Though Black politicos like tyrant Robert Mugabe of ‘Zimbabwe’ (Southern Rhodesia) typically prided themselves on ‘throwing off the shackles’ of the British Empire (a process largely masterminded by British liberal-leftists), it transpired they were happy with the new (and presumably more lucrative for them) brutalities of the Chinese Empire. In particular, after a generation of useless Zim independence reducing most natives to grinding poverty as Whites fled, the Chinese were (quite literally) whipping Zim’s Bleck ‘workers’ into shape to build a central powerhouse, a military academy. The Guardian recorded (2 i 2012):
Surrounded by a perimeter wall that runs for a kilometre through what was once farmland, the shadowy military academy is being built by a Chinese contractor whose managers are accused of meting out physical punishments, miserable conditions and meagre pay.
"The beatings happen very often," said a 28-year-old carpenter, wearing blue overalls as he made the long walk home after a 14-hour shift. "They ill-treat you and, if you make a mistake, they beat you up.
"I saw some men beaten up yesterday. A guy complained: 'You're not treating us like human beings,' and the Chinese replied: 'You should appreciate we've come to assist you.' They beat him up and he was fired." He estimated that there were about 600 Zimbabwean and 300 Chinese workers on the site. Around 50 of the Chinese were managers. Some of the Chinese have "nice homes inside" while others live in wooden shacks just outside the complex. The Zimbabweans and Chinese rarely mix, he added. "They don't speak English so we use sign language. The Chinese eat off plates, then give us the leftovers."
But, like the other African dictators who were the native response to the West’s White-guilt-ridden withdrawal, Mugabe and his merry men found it lucrative enough to live with China supplying necessary labour discipline (and all without the new rulers being pestered over ‘human rights’).
EDUCATIONAL IDEALISM (AND FRAUDULENCE) STILL BEING TRIED
30+ years after Sir Keith Joseph’s free-contraception-for-the-masses Preston speech (which ended his Prime Ministerial ambitions and saw Mrs Thatcher succeed him), no-one could accuse Britain of a premature lurch into eugenics. Rather, adding to the efforts of social workers, benefits operatives, social housing bureaucrats, police, doctors, human rights lawyers and lesbian breastfeeding counsellors, ‘Conservative’ Daft Dave Cameron offered private companies (employing who?...) £15K for each ‘shameless’ [after a TV series] layabout family where they could get a member to write a CV and/or get a job (for how long?....) (Daily Mail, 3 i).
{Yes, money that could have been usefully spent on providing sterilization was to be showered on a new bunch of half-arsed sociologists from polytechnics ooops new universities, showing that Cameron was indeed the ‘heir to Blair.’ – But here was true idealism, since neither the sociologists or the guided CV-writers would ever vote Tory.} A Mail correspondent observed:
They can't possibly believe that this is going to work - can they? God help those who have to deal with them. These people who come up with these daft ideas have no idea at all of what they are dealing with. . .... I dare ONE of them to go into a Benefits Office or Job Centre and try telling one of these 'tough nuts' (for that is what they are), that their money is going to disappear. WE see and put up with it every day .... these benefit bullies who demand a living from the rest of us - BECAUSE THEY THINK IT'S GOVERNMENT MONEY they pilfer from us. Why don't you start by asking the staff who work in Job Centres/Benefits Offices for their experiences in dealing with these people? I've seen stand-up fights in some of these offices where they have had to call the police for their own safety. Cut off their beer money or drug funding and expect them to change their ways, just like that! Get real!
ANTI-RACIST IGNORANCE
As the BBC embarked (3/4 i) on an orgy of anti-racist celebration that, after 19 years of multi-million-pound effort, two White 36-yr-olds were convicted of the East London late-night street murder of Black teen Stephen Lawrence, after two trials had already cleared all five alleged perpetrators, it was little remarked that the leftist hysteria surrounding the case (and leading to the MacPherson of Loony Report* [see Wm McDougall NewsLetter, passim], the condemnation of the Metropolitan Police as ‘institutionally racist’ and the ten-year reduction of ‘stop & search’) meant that no-one had really learned anything (except that the British state would readily abandon justice [no ancient prosecutions, no ‘double jeopardy’, no undercover surveillance evidence] when faced with the mob):
Confronting hysterical calls for their heads, the five White hoodlums had stuck together in ‘entirely not guilty’ pleas, meaning that neither the actual assailant nor the actual motive for the attack were identified (the incident had begun as a gang clash, possibly over Lawrence’s non-payment of a drugs bill**).
*This infamous report by a remote Scottish judge who knew little of London or Blacks, commissioned by Labour, did Blacks more harm than good. Telegraph columnist Philip Johnson recorded that: “In the first few years after Macpherson, stop and search operations declined, drug seizures fell and gang-related street crime rose” (4 i).
Johnson added: “The report became a stick with which to beat the police. In the end, the changes in policing harmed the very communities whose perceived grievances they were supposed to address. Just ask the people whose shops were looted and houses burnt in the riots last summer [2011]. Arguably, the disastrous handling of the disturbances in Tottenham that triggered three nights of mayhem can be traced to the criticism the police faced for failing to catch the killers of Stephen Lawrence.” Sir William Macpherson went into overt terminal mental decline soon after his report was written.
**For some reason which MSM could or would not explore or anyhow detail, Lawrence’s parents had split up soon after the killing and early trials – presumably not over the high-falutin’ issue of whether (contrary to a thousand years of English practice) suspects could be endlessly retried until the ‘correct’ verdict was brought in. Neville Lawrence had forgiven his son’s killers and moved back to Jamaica; whereas his wife Doreen had determined on 100% justice for her son.
The handling of the Lawrence case did not satisfy merrily obese frump Black MP (for Hackney North) Diane Abbott, who deplored Whites using “divide and rule” tactics to pretend there was no single ‘Black community,’ the complaints of which they needed to address. Hilariously, this throw-away mini-critique promptly drew universal accusations of “racism” and demands that Diane should be sacked as Junior Shadow Minister for Public Health, not least from LibDim leader Nice Nick Clegg (Daily Mail, 5 i). The Labour Party took the opportunity to announce it deplored “sweeping generalizations”; and, more helpfully, PM Cameron reminded Diane’s critics that it was hard to qualify remarks on the 140-character Twitter system.
But, instead of standing up for free speech, Diane, hair-dryered by adenoidal Labour leader Red Ed, retracted her opinion and settled for the usual pseudo-grovel that she was ‘sorry if she had upset anyone.’
In previous, less hysterical times, licensed jester Diane (who got 7% of the votes when she ran for the Labour leadership) had been able to get away with saying that PM Cameron and his Chancellor were “two posh White boys”, that “blonde and blue-eyed” Finnish nurses should not be allowed jobs in London hospitals, that Black people should never be laid off from the public sector, and that Black mothers cared more about their children than did White mothers.
Like myself, the Guardian’s Alexander Chancellor thought Diane had been given an unduly hard time for her views (5 i). {Perhaps Mueslis would soon be required to apologize for their confrères threatening the entire 85M Christian population of Nigeria with expulsion or murder?....}
Abbottafatty Diane soon found herself in hot water again for opining (surely correctly) that Britain’s cabbies – themselves overwhelmingly White since they had to master The Knowledge (of their local area) -- were reluctant to pick up Black fares (Sun, 7 i). Another pseudo-grovel coming up rather than for her to defend her race realism or at least freedom of speech? The Labour Party declined to comment. {If only some MSM wallah had asked her whether she thought taxi-drivers irrational!...}
MODERN ARCHITECTURE – A VISUAL AID
Providing striking testimony to the uselessness of modern architecture, a smart if unusual house (with exaggerated eaves) in Kilcreggan, west Scotland, was completely blown down in the storm of 3 i (Telegraph, 4 i; Scotsman, 4 i). The house had featured in the Channel 4 TV programme Grand Designs....
MULTICULTI MADNESS
The futility of the US and UK policies of bringing multicultural demakrazy to Iraq was manifested as 200 Shitites were killed by Solunni bombs in Baghdad within a single week (Guardian, 5 i) – and hundreds more were injured as a result of the West’s 8-year failure to arrange ethnic segregation of high-P Mueslis. Likewise the Shitites and Solunnis of Syria continued to go at each other hammer and tongs despite there being an obvious option of creating a safe haven for fractious Solunnis along the border with Turkey.
In north-east Nigeria, a few dozen more were slain around January 7th by the Islamoluni Procul Harem – including Muslim clerics selected for assassination after decrying the violence (Observer, 8 i).
POWELLITE STAR ON HORIZON
As the Twelve Days of Christmas ended (with the turkey soup, chipolatas and mince pies finally running out in the Brand household – though not the gin and Old Pulteney, thank heaven), a Labour star appeared in the firmament to make up for the dismal performance of union-backed ‘Red Ed’ Mililitre (forever associated, along with his sidekick Ed Balls, with the failed Labour extravagance and multiculturalism of 1997-2010): balded Harvard Fulbright scholar Liam Byrne, a Birmingham MP and former Labour Treasury Minister, reinforced his earlier stances against immigration and ‘welfare’ as well as socialism-backed bankstas. Said the Guardian (5 i):
Though opposing some cuts to disability benefits, [Byrne] favours "reform" to reduce welfare spending. The solitary concrete proposal in this respect is to make the receipt of benefits, after a period of time, conditional upon attendance at a work or training centre: workfare, in other words. Yet, it is less the policy specifics than the ideological language framing his intervention that is arresting. He complains of soaring benefit costs, but blames this on social behaviour being skewed by the welfare state. Idleness and dependency on "unearned" income are the problem. This admixture of authoritarianism and free-market orthodoxy is very Thatcherite.
Happily, the Guardian’s star columnist, fat Florence-living femisocialiste Polly Toynbee, was furious with LB’s Powellism (7 i).
FRANCE DOES EXCLUSIVITY
As of January 1, applicants for French nationality were required to demonstrate linguistic proficiency in French equal to that of the average 15-yr-old native speaker, to disclaim dual nationality while on French soil and to agree to be deported if they clocked up a criminal record (AmRen, 2 i). Pres NapoSarkozy, trailing in polls and facing a general election in May, also promised to do something to get rid of a few more of the 15K gypsies ooops Roma in France who were estimated to be responsible for 10% of all crime in the country (BBC Radio 4, 6 i, 21:00).
IDENTEQUALITY CONTESTED
A review of: John HARVEY (2012) (Email: raceandequality@gmail.com) Race and Equality: the Nature of the Debate. Ulster Institute for Social Research, pp 142, £15, ISBN 978-0-9568811-3-7
Written by a retired maths teacher, this book is concerned to explain the basic concepts of evolution and genetics, to show how variety is constantly thrown up at both individual and racial levels and to point out that denial of radical human differences (‘identegalitarianism’) reflects little but the political desperation of socialists and kindred utopian idealists. Harvey writes with aplomb – even sometimes too much, dismissing some socio-environmentalist answers to his many questions ex cathedra as “ridiculous”; and he sometimes burdens himself with unnecessary theorizing, e.g. as to the superiority of men – an unlikely thesis in view of the equal contributions of males and females to subsequent generations and roundly dismissed by no less a would-be chauvinist than Doctor Johnson (who observed that the law gave men more power just because in nature they had so little). But Harvey gets to the nitty-gritty of speciation, genetic bottlenecks, founder effects, genetic drift etc; and, though there are perhaps too many examples taken from animals, he includes plenty of observations which should be better known – e.g. that Darwin’s Origin of Species was subtitled as having to do with just those dreaded “races” which it has lately been the business of postmodern relativists and similar successors to sociology to contest.
Psychology itself does not take up much of the book. Thus there is no serious consideration of how the g factor and IQ (the biggest factors in human difference) were derived; nor of what intelligence really is or of how and why it is so important in determining human dominance hierarchies. More surprisingly, there is little effort to explain the key concept of heritability (whether narrow or broad) over which London School psychologists and their critics once took so much trouble. Again, Harvey has no idea of what to do about the human differences in which he believes – he is not overtly concerned to say that society and its educational system in particular should respond to merit. Needless to say, Sir Francis Galton, William McDougall, Raymond Cattell, Hans Eysenck, Arthur Jensen and Phil Rushton are unmentioned in the index.
Yet Harvey’s heart is clearly in the right place and he concludes with an engaging trot through the modern world’s ethnic differences and conflicts – e.g. observing that when the greatest egalitarian experiment collapsed, the USSR broke up along not political or economic but along ethnic lines, with its star state, the GDR preferring its ethnic link to West Germany than any other route of going its own way. The book is admittedly no match for Eysenck’s great hymns to human inequality (e.g. the 1967 Chapter 1 of Biological Basis of Personality); it has many typos; and it largely holds back from commitments about the major racial inequality of all, that between Blacks and Whites; but, in avoiding frightening the horses, it will enable technical and political advance for students who have found themselves passably enthusiastic about Steven [sic] Pinker’s (2003) The Blank Slate.
-----------------------------------
Comments? Email Chris Brand. -- CV for Chris Brand. -- Some history.
-----------------------------------


