done well to considered the following verses: Genesis 24:3-4, 27:46 – 28:9; Exodus 34:15-16; Leviticus 21:14; Numbers 25:1-9; Deuteronomy 7:3-4; Joshua 23:12-13; Judges 3:5-6, 14:3; I Kings 11:1-6; Ezra 9:1 – 10:44; Nehemiah 10:30, 13:23-27; and Ezekiel 44:22 ~ Mickey Henry)

The mass mixing of the races with the intent to erase racial boundaries he does consider to be wrong, and on the basis of this, he would oppose the mixing of the two races in this way.... the Bible seems to teach that God has established and thus revealed his will for the human race to be that of ethnic pluriformity, and thus any scheme of mass integration leading to mass mixing of the races is decidedly unscriptural.'

Christians and White Privilege

 

The latest front of anti-Caucasian propaganda emanating from the multicultural ideologues is the White privilege movement.

White privilege argues that White people are born with unfair benefits, and that their very presence makes them involuntary oppressors of minorities.

The White privilege movement has been running ads similar to this one in Minnesota:

 

Within the last week, Harvard's Kennedy School of Government has begun mandating 'privilege' training for all incoming political science majors.

Needless to say, Christians should reject any movement that encourages an entire race of people to feel guilty for their existence.

How is this latest slander of White people going to improve race relations in America? How is it going to foster a more loving relationship between human ethnic families?

If minorities start believing that White people possess some kind of unfair 'privilege' are they going to more or less likely to form healthy relationships with them?

Talk of White privilege can only lead to more division and distrust in multiracial churches, and more guilt, envy, fear, and anger between the races.

One of the interesting facets of the White privilege movement is that there is little talk of fixing the 'problem.'

Why? Because White privilege is something that a person can't get rid of. White people are innately guilty of it, they can't rectify it, they can't remedy the injustice...Whites just have to sit around and accept that their existence is oppressive to others.

If there is no way to fix the problem, and bringing up the problem is just going to lead to greater racial agitation, then why should Christians encourage this kind of accusative talk?

The White privilege movement is a racist one meant to destroy the identity and reputations of White people.

God did not create White people inherently evil. More than any other racial group on earth, White people have spread the gospel of Christ.

For a great critique of the privilege movement see Jared Taylor's short video 'White Privilege: The New Frontier of White Guilt.'

Matthew Heimbach's Excommunication

Heimbach on ABC Nightline

Within the last few weeks Matthew Heimbach, founder of the Traditionalist Youth Network and outspoken advocate of White people's rights, has been excommunicated from the Orthodox church less than a month after he was welcomed into it.

The reason?

Well...nobody is quiet certain.

The official statement of the priest sites two verses:

'For, 'There is neither Jew nor Greek, neither slave nor free, nor is there male or female for we are all one in Jesus Christ' (Gal. 3.28). And again, 'They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd. (John 10.16)'  

But no rational interpretation of either of these verses has anything to do with Matthew's ideology. Galatians 3.28 isn't denying the existence of different races any more than its denying the existence of different genders.

Heimbach has never claimed that one has to be a White Caucasian to be a member of the Church.

Taken in context, John 10.16 can only be interpreted to mean that Christians everywhere are united in Christ.

Heimbach has never said anything that would contradict this claim.

The only other explanation given for Heimbach's excommunication is a reference to the heresy of Phyletism.

Apparently, the heresy of Phyletism was simply made up by the Orthodox church in 1872.

Even so, Phyletism in no way condemns ethnic identity. It deals with racial exclusivism which destroys church unity. For example, if the American Greek Orthodox church refuses to have any common unity or organization with the American Russian Orthodox church.

Heimbach, however, has never said anything that would suggest this he ascribes to this heresy. In fact, he has released a statement within the last few days condemning Phyletism:

I reject the heresy of Phyletism. Nobody is to be denied entry into the Church, warm fellowship, or communion on the basis of their racial, national, or ethnic identity. The Orthodox Christian Church is Universal, transcending racial, national, and ethnic identities, and each parish must remain a safe harbor for any and all Orthodox Christians.

The only heresy of which Heimbach appears guilty is that of protesting the multiculturalist doctrine of the leftists.

He appears to be one more victim of a left wing witch hunt.

Leftist American Christianity, corrupted by the vile of Marxist ideology, hopes to send a clear statement to Christians that being racially realistic is an unacceptable position.

American Christianity appears ready to jettison the truth in an effort to stay 'culturally relevant.' The Church would rather retain its unholy alliance with decadent American culture than justly serve a brother with unpopular views.

Should White Males Apologize?

A recent video trending on Huffington Post pushes for strait White males to begin apologizing for their 'privilege.'

But what would White males apologize for?

Should we apologize for creating thousands of medical advancements and agricultural techniques that have caused historically unequaled infant survival rates and population growth?

Should we apologize for saving Blacks from an impoverished pagan disease ridden continent, teaching them Christianity, freeing them, and allowing them to live among us as equals in the richest country on the planet while their African cousins waste away from starvation, AIDS, and genocide?

Should we apologize for creating the most educated civilization in mankind's history?

Should we apologize for spreading the Word of God from one of end of the globe to the other?

Should we apologize for developing the internet and technology that allows poor minorities to have a voice in the globalized world?

Should we apologize for the welfare programs that now provide nutrition to millions of dysfunctional Black families?

Should we apologize for elevating women to their current status while the rest of the world used them as reproductive chattel?

Can anyone imagine a women like Queen Elizabeth ruling a mighty empire in the 16th century Middle East? What about China? ... forget about it.

Thanks to White males the demographic trends, technological advancement, education, religion, and general welfare of Black Africa is hundreds of times better than it was before European contact.

Thanks to White males women are no longer treated like throwaway sex slaves as they were in India and Mesoamerica.

Thanks to White males the saving message of Christianity has now reached almost every tribe, tongue, and nation on earth.

If anyone should be apologizing it should be everyone else apologizing to White males for not throwing in an equal contribution to the progress of humanity.

Diversity Destroys Church Community

Church leaders often advocate for more racial diversity in the Church. They argue that each church should mirror the demographics of its neighborhood or region.

But is diversity good for churches?

A lot of research suggests it is not.

Contrary to the assertions of the pop preachers, diversity destroys trust and dismantles community.

As two Michigan State researchers said:

...recent...work... has uncovered a community-diversity dialectic wherein the contextual conditions that foster respect for diversity run in opposition to those that foster sense of community. More specifically, within neighborhoods, residential integration provides opportunities for intergroup contact that are necessary to promote respect of diversity but may prevent the formation of dense interpersonal networks that are necessary to promote sense of community.

In other words, as diversity rises community diminishes.

Harvard researcher Robert Putnam conducted a colossal study on the issue of social capital. In 2007 he released his findings:

...inhabitants of diverse communities tend to withdraw from collective life, distrust their neighbors, regardless of the color of their skin, to withdraw even from close friends, to expect the worst from their community and its leaders, to volunteer less, to give less to charity and work on community projects less, to agitate for social reform more, but have less faith that they can actually make a difference, and to huddle unhappily in from of the television.

Racial diversity is so destructive that it causes even close friend to become distrustful of one another.

Researchers in a Netherlands study added:

1) neighborhoods' ethnic diversity reduces individual trust in neighborhoods; 2) those with neighbors of a different ethnicity have less trust in neighborhoods and neighbors; 3) a substantial part of the effect of neighborhoods' ethnic diversity on individual trust can be explained by a higher propensity of having neighbors of a different ethnicity. We conclude that ethnic diversity can have a negative effect on individual trust.

Do churches want their members to distrust one another? Do they want less volunteering and more social agitation? Is their goal to collect less money from the collection plate?

Church should function efficiently and comfortably. Racial diversity destroys functionality by undermining trust and individual investment in the community.

Realistically speaking, multiculturalism and multiracialism are recipes for church disaster.

Billions of Dollars Later...Whites Still Outperform Blacks

 

In 2000 Bill Gates spent $5 billion dollars on reforming American high school education. One of his primarily goals was closing the achievement gap between Blacks and Whites. Gates called education reform a 'civil rights issue.' His philanthropic donation was a record setting venture.

Gates later admitted that his money had failed to make a difference, and that high school education had not improved from his investment.

Since 1965 Americans have spent $778 billion dollars on federal education programs.

In 2001 Bush introduced No Child Left Behind (NCLB). The Bush administration asked for $24.4 billion dollars in 2008 - representing a massive 41% increase since 2001.

The U.S. Department of Education reports on its website that NCLB is meant to close the gap in education performance between Blacks and Whites: 'Schools are now held specifically accountable for the annual progress of African American students.'

Obama's 2013 budget slated $71.2 billion dollars for education; a 4.6% increase over 2012.

What have Americans gained with all these hundreds of billions in tax payer funds?

Answer: absolutely nothing.

Despite efforts to get African-American students to catch up with Whites the achievement gap in reading increased by 5% between 2009 and 2013!

In Math, the gap remained unchanged.

SAT reasoning scores (used to gauge intelligence and college success) in reading for high school seniors has been dropping for decades.

How can billions of dollars be spent on education with no discernible benefit detected?

The unfortunate truth is that minorities are increasing as a percentage of the US population. These minorities (Blacks/Latinos) have lower genetically inherited IQs than American Whites.

Even billions in donations from rich entrepreneurs and the American government cannot fight nature. American education test scores will continue to fall in proportion to the growth of low IQ racial groups in the United States.

What must Christians learn from this?

Well meaning racial naivest Christians often discuss the injustice of bad minority schools in America. They blame bad education on the failure of Blacks to achieve in life. These same people argue that Christians have an obligation to correct these injustices and better the lives of these ethnic groups.

The reality, however, is that White Christians have no control over biologically inherited intelligence. Even extreme interventions like adoption have been shown to have no long-term effect upon Black people's intelligence.

If even adoption cannot raise minority adult intelligence, and most of the poverty in the Black community is caused by low IQ, than what can Christians really do to improve these people's lives?

We can waste billions of dollars fighting a losing war with God, or we can use his blessings wisely.

The Single Story of Black Africans

Chimamanda Adichie's recent TED talk on the dangers of a single story of Africa has been making waves.

In her talk, Adichie argues that Africa has been viewed through the single lens of poverty, darkness, and chaos, and that this has produced a simplified narrative of the continent and its people.

As she says: 'If I had not grown up in Nigeria, and if all I knew about Africa were from popular images, I too would think that Africa was a place of beautiful landscapes, beautiful animals, and incomprehensible people, fighting senseless wars, dying of poverty and AIDS,  unable to speak for themselves and waiting to be saved by a kind, white foreigner.'

Adichie bemoans the fact that Europeans create the predominate narratives of Africa, and that they view its condition as lower than their own.

Surprisingly, I agree with her.

But the realities which Adichie conveys are inevitable. There is no way to remedy the problem she describes.

I would contend that Joseph Conrad's 'heart of darkness' will always be viewed as a place of violence, poverty, and senselessness to White European peoples.

Why?

Because Africans have no history, they have no self constructed narrative. Before the arrival of Europeans, Black Africa developed no written language. No accurate history had ever been compiled or preserved. There were no non-animistic religions, no advanced gods, nor any idea of a 'higher' concept that would allow the natives to view themselves from an unselfish perspective.

As the famous German philosopher Georg Hegel expounded: 'In Negro life the characteristic point is the fact that consciousness has not yet attained to the realization of any substantial objective existence - as for example, God, or Law - in which the will of man's volition is involved and in which he realizes his own being.'

Hegel's argument for dismissing Africa as having no historical part in the world was that Africans have no history, and that without history whatever movement a people makes through the ages is worthless to them because it is never utilized, evaluated, interpreted, or applied.

In other words, without history a people can never create an identity.

Individuals 'find themselves' by growing up, evaluating their personal history, assessing their talents through past failures and successes. Just as with individuals, an ethnic group needs a history in order to 'find themselves' in the world, to create a narrative for their lives.

Africans do not have the ability to construct their own narrative because the IQ threshold for gathering and inferring one's own information is 115. The average IQ in sub-Saharan Africa is only 67.

So few Africans have the capacity for interpreting the history of their own people that even when one of them does emerge his/her narrative falls on deaf ears.

Even the few intelligent Africans that do have this capacity are far outnumbered by more intelligent White thinkers (like Hegel) who are also in the business of interpreting Black African history. This produces the result that Whites are always better at interpreting Black history than Blacks are.

Whites will always interpret Africa as a poor violent backwater because, in comparison to their own societies, that is precisely what Africa is.

As much as intelligent Blacks try to change the perception of their continent and their people they are fighting a losing war with an army of intelligent Whites who can and will define the single story of Africa for them.

But this phenomenon is not exclusively an African one. Even in America Black identity is largely the construction of White liberals who see an opportunity to exploit Blacks for political and social ends.

The 'grievance industry' produced by leftist White Marxists has consistently told Blacks that their identify is defined by their being victims of White racism.

In this way, American Blacks have taken on the single story being written for them by Whites. Their acceptance of the narrative given them by White liberals is evident in the fact that Blacks vote overwhelmingly for liberal candidates in every election (95% for Obama in 2012).

Even the identity of 'Black' (though rooted in biological reality) was a descriptor discovered and translated by White anthropologists to those of African descent.

The very idea of Black identity, or a Black story, is the product of White people.

The history of humanity is held in monopoly by the White race. Through grand archeological vision the history of other peoples has been discovered by White people and interpreted through their eyes. Because of this anthropological imperialism, even African history has been constructed by Whites.

The world may never escape the single stories told by White people, because the stories were almost never told without them.

NEW MONASTICISM - A WHITE LED ANTI-WHITE MOVEMENT

New Monastic Leader Shane Claiborne in 2009

I am always looking for new ways to advance my faith. At one point this search led me to the movement known as New Monasticism. The New Monastic movement is about middle class people moving into urban slum communes and rebuilding neighborhoods, spreading Christianity, and renouncing wealth and materialism.

KENYA LEGALIZES POLYGAMY

Regions Where Polygamy is Legal (Black)

Kenya has passed a law legalizing polygamy. Polygamy has been practiced in the region forever, but now polygamous marriages are recognized by law.

What is the argument Kenyans are using to justify this practice? Their taking a page from the American playbook. Legalizing polygamy is about marriage equality! As one jubilant women told CNN: "We are happy with the law because finally all marriages are being treated equally."