Good Morning, Mr. President!
by Douglas Mercer
IN 1970 Daniel Moynihan told Richard Nixon that there was no evidence whatsoever that the amount of money spent on education had any effect at all on the performance of students. No data has emerged in the past half century to refute this claim. And yet the education boondogglers, their scam now taken over by parasitic anti-White ideologues, continue to dip their unholy snouts into the financial gravy train.
* * *
When Sputnik hit, America had a collective meltdown; but still being a country concerned with its survival it rolled up its sleeves and got to work; it overhauled its educational system. It was still a country very well aware that in the race of life, one was always in competition with other nations, and to lose meant vassalage or death.
There is an intractable problem with our educational system, and the the results of this problem have been bad, very bad, for many years. Both sides concur on that. One side thinks that there can be a vast improvement in the results; the other side believes that there can only be a moderate improvement. In identifying the problem one side has concocted a total fantasy, while the other side sees things clearly. But the fantasy side overwhelmingly dominates the media and to some extent public opinion, and is the only side heard by policy makers. The realistic side can’t get a fair hearing. The realistic side “shocks” and “appalls” the self-appointed “taste makers” of the day. The realistic view is deemed “evil.”
So hundreds of billions of dollars are thrown at the fantasy problem. And this deluge of money can only increase, never decrease — because, having become a racket, those who profit from it have every incentive to keep the gravy train going and create a self-reinforcing positive feedback loop of academics, unions, “scientific studies,” pressure groups, and bought lawmakers. A real and permanent solution is not in their ideological or financial interests. Meanwhile, the moderate improvement that could actually be made never happens. And the problem continues into the future indefinitely, growing all the time — though perhaps not growing quite as fast as the cash flow to the grifters.
* * *
Ed Dutton says if you base public policy on bad information you get bad results. This seemingly anodyne observation is in fact explosive.
To a large degree American public policy — on education and other issues as well — is built on a tissue of lies. It addresses a problem that does not exist, and the problem that does exists festers interminably, grows worse, and may end up killing us all.
That is: US policymakers operate under the assumption that all men are created equal. If everyone is a blank slate, then everyone should perform equally. When people do not perform equally, and they never do, there are two fallback positions: The underperformers are the victims of unequal environments which are created by “racism” — or victims of “racism” itself.
That is, they have one fallback position — “racism.”
Never do they consider the inescapable truth: Men are not equal, and the vastly different performances of the various races are the result of ineradicable genetic differences.
* * *
Forget about Sputnik, forget about the 5,000-year juggernaut of China looming on our horizon, forget about the eternal struggle of the races. In the long arc from the swamp to the stars, the White man was well on his way to the stars — but now racial aliens rule us, and all over this once-great nation they are abandoning standardized tests — and standards themselves — in education. So forget the stars. The swamp again beckons.
The SAT? That’s racist! Programs that promote the best students to top classes? That’s racist! So they level everything off, have admissions policies based on so-called “holistic criteria” that rate spinning basketballs and re-re-sampled “hip hop” as high as Maxwell’s equations and Vivaldi. They put geniuses in the same classes as Barkevious, La Twonda, and the Toltec People. This is because they know that if real, objective tests are in place, almost no mongrels will make it. And they want mongrels promoted. They don’t care about the stars. They will send us back to the swamp — where there’s no need for the Periodic Table, because everything is mud.
In the former bastion of liberty and the White man called Boston, they recently suspended enrollment for high-performing fourth, fifth, and sixth graders due to “equity concerns.” By equity concerns they mean not enough of the lower hominidae made the cut. Some monstrosity named Brenda Cassellius (she looks the Jew, but I was unable to confirm) implemented a one-year hiatus for the program. (Chances of it being reinstated: zero.) The program was known as “Advanced Work Classes,” and like being on time and working hard the word “advanced” to them is “racist” to the core and colonizes the curriculum all by its lonesome. Cassellius said “there’s a lot of work we have to do in the district to be antiracist and have policies where all students have a fair shot at an equitable and excellent education.” Ah, there’s that buzz word “equity” — which is really a buzz saw cutting into the White world. And they do have a lot of work to do. Too bad they have no intention of doing it. Rather, they are replacing education with edu-ma-cation aimed squarely at the feral and the backward who should have been left behind 5,000 years ago. Their motto, always: the White man be damned.
* * *
Get a reasonably honest and self-respecting social scientist alone, or shoot him full of Sodium Pentothal, and he’ll tell you what we all already know: One of the most indisputable facts of his profession is that the various races differ dramatically in their cognitive potential and that this differential is almost totally due to genetic inheritance. In simplified language, Blacks people are, on average, unintelligent by human standards, Mestizos are a little more intelligent than that, and White people and Asians are much, much brighter. Social scientists have known this for a hundred years or more. The data is always the same. But take that same social scientist and put him on a podium with cameras and microphones rolling, and he’ll sing a very different tune. One that resembles the truth about as much as Maury Povich resembles the Apollo of the Belvedere.
In the 1990s Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein sent a body blow to the equality myth with their book The Bell Curve. Their booked proved beyond any rational doubt that the races are unequal. For their trouble they were called Hitler. The controlled media and Establishment hacks scrambled to cover up the truth and vilify the authors.
Now in all honesty Charles Murray is a neocon cuck who rarely if ever puts in a good word for the White man. He even married interracially early in life. But I must say he can collect and collate uncomfortable facts like no one else, and let the reader come to his own conclusions. And he’s going into the lion’s den again in the summer of 2021 with an upcoming book called Facing Reality. Now the chance that Jews and their White traitor allies will ever honestly face reality is not a jot north of none — but, still, it’s good to get things on the record.
Amazon has lost its biscuits so hard over Mr. Charles Murray. Just now I went to their pestiferous Web site and typed his name in. The first thing that struck my face was something called Do the Essentials of Unpacking Your Biases. Then came a book called Me and White Supremacy, a book about how to not be a “racist.” Then this regular White man had to scroll down, and down, and then — and only then — saw Murray’s upcoming book. Facing Reality will show us why Negroes are genetically “disadvantaged” beings, and argues that the ruling class should just accept that — because, really, it’s not that big a deal. As far as Amazon’s amazingly subtle algorithms go, they really do protest too much. Nice try, losers.
The blurb for this forthcoming book reads:
The charges of white privilege and systemic racism that are tearing the country apart float free of reality. Two known facts, long since documented beyond reasonable doubt, need to be brought into the open and incorporated into the way we think about public policy: American whites, blacks, Hispanics, and Asians have different violent crime rates and different means and distributions of cognitive ability.
Of course these are facts, known with absolute certainty for more than a century. The shame is that someone even has to say it.
Where Murray falls down is that he thinks that all of these differences can be papered over with a few tattered copies of an “American creed” that no one even clearly remembers any more, much less believes in. He thinks that it wouldn’t be painful at all for the ruling class to abandon its Prime Directive. He actually thinks they’d be willing to admit that no amount of money or education will ever make Mestizos and Blacks the equal of White men.
Ha! They don’t care about truth — they don’t care about any American creed. They care about winning, which they are. Murray is dangerously naïve and thinks that sweet reason will carry the day. What he fails to appreciate is that quite often sweet reason needs the assistance of jackboots and a whip.
* * *
For younger generations, Daniel Patrick Moynihan is remembered, if he is remembered at all, for being a generic if occasionally hilarious liberal senator from New York and for being a thoroughgoing booze hound. But while serving as the Assistant Secretary of Labor under big fat goon Lyndon Johnson, Moynihan bucked the common wisdom in a 1965 paper called The Negro Family: A Case For National Action. In it he rung the alarm on the rise in single motherhood among Negro females, and attributed it to a “destructive vein in Negro ghetto culture.” Of course being a paid-up member of the Harvard liberal elite, he blamed slavery and Jim Crow for that destructive culture, but as the hero of American History X wisely noted, if you can’t get your act together after many generations maybe you’re the problem. (Moynihan should have studied Homo afer in its native African habitat to cure him of his “Jim Crow made them do it” delusion.) What Moynihan was prefiguring was what Black activists would later deride as “respectability politics” — that is, Blacks who said Blacks needed to take the blame for their own failures, something touted by Larry Elder and most famously by Bill Cosby. (With the latter it was also sometimes called “pull up your pants politics.”) Cosby railed against “names like Shaniqua, Shaligua, Mohammed, and people with their hat on backwards, pants down around the crack.” (But in Cosby’s own case — he repeatedly raped White women after drugging them — the jungle in him was too strong, whatever he might have said about others.)
Moynihan is also famous for his Law of the Canadian Border. Said law posits that, in the US, the further a place is from the Canadian border, the worse their students’ test scores will be. True enough, but the Canadian border has nothing to do with it — and the larger percentage of Negroes in the South has everything to do with it. Thus Moynihan’s Law of the Canadian Border is really the Racialist Law of the Great White North. Though lately all those Somalis that Hebrew Immigrant Aid has dropped into Minnesota are putting this once-iron law in grave doubt.
* * *
Murray’s Bell Curve co-author was Richard Herrnstein. As if the “stein” wasn’t a tip off, he was the product of Jewish immigrants from Hungary who came to Manhattan in 1930, a typical enough story. From this inauspicious beginning he deviated enough from the pattern to make a name for himself proving that Negroes are relatively stupid, showing that all men are not created equal, and of course getting called Hitler.
Work that Herrnstein did in the late 1960s elicited a truly astonishing conversation between Daniel Patrick Moynihan and his fellow avid boozehound Richard M. Nixon.
The President was ruminating in the Oval one fine morning when he got his Secretary on the line and asked her to get Mr. Moynihan on the line for him, stipulating that he was probably “either at the UN or at Harvard.”
This has all been recorded.
After a moment’s silence we hear the always chipper voice of the latter saying: “Good morning, Mr. President!”
After some desultory chitchat, Nixon gets to the point. He says he’s been “reading your piece on the Herrnstein piece.” That is, he’s been reading about what would later be termed “race realism” — that the races differ in their cognitive potentials, that these differences are rooted in the genes, that Negroes are stupid. Nixon then says “No one on the staff even knows I’m reading the goddamn article.” Here Moynihan chimes in “oh good, good.”
So we have here the spectacle of the supposedly “most powerful man in the world” furtively skulking around the White House so he can read the simple truth about the races.
They must not know I know the truth! The sky will fall! The Jews will be up in arms!
Nixon then says, “This Herrnstein stuff — no one must even think we are thinking about it.” Heaven forfend that anyone should even suspect that the President of the United States should be fully informed about the data that affects billions of dollars in expenditures, affects nearly all of domestic public policy, and affects the future of every American child for generations to come. Not that!
“And if we do find out it’s true we must never tell anyone.” This must constitute a fiduciary breach on his part, and certainly is an abrogation of his oath wherein he swore to defend and protect his country. Instead he is being cagey, thus throwing the country to the Jewish lions.
He then says that he’s reluctantly concluded that what Herrnstein says is true. He says this is knowledge that it is “better not to know.”
What he means is that while it may be important for a President to know about genetically based racial differences, he must never utter a word about it. He gives the vague impression that, armed with the truth, he will operate behind the curtains, curbing the worst excesses of government programs based on the equality lie. (That is not enough, Mr. President, not nearly enough, and may God damn your gutless soul forever.)
He then give a rather humorous tour of the world in which he concludes that “Blacks and Latins” are incapable of self-government, that only Whites and Asians can do that. He then says that Blacks are good at sports and music, and veers fairly close to saying that they excellent at shuffling and jive talkin’. But when it comes to “rigid discipline” they have a “helluva time.” Ever the prole, he adds that excelling in dancing and sports is “nothing to piss on.”
He then begins to speak about how a politician might know that having a Black or Jew on a Presidential ticket would hurt him electorally — but he must never say so.
But it seems clear that that is just a proxy for what he is really thinking, what he has just been talking about — the deeper issue that Blacks will never be able to be the intellectual or social equals of Whites, not even close. And he says that though a politician may know that, he must never say it.
Because by saying it, Nixon avers, he will unleash “latent prejudices.” That is, by saying it he will risk ushering in “the unthinkable” By that he means of course: racism.
Apparently even the fully-fledged “race realist” Nixon fully bought into the idea that that this brand new sin of “racism” really was the greatest sin of all. (Of course, being a politician, he might not believe that anything is a sin — except doing something that the media-addled mob disapproves of this week.)
* * *
All in all, this is a startling conversation. Essentially he is saying that he is fully aware of, and is fully in accord with, what we now call race realism. He says he knows it to be true, but that this is something that we cannot admit we know. He gives the impression that he plans to work behind the scenes as kind of secret truth agent, curbing useless programs based on this knowledge (but of course always giving specious reasons for what he is doing).
But the truth is that the Nixon Administration oversaw a vast expansion of “Affirmative Action” programs, an expansion of welfare programs, and no curtailment at all of the burgeoning “civil rights” policies of the previous administration. Pat Buchanan claims that in a second full term Nixon planed to toss caution the winds and finally govern in a hard core right-wing way. Well, maybe so, maybe not. With these conservatives the check is always in the mail.
And his final statement gives the game away. He doesn’t want to bring on “the unthinkable.” That is, “racism.” That, to him, would be worse than anything, worse than lying, worse than imbuing Whites with collective guilt, worse than tossing billions of dollars down the Congoid rat hole, worse than giving untold energy to an ideology that has ended up tearing our civilization apart, worse that creating mass cadres of anti-Whites determined to eliminate us.
This fallacious reasoning is reminiscent of that of Charles Lindbergh’s wife, who, after her husband called out the Jews, said she knew he was right but she wished he hadn’t said it. Because “pogroms,” you know. Nothing is worse than that.
* * *
In 2020 (Anno Floyd year zero) the University of California (UC) voted to phase out the SAT requirement to apply to its ten schools. This decision by a major school will eventually flow throughout the entire American university system. UC made its decision amid “concerns” that “testing is unfair to Hispanic and Black children.”
* * *
So Nixon was wrong; no amount of backroom, behind-the-scenes presidential Machiavellianism will ever work. The anti-White juggernaut is too powerful, has too much momentum. And Charles Murray is wrong that another erudite and sweetly reasoned tome will appeal to the better angels of our rulers and our adversaries, because they are purely demonic. No gentle blandishments, no reason, will ever deter them.
No, the trick is to make the unthinkable thinkable. To do that you must proclaim it, truthfully, powerfully, relentlessly. Let us work together to get to the point where each White man and each White woman hears our message one hundred times a day at least.
In the words of the wise William Pierce, you must attack.
And give no quarter to those who give none.
For it is the collusion of silence, of cowering in fear, of trembling at the thought of being called a “racist,” that is our enemy’s greatest strength. Pavlov was never prouder of his dinner bell than they are of their “racism” invention. One made dogs salivate; the other makes men whimper.
But when the spell is broken — when our people know that the truth written in their hearts and right there before their very eyes was right all along — then the unthinkable will become thinkable. And after that it will be inescapable.
* * *