Revolt of the Submen
A FEW YEARS AGO “fascism” was the number-one devil of the radical Left. Today it is “racism.” This change is significant, and a close look at the reasons behind it reveals to us, in starkly simple terms, the fundamental nature of communism and the true motives of its promoters.
The switch in emphasis from anti-fascism to anti-racism is not the only major change in the communist image which has taken place in recent years, of course. Long gone are the soapbox haranguers with the Yiddish accents who in pre-World War II days exhorted the workers to cast off their chains. Today their sons and daughters in the so-called “New Left” are on an entirely different tack.
Americans Wouldn’t Bite
American workers, even during the most difficult periods of the nation’s history, were never desperate enough or stupid enough to swallow the lie that they could come out ahead by exchanging their capitalist chains for communist chains. Instead, they strived to make their capitalist chains more tolerable.
Through aspiration and diligence they succeeded in large measure, many even becoming mini-capitalists themselves. To be sure, inflation has recently made the American worker’s effort to maintain his standard of living akin to the hopeless task of Sisyphus. A lot of hard work and a little common sense have, nevertheless, remained a more appealing formula than any Marxist doubletalk about “expropriation” or a “dictatorship of the proletariat.”
Thus, the majority of the White American working class was long ago written off by the Marxist planners as an impossible bunch of rednecks and reactionaries, even though lip-service is still paid to the old goal of “workers’ solidarity,” especially in some of the redder unions. The Reds began looking instead to the growing masses of non-Whites in American cities as the proper raw material for their revolutionary army.
The Negroes in America have always been a factor in communist plans, but World War II was the real watershed between the former emphasis on White workers and the beginning of a gradual shift to non-Whites—a shift which has become completely obvious only in the last year or two.
As early as 1912 Israel Cohen, a Marxist living in England, wrote in his A Racial Program for the 20th Century that the growing Black population of America should be regarded as the key to the delivery of the Western Hemisphere into communist hands, but for many years Cohen’s plan was kept on the back burner.
During World War II, however, the slow migration of Blacks from Southern farms to industrial cities all over the country was given a great impetus. Many American cities which were nearly all-White in 1941 have become predominately Black—or, at least, predominately non-White. Not only the urban migration, but increased immigration from the Caribbean and the darker areas of Latin America and an astounding non-White rate of reproduction, encouraged by a welfare system which rewards promiscuous fecundity, have resulted in the color shift in America’s cities.
Inferiority Is Essential
The precondition for any successful communist activity is a society containing at least one recognizable category of people obsessed by a feeling of inferiority. The first task of the communist cadres is to transform that feeling of inferiority—whether it stems from artificial, class divisions or from natural, biological differences—into resentment and hatred of all those who do not belong to the inferior category. That hatred then becomes the driving force of a movement to destroy society’s superior elements, since they are, by communist reasoning, responsible for the inferiority of the others: without superiority there can be no inferiority.
America’s White workers, though often recognizing that they were being unfairly used, never really felt, as a whole, that they were irreconcilably inferior to those using them. Furthermore, they preferred to remedy in their own way whatever inequities they felt, without the help of any outsiders as their self-appointed leaders.
America’s non-White minorities—especially the Blacks—are in a fundamentally different position. What can they do to salve their feeling of inferiority? Racial integration has only made it worse.
When they attended all-Black schools and lived in all-Black communities, they certainly were not pleased by the contrast they could see between White America’s standard of living and their own. But that resentment was nothing compared to their feelings now, when they are forced each day to compete with the Whites, in the schools, on the job, and in the marketplace.
No More Excuses
All the old excuses for an inferior status no longer yield any comfort. When Whitey, in his big, fine house across the tracks, could be blamed for holding the Black man down, there was some solace. But now, with all Whitey’s barriers down and the Black man still unable to compete on an equal basis, a much deeper sense of inferiority is turning resentment into a raging, bloodthirsty hatred.
The dirge of “we shall overcome” has given way to the cry of “kill Whitey!” That is a sentiment the communists know well how to use!
During the 1960s the Students for a Democratic Society and other New Left organizations were largely Jewish in makeup. A heavily Jewish leadership made a strong effort to build a mass communist movement of alienated young Whites on university campuses and in the “street” communities of young dropouts.
The White response was marginal, however, and SDS and the other groups ended up with a rank and file which displayed nearly the same embarrassing preponderance of Jewish faces as the leadership cadres. Thus, for example, when the Ohio National Guard opened fire on a group of leftist rioters at Kent State University on May 4, 1970, three out of the four students killed were Jews—and the fourth was an ROTC student not participating in the riot who was accidentally hit by a stray bullet.
New Plans, New Faces, New Enemy
The American pullout from Vietnam gave the New Left a chance to withdraw temporarily from the field of action and make new plans. They are back now, and they have both a new set of faces and a new name for the enemy.
The new faces are black and brown and every shade in between—even a few red and yellow ones—and the enemy’s name has changed from “imperialist military-industrial complex” to “racist ruling class. ” The same Jews, of course, are calling the shots.
The reason the enemy must be smashed is no longer because he is waging an imperialist war in Indochina but because he is oppressing the non-White workers of America.
The Old Left, i.e., the Communist Party USA, has been on the anti-racist track even longer. Since 1961 their figurehead party chairman has been a Negro. In 1968 they ran a Black woman as their candidate for President of the United States, and in 1972 their vice- presidential candidate was a Negro.
The rhetoric of SDS and other Red groups now relates nearly all their old, standard, bread-and-butter economic issues to a racial theme: members of the ruling class in industry and business are holding non-Whites back from the best jobs and from promotions; in the armed services the military branch of the ruling class is giving Blacks the hardest work and the most dangerous missions and punishing them more severely than White transgressors for breaches of military discipline; ruling-class administrators and professors on the campuses are conspiring to keep non-Whites from enrolling and to keep those who do manage to get in from getting good enough grades to graduate to top-paying jobs. And, of course, it is racist members of the same, hated ruling class who run the government and are conspiring to deprive Blacks, Chicanos, Indians, etc. of welfare payments, health benefits, food stamps, subsidized housing, and human dignity.
Absolutely essential to the political strategy of the New Left is the same thing on which the Old Left depended so heavily: the active collaboration of a vast number of “liberal” fellow travelers.
Liberals formerly supported Red programs in order to “fight fascism.” Today it is to “end discrimination.”
Middle-class liberals who would not dream of throwing a bomb at a police station, or even marching in a Red demonstration, sponsor boycotts against all lettuce and grapes not picked by a Chicano union. Through their churches they give money to Black terrorist groups waging guerrilla warfare against White farmers in Rhodesia. And through political donations and campaign work for both the major parties they sent the men to Washington who have given us school bussing; preferential Black hiring quotas; and racially integrated, drug-ridden armed services.
Also essential to the Reds’ success is the passive collaboration of a thoroughly intimidated general public–all those who are afraid to oppose them because they don’t want to be called “racists,” just as a few years earlier they were afraid to be called “reactionaries” or “fascists” for standing up for what they believed.
Nowhere is the new image of the New Left more forcibly displayed than on America’s college campuses. No longer is the SDS burning campus ROTC buildings; now the fire is being concentrated on “racist” administrators, professors, and textbooks.
Attacking Dr. Shockley
Currently the most popular campus target of the New Left is Dr. William Shockley, who has been presenting—or attempting to present—his proof of the genetic basis of Negro mental inferiority to university audiences around the country. The Reds almost invariably use an appearance by Shockley as an excuse to turn a campus upside down.
It is relatively easy for them to convince Blacks on the campus and in the surrounding community that Shockley is advocating the mass extermination of non-Whites. Campus Jews pin yellow Stars of David on their clothes and dust off all the tired, old concentration-camp stories about Nazi medical experiments and gas chambers.
Leaflets are mimeographed, bomb threats are telephoned to the administration and to the group sponsoring Shockley’s visit, anti-racist rallies are held, and, on the day of the scheduled lecture, picket lines are set up around the auditorium.
The Reds pack the hall with their fellow travelers, while roving gangs of Negro athletes threaten other students who try to get inside. When Shockley attempts to speak he is drowned out by shouted obscenities and chants of “No free speech for racists!”
Dr. Shockley, of course, understands the necessity of such confrontations for provoking the Reds into playing their whole hand, and he perseveres. Others are not so bold, however. On campus after campus spineless administrators cave in to demands to cancel Shockley’s speaking engagements and to ban the use of biology, psychology, and sociology textbooks which even hint at the facts of race.
Ironically, many fellow travelers have also found themselves targets of the Reds’ wrath. In order to draw fire one does not have to pose any substantial challenge to the equality myth; it is sufficient to suggest that perhaps IQ tests may still have some value, or that “racist” books should be ridiculed but not burned, or that there may be certain biological differences between Blacks and Whites.
Reaping the Whirlwind
A nutrition research laboratory was wrecked by Reds on one campus because the “racist” director of research insisted on maintaining that there are genetically based differences in nutritional requirements between Negros and Caucasians. It didn’t help a bit for him to protest, “I’m not a racist; I marched at Selma!”
At Temple University, in Philadelphia, English professor Dr. J. Mitchel Morse has been under attack as a “racist” for writing a textbook which describes Negro ghetto dialect as inferior to Standard English. His thesis is that Negroes should be taught to speak, read, and write exactly the same as Whites. For this, his classes have been disrupted by SDS members and the Temple University administration has been presented with demands that he be fired.
Morse has angrily remonstrated with SDS hecklers,”How dare you call me a racist when I’ve been an anti-racist all my life?” But the heckling and disruptions continue.
The Streaking Conspiracy
The New Left now interprets virtually every social phenomenon in terms of “racism”—even streaking. The March-April issue of New Left Notes (published by SDS) has an article titled “Streaking: Bosses Exposed” which concludes that streaking is the product of a conspiracy by the ruling class to divert students’ attention and energy away from the fight against racism.
The immediate goal of all this New Left activity is twofold. First and foremost is the campaign to organize the non-Whites of America into a revolutionary political force which can be used to destroy the White “ruling class.”
Against all Standards
A variation of the carrot-and-stick approach is used here. Blacks, Chicanos, Puerto Ricans—in fact, every misbegotten half-caste the Reds can dredge from the cesspools of miscegenation which America’s cities have become—are flattered by the uncompromising insistence on their absolute “equality.”
The New Left’s demands for open admissions (no grade requirements) at colleges, for the abolition of examinations and course standards, and for the stamping out of other forms of supposed “discrimination” against non-Whites, both on campus and off, are winning the hearts of those who see every one of White society’s criteria for quality or efficiency as an obstacle designed to keep them “in their place.”
At the same time the Reds are convincing them that communist revolution is their only hope for attaining full “human dignity.” Not only does the ruling class want to hold them down, but even the liberals are racists at heart. This is the New Left’s reason for making seemingly preposterous demands which they know that not even the most guilt-ridden liberals can go along with.
The second aim of current Red activity is the intimidation of all potential opposition. It is here that the fellow travelers play a key role.
They are the priests and ministers who piously sermonize about the equality of “all God’s children”; the schoolteachers who consciously promote the myths that Negroes discovered the North Pole, played leading roles in the American War of Independence, were the first heart surgeons, and helped win the West; the advertising executives who design TV commercials portraying a bright and carefree world of racial integration and consumer luxury; worst of all, the public officials—America’s elected and appointed “leaders”—who cheerfully lead America down the steep, one-way path to national and racial suicide, because that’s where the media support and the big campaign contributions are.
These people are not card-carrying communists—neither are most of the kids who sign their names to anti-Shockley petitions when he is scheduled to speak at their schools—but they very handily do the Reds’ public relations work for them.
A New United Front
The Reds and the neo-liberals have formed a coalition against White America which is far more effective than the old United Front against “fascism” ever was.
The atmosphere of intimidation, the compulsion toward orthodoxy on all racial matters, is growing every day. Even patriots who were not afraid to stand up to the Reds on the issue of “U.S. imperialism” during the Indochina war are now forced to toe the party line by the threat of being labeled “racists.”
Red, Liberal Differences
Although America’s liberals are collaborating fully, albeit sometimes unwillingly, with the Reds on racial matters, the liberals really regard the racial crisis in a different light than do the hard-core elements of the New Left. Whereas the communists want to exacerbate the crisis and exploit it, what the liberals really want is to weasel around it.
They think they can make the crisis disappear by eliminating its cause, namely, inequality. Ultimately, this boils down to arriving at communist goals nonviolently instead of violently.
The Reds look forward to a wholesale massacre of “ruling class” White males accompanied by a mass rape of their females, after which a domesticated herd of exactly “equal,” coffee colored proletarians will happily enjoy the benefits of a brave-new-world-style welfare state—administered, of course, by commissars of God’s “chosen” race. The liberals would like to bypass the massacre and rape, if possible.
A Prosperous Babylon
American “conservatives,” ranging from Nixon Republicans to Wallaceites, take a position on racial matters not fundamentally different from that of the liberals.
Although, unlike the liberals, they do not want to see the White race become peacefully submerged in a rising tide of colored subhumanity, they wring their hands and say, “Alas, what else can we do?”
Their motivation is not neoliberalism but economic self-interest. The only concern in their shopkeepers’ souls is that their money-grubbing and their self-seeking pursuit of “happiness” not be disrupted.
A peaceful Babylon, a prosperous Babylon, is their desire. Its color does not matter.
Riots Are Bad for Business
So far as they are concerned, the race problem would be solved if Blacks would all work and consume—like the happy Blacks in the integrated TV commercials for Pepsi Cola and Crest—instead of rioting, robbing, raping, and swelling the welfare rolls. The conservative solution to Black unrest is to buy them off, with more concessions, more integration, more “equality.”
But there is another way. It is the White man’s age-old way. That is, it was the White man’s way before materialism destroyed his character and liberalism sapped his will and softened his spine.
That way is to meet the problem head-on and to either overcome it or perish in the attempt.
There is a growing, worldwide conflict between the White race and the non-White peoples who want for themselves what the White man’s genius and energy have created. Very well, let us not look for some way to weasel around that conflict or to convince ourselves that it does not really exist. Let us quit stalling for time and trying to appease our enemies.
Instead, let us oppose them with all the resources at our disposal. Let us place the destiny of our own people ahead of all other considerations, and let us take whatever measures are required to secure that destiny.
From Attack! No. 27, 1974
transcribed by Vanessa Neubauer from the book The Best of Attack! and National Vanguard, edited by Kevin Alfred Strom