Dr. Ralph Scott’s Forty-year Battle for Science in Research on Forced Busing: Angela Saini, Barry Mehler, and the Academic Left

Angela Saini, who describes herself as a “freelance science journalist,” has written a propaganda piece on race for the Guardian (“Why race science is on the rise again”), a precis of a now-released book of the same title. You know what you are up against right from the beginning, with the phrase “so-called ‘races,’” with ‘races’ in scare quotes. She describes herself as growing up in an “Indian-Punjabi household” and appears to be yet another non-White who is campaigning against the idea that Whites are a real group—a group with interests and a long, proud history.[1] In other words, she is promoting her own ethnic interests in dismantling the West as an ethnic entity and sees herself as a lifelong victim of White racism (“racism was the backdrop to my teenage years”) because there was a White nationalist bookstore in her neighborhood and because of the murder of one Black person — Stephen Lawrence who has since been elevated to sainthood by the same activists and media that have systematically ignored or downplayed victimization of native Brits by non-White immigrants; see Tobias Langdon, “Black Saints, White Demons: The Martyr-cult of Stephen Lawrence”).

The Guardian piece centers around one Barry Mehler, who has been a longtime anti-race realism activist as head of the Institute for the Study of Academic Racism, a non-profit housed on the campus of a state-supported university, Ferris State in Michigan.

I’ve long been aware of Mehler, being a target of some his writing. Mehler was the protégé of Jerry Hirsch, a behavior geneticist who devoted much of his professional life to campaigning against sociobiology and against quantitative behavior genetics, especially as applied to humans. Hirsch has a cameo role in Chapter 2 of The Culture of Critique, so you know what I think of ethnic activists like Hirsch and Mehler.

Indeed, Mehler is Faculty Advisor to Jewish Students at Ferris State University, a good indication that he has a strong Jewish identity. Saini’s article also shows his Jewish identification as informing his crusading against race science: Mehler “immediately saw parallels between the far-right network of intellectuals and the rapid, devastating way in which eugenics research had been used in Nazi Germany, terrifying him with the possibility that the brutal atrocities of the past could happen once more.”

Also indicative of his ethnic activism, Mehler has long been associated with the ADL. A 1995 article on the ADL website describes Mehler as the ADL National Commissioner. Another describes him as the chairman of the ADL’s Latin American Committee working to combat the confiscation of Jewish property and forced exile of Jews by the Sandinista government because of Jewish support for the previous government and because of Jewish support for Israel.

Not much doubt that Mehler is a Jewish academic ethnic activist, an activist ensconced at a state-supported university—the height of establishment respectability.

Once again, we see the confluence of Jewish identity and academic activism aimed at furthering Jewish interests, in this case by someone with no training in evolutionary biology or genetics. Despite the clear ethnic and political motivations characteristic of both Mehler and Saini, Saini has the gall to claim that race science is “innately political,” thereby absolving the activism of people like Mehler and Saini from any taint of extra-scientific interests.

The article names the usual suspects — e.g., Richard Lynn, Richard Herrnstein, Charles Murray, and Jared Taylor, but also some who are less widely known today, such as Roger Pearson, founder of the Journal of Indo-European Studies, the Journal of Social, Political and Economic Studies and Mankind Quarterly.

Here I want to focus on another important figure who is less well-known today: Prof. Ralph Scott. This is what Saini’s article says about Scott:

In May 1988, Mehler and [another activist, Keith] Hurt published an article in the Nation, a progressive US weekly, about a professor of educational psychology at the University of Northern Iowa called Ralph Scott. Their report claimed that Scott had used funds provided by a wealthy segregationist under a pseudonym in 1976 and 1977 to organise a national anti-busing campaign (busing was a means of desegregating schools by transporting children from one area to another). Yet in 1985 the Reagan administration appointed Scott to the chair of the Iowa Advisory Committee to the US Commission on Civil Rights, a body tasked with enforcing antidiscrimination legislation. Even after taking up his influential post, Scott was writing for Pearson’s journal.

Scott informs me that Saini presented him with quotes from some of Mehler’s writing on Scott, asking for comments. However, she ceased contact after Scott related his allegations about Mehler and in particular that Mehler had repeatedly refused to debate him on the issue of busing.

TOO has previously published two articles dealing with Scott. Nelson Rosit’s “Assault on Psychology: Research on Race Differences Anathematized” (2017) also deals with other dissidents from racial orthodoxy, including Arthur Jensen, J. Philippe Rushton, and Raymond Cattell, all of whom have been targets of Mehler’s activism. Cattell was one of the most influential psychologists of the twentieth century, with major contributions in personality psychology as well as experimental design and analysis. At the hands of Mehler’s activism, these accomplishments, which were influential in the rise of scientific psychology, counted for nothing, and Mehler targeted him after he was nominated for a lifetime achievement award by the American Psychological Association. (Cattell eventually withdrew from the nomination and died soon thereafter.)

Cattell’s fall from grace was the result of being a thoroughgoing evolutionist, accepting not only the science behind eugenics (which is based on individual differences, not race differences), but also viewing the improvement of human potential as a good in itself. His secular religion of Beyondism, published late in his career, is a logical consequence of this perspective, proposing that evolutionary competition should be allowed to happen such that only the leading civilizations would survive.

Although Cattell never published scientific papers on race differences per se, this combination of accepting eugenics and natural selection between civilizations was enough to provoke Mehler’s ire, and his activism included the usual guilt by association drivel. It’s no surprise that the SPLC posted a 1999 Mehler article on Cattell, Lynn, Glayde Whitney, et al. with a section titled “Race, IQ and the death camps” that cites Richard Lewontin and Ruth Benedict (two villains discussed in Chapter 2 of The Culture of Critique). Mehler was also cited favorably by the SPLC in its portrait of Cattell; this article mentioned that Mehler’s colleague, Abe Foxman, head of the ADL at the time, wrote a letter to the APA opposing Cattell’s Lifetime Achievement Award.

So the portrait of a Jewish academic ethnic activist is complete: head of a non-profit housed at a state-funded university, with close ties to the SPLC and ADL, able to publish in elite left-leaning media like The Nation, characterized by a strong ethnic identity and working for Jewish activist organizations. And Mehler, having stated his concern that eugenics leads to a holocaust for Jews, clearly sees his activism as advancing Jewish interests. As has been typical of Jewish intellectual activists, in such an enterprise, the truth about race, intelligence, school busing and everything else he touches on has no importance whatever.

I penned an article,Prof. Ralph Scott on the Costs of Not Mentioning Race Differences,” based on a 2013 article Scott wrote for Mankind Quarterly. These articles make it clear that Dr. Scott was much impressed by the research of Arthur Jensen, the father of research on race and IQ, who, amazingly, is unmentioned in Saini’s article. Scott’s Mankind Quarterly article is essentially a tribute to Jensen, but also describes the dismal history of the attempt to raise the academic achievement Black children. Prof. Scott was vilified to a large extent because he opposed busing of Black of children to largely White schools as ineffectual in rectifying the racial gap — a view that has been resoundingly confirmed by all the research.  But the correctness of his views had no influence on the haters.

What’s striking from the perspective of 2019 is that someone like Prof. Scott could have become a respected public figure during the 1970s and 1980s, for example becoming Iowa chair of the US Commission on Civil Rights during the Reagan administration, testifying before the U.S. Senate on educational issues, and actively participating in educational interventions in Iowa. As Rosit notes,

In the early 1970s Prof. Scott was involved in designing Home Start, a birth-to-kindergarten enrichment program for poor families in Waterloo, Iowa. Such early intervention was one of Jensen’s recommendations. Although Scott’s program was well received, the problems began when he advocated early intervention as an alternative to forced busing. In 1976 he organized a series of symposia entitled, “Constructive Alternatives to Forced Busing.”  That is really all it took. To support Jensen’s findings and oppose massive busing could only mean one was a hateful bigot. The news media in several cities where the symposia were held alleged Scott had racist affiliations. Reporters, including Grace Lichtenstein of the New York Times, called administrators at Scott’s university to complain about his activities. This led to an investigation to see if there were grounds for dismissal.

Fortunately, Prof Scott’s tenure prevented termination.

While the university could not rid itself of Scott, leftist students and “colleagues” could make his life unpleasant. He and his family received threating messages including death threats.  Follow professors denigrated Scott to their students, resulting in decreased enrollment in his classes. The university reduced his teaching assignments.  The harassment and opprobrium lasted for decades until Scott’s retirement in 2014.

In 1988 Scott’s teaching and research came under scrutiny of the baleful eye of leftist academic activist Barry Mehler. Mehler, who received his undergraduate degree from Yeshiva University, is the Jewish director of the so-called Institute for the Study of Academic Racism (ISAR) at Ferris State University in Michigan. As part of his investigation Mehler had an assistant use a pseudonym to make calls to Scott posing as a reporter seeking an interview for the Baltimore Sun.

All’s fair in love and war, and it’s quite clear that this is war. As Rosit notes, Scott was harassed throughout the remainder of his career. Scott’s Mankind Quarterly article describes the general picture:

For years, hitherto supportive White and Black students sought to drop my courses, having been informed in classrooms that I am a “racist” and consider Blacks “inferior.”  In citing my “racism,” one lecturing professor reported that a New York NAACP organization advised him to monitor my classes.  Asked about this, the professor threatened to sue me for infringing on his academic rights.  Given parameters of customary academic freedom, I brought the issue to the university graduate council, composed of friends and colleagues opting to accede, however reluctantly, to academic constraints; my concerns were summarily dismissed.  During council discussion, one professor asked, “Is it any worse for someone to be called a racist for antibusing views than reporting that busing is harmful to Black children?”  …  Day and night, my family members received threatening calls at home and office; university police scanned anonymous death threats; the dean of the College of Education warned, “You could get shot.”

I have been corresponding with Prof. Scott and he has allowed me to see some of the extensive paper trail extending from the 1970s to his retirement at the age of 86 in 2014. One thing is quite clear. Dr. Scott never backed down from a battle. The entire history is littered with court proceedings and complaints to government agencies and various offices of the University of Northern Iowa.

The fact that Scott was appointed Iowa chair of the US Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR) in the 1980s says a lot. Even more remarkably, the lead council for the USCCR, John C. Eastman (now a professor of law at Chapman University), with the cooperation of the head of the USCCR, Clarence M. Pendleton (a Black conservative), wrote a letter published in the Des Moines Register (dated March 4, 1988) that supported Dr. Scott against charges the paper had published alleging that Scott “stands against much of what the civil rights movement stands for.” Eastman wrote that the charges amounted to the claim that Scott had “vigorously opposed race-based forced busing, and has therefore earned the ire of those who favor race-conscious remedies and who consider themselves monopoly landlords of civil rights policy.” Eastman’s letter goes on to state that “many leading academics, politicians, and even some civil rights leaders have raised objections to busing on the basis of race.” Not surprisingly, the letter caused a maelstrom of controversy, with both Eastman and Pendleton being heavily criticized.

The attacks were relentless, spanning over 40 years. Way back in 1974 Dr. Scott was being called a “Nazi” and someone with “extreme dislike for blacks, Jews, and nuns” by other faculty. But these statements were not in his presence. He also received harassing phone calls and was terminated as a consultant to the federally funded Head Start program despite being involved in the design of the program.

Face-to-face hostility can be even more difficult to endure. As with others who have become academic pariahs, Dr. Scott’s face-to-face world included a number of hostile encounters. Articles appeared attacking him for his views in the Des Moines Register, a local newspaper read by many in the campus community. A very painful example occurred in 1982 at a faculty women’s lunch when the wife of a dean refused to sit at a table with Scott’s wife, claiming she would not sit with “the wife of a racist.” The harassing phone calls continued.

Speaking from personal experience and that of others subjected to such accusations, this type of social ostracism is typically more devastating to women than men and often has very negative repercussions on marriages. One can only imagine the devastating impact such an incident would have on his wife and on their marriage.  Such incidents are often the most painful experiences of the entire process. But the people who revel in politically motivated harassment are clearly proud of their actions. They are the real haters.

These attacks are devastating to White people because they are framed as moral failings, not intellectual failings. We all want to have a reputation as upholding the moral standards of the wider culture, but it’s particularly important for northwest Europeans—a major issue in my forthcoming book.  As a result, it’s especially difficult to be seen as a moral pariah in one’s face-to-face community.

So one can imagine the distress Prof. Scott felt when being called as a witness in an Iowa court on an issue involving possible termination of a school administrator. The opposing attorney claimed that Scott’s testimony was useless because of Scott’s “character problems” associated with his opposition to busing. The fact that in Scott’s scholarly opinion, busing consigned large numbers of Black children to harmful practices (e.g., much less involvement with the school by students and parents) and did nothing to advance their academic achievement meant nothing.

Another incident, also from 1982, says much about the academic environment at the University of Northern Iowa. A Black woman, Dr. Patricia J. Edwards, head of the university’s Culture House, had made the mistake of co-teaching a course with Dr. Scott. Administrators who are not also faculty members do not have tenure, and for simply co-teaching the course with Dr. Scott she was vilified and harassed because of Scott’s views that forced busing is counter-productive—an empirical question that should be settled by research, not fiat. She eventually resigned her position at the university rather than be fired. Any association with Dr. Scott — whether by marriage or co-teaching a course — was grounds for stigmatizing and, in Dr. Edwards’ case, loss of livelihood.

It’s quite clear that nothing happened to those harassing Dr. Scott or his associates. Indeed, they likely prospered in a university environment where virtue signaling on issues of race is practically a prerequisite for upward mobility. All this occurred despite the usual university pronouncements against harassment, hostile educational environments, and promoting “safe spaces” to prevent people from having their feelings hurt. Pleas to the FBI to investigate went unanswered. Harassment, hostility, hurt feelings, and tensions within one’s marriage are quite acceptable if the recipient is someone like Dr. Scott.

Dr. Scott retired from his full-time, tenured position in 2009 as part of a settlement with the university and the Iowa Civil Rights Commission of an age-discrimination complaint and retaliation because he had filed previous complaints. The settlement noted that his treatment was much more likely due to his ideas, not his age—hardly reassuring.

Dr. Scott’s last controversies occurred because the university was under contractual obligation to continue to offer him the opportunity to teach part-time in his specialty of human development after his retirement. The final events unfolded in the Fall semester of 2014 when a Black student stood up in class and angrily denounced Scott, claiming he had violated her “civil rights.” At first nothing happened, but then Scott realized that he was no longer scheduled to teach the course in the Spring semester even though he had been listed as the teacher for the course. He was told that the reason for this action was not the result of student concern but because of a need for budget cuts.

The university did nothing to redress the situation, so Scott filed several claims in small claims court for the salary he would have received—his fifth such claim since 2012. No documents were ever presented showing that the university had not allowed him to teach the course because of budget cuts, and the judge acknowledged that he was qualified to teach the course. However, Dr. Scott lost the cases, despite the judge in one case acknowledging that it was highly probable (400-to-1 probability based on his qualifications compared to other part-time teachers) that the document specifying the rights of emeritus faculty had been violated.

Moreover, the judge in another claim ruled against Scott despite the court’s recording system having broken down so that it was impossible for either Scott or the respondent to hear the proceedings. Scott complained that this was a clear violation of Iowa law and was referred for redress to the Iowa Board of Regents (the board that runs Iowa’s university system). Their reply was truly Orwellian: They refused to do anything to rectify the situation but restated their firm support for academic freedom. Dr. Scott concluded his reply to the Regents by writing that “as a World War II veteran I must add that events which transpired in the matters I now bring to the Board of Regents are reminiscent of what I witnessed under ‘Soviet justice’ in the 1940s.”

The forces of censorship and moral preening had achieved their final victory.

Ironically, Scott’s position on busing is now identical to what some liberals and the NAACP have been saying for years. Right now Joe Biden is coming under attack from the left for his history of opposition to race-based busing, a history that may well cost him in his bid for the Democratic presidential nomination. Scott’s  recent letter to the Iowa Board of Regents (March 24, 2019) refers to a 2015 article, “School Busing Does Not Work. And to Say So Is Not Racist.” by Ted Van Dyk, a staunch liberal and author of Heroes, Hacks and Fools (University of Washington Press, 2007). Van Dyk notes that the main concern for parents opposing busing was the well-being of their children:

This was the case even in liberal Washington, D.C. My wife and I had two sons enrolled in a Northwest Washington elementary school when busing began in the city. School buses would deliver black kids from Southwest D.C. at the Janney School front door at the morning bell. The same buses picked up the same kids, immediately at the end of classes, and took them back to Southwest. They did not participate in any pre- or after-school activity. No black parents took a bus or drove from Southwest to attend evening PTA meetings or to otherwise participate in school-related activity. The quality of classroom instruction fell off markedly. Fourth- and fifth-grade neighborhood students, for instance, were repeating material learned in earlier grades because teachers found their bused classmates had not yet received it. Not surprisingly, parents from the neighborhood began looking for private schools for their kids or moved to Maryland or Virginia suburbs—not because of racism but because their neighborhood school no longer was working.

Van Dyk makes the very telling comment on the contemporary racial situation: it’s more about registering grievance than helping Blacks:

The emphasis now is not on [initiatives to improve the education of Black children] but on real and imagined grievances against a “white establishment,” denunciations of local police, focus on race-based violence (which has diminished markedly in recent years), and on the labeling as “racist” anyone not buying completely into the current politically correct talking line.

And so it is with the entire panoply of issues related to race, gender, immigration, and multiculturalism. Questions that should be decided by scientific studies (Does race-based busing really help Black students? Does race-based busing harm White students?) are instead settled by leftist ideologues and dissenters are punished. All in the name of being on the side of propping up a grotesque, Orwellian morality.

Throughout his career Prof. Ralph Scott has stood for the pursuit of truth in his research and for integrity in his recommendations on public policy. He deserves a prominent place in the pantheon of brave souls who stood up to the imposition of a short-sighted, politically motivated, leftist orthodoxy in the social sciences.

[1] Interestingly, she seems quite proud of her genetic heritage, given the title of another of her books, Geek Nation: How Indian Science Is Taking Over the World), but the book actually paints a rather bleak picture of Indian science as mainly staffed by conformist, uninventive drones and light years behind the West and Japan.

23 replies
  1. jimmie moglia
    jimmie moglia says:

    With a name like ‘Angela Saini’ her growing up in an ‘Indian-Punjabi ‘ household is puzzling. ‘Saini’ is a typical Northern Italian name diffused (in order of frequency) in the regions of Lombardy, Piedmont and Emilia. Its first recorded apperance is in a peace treaty occurred in the 14th century. As for ‘Angela’ it is now ubiquitous, as a kind-of-chic internationalized Italian first name.
    She is married to a Mr. Mokul. Even so, her features are more Indian than Italian. She also holds the notion that Indian science is taking over the world, which may be true but not for the reasons implied. Where I live Intel has a blank check from the Immigration Office to bring in as many Indians as needed. The official reason is that “there are not enough Americans to fill the jobs.” Unsaid, of course, is that Americans exist but Indians can be paid less. And equally unsaid is that one H1B visa immigrant can help immigrate 240 relatives. (according to one congressman whose name I do not remember – but that today (I assume) wouldn’t dare repeat it). In effect, during my rare but necessary visits to the supermarket, I feel I am in Mumbay or Calcutta.

  2. James Bowery
    James Bowery says:

    Being an Iowan, and having seriously considered attending the University of Northern Iowa (UNI), I have a vague recollection of my perception of the Prof. Ralph Scott controversy. When I was in high school I went to visit that university to see if I wanted to attend there. The experience was very enlightening and changed my life for the better by providing me with profound perspective. Although I didn’t go there, I did end up attending the University of Iowa (UofIA) and then went to work at the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana (UofIL) in the milieu that broke ground for the Internet.

    It boiled down to this:

    1970 UNI M:F ratio ~1:2 (a “teacher’s university”)
    1972 UofIA M:F ratio ~1:1
    1974 UofIL M:F ratio ~2:1 (an “engineering university”)

    I won’t go into much detail of my experience visiting the UNI except to say that it left quite an impression on a 16 year old adolescent and it was very much in contrast to the experience at the UofIL. The human ecology of these environments has a profound impact on the neurophysiology of different ethnic groups and genders.

    It wouldn’t at all surprise me to learn that US founding stock male professors at the UNI have a strikingly healthier endocrine system, hence neurophysiology than the general population of US founding stock male professors in academia. Such characters aren’t supposed to exist according to Jewish niche competition, exemplified by a movie of that era “Getting Straight“.

  3. White Nation
    White Nation says:

    “Indian Punjabi”

    Punjabis have completely displaced Europeans as a ruling class in Canada, and now they’ve set their sights on America.

    Cohesive groups like Punjabis and Jews will always outcompete individuals like White Europeans.

    Ruthless repatriation of Punjabis back to Punjab is the only insurance against White Extinction.

    • JM
      JM says:

      ““Indian Punjabi”

      Punjabis have completely displaced Europeans as a ruling class in Canada, and now they’ve set their sights on America.

      Cohesive groups like Punjabis and Jews will always outcompete individuals like White Europeans.

      Ruthless repatriation of Punjabis back to Punjab is the only insurance against White Extinction.”

      Somewhere there ought to be a – facility – to – simply – give one BIG TICK to a post on this most excellent site. That’s all I want to “say” in relation to this excellent post summing up all that needs to be said on the subject.

  4. Arlene Johnson
    Arlene Johnson says:

    Dr. Scott is correct; forced busing is counter-productive. In 1978, when my daughter was 13-years-old, court ordered busing was instituted in Los Angeles, CA. There was a meeting of all Caucasian parents at the junior high school these children attended, and the principal of the school to where they would be bused had been my algebra teacher when I was 14-years-old, Mr. Simpson.
    After his talk encouraging the 7th & 8th grade students to attend his school which was way across Los Angeles from Tarzana, CA, I walked up to him, and said, “You were a wonderful algebra teacher, but I will never send my daughter to your school.”

    I had told both my children that I would never allow them to be bused.

    At that age, my daughter was a competitive figure skater having watched Dorothy Hamill win gold at the 1976 Winter Olympics, and as my daughter was talented in figure skating, she and I arose at 4:30 A.M. 5 days a week and she was on the ice at 5:30 A.M. for two sessions, after which I drove her to school. The next fall, I enrolled my daughter into the professional school for one year as 9th graders were not subject to the busing.

    When my son entered high school in 1979, which was in Woodland Hills, CA, Sidney, an African American volunteered to be bused across Los Angeles to the San Fernando Valley, a suburb of L.A. for his education. He joined the football team where he and my son, David, met and became friends. My husband and I invited Sidney and his mother to our home for dinner one night, and in the course of the conversation, I mentioned that I didn’t want to force my daughter to get on a bus early in the morning to go to another school. Sidney’s mother stated, “I wouldn’t do that to my son either.” In other words, she agreed with me.

    Now, fast forward many years later in New York City; my daughter’s best friend is Oliver, an African American man. They met somehow after she moved to New York City, which was in 1985, and are still friends today. My best friend in the United States, who is now deceased, was an African American woman named Elvira (God rest her soul.). She promoted my work more than anyone else I have ever known, and I miss her. My favorite professor was an African American whose skin was so fair that initially I didn’t realize that she was African American. I enrolled in her class in 1983, and liked her so well that I just kept on enrolling in her classes, a total of three before I graduated from that college, Los Angeles Pierce College in Woodland Hills, CA. When I graduated from UCLA, my significant other and I invited her and her African American partner to my graduation party which was in 1987. They came.

    Many people who lived in Los Angeles County, moved to Ventura County (the first county north of L.A. County) to get away from the forced busing. They call it White Flight.

    Am I a racist? No way!


    Arlene Johnson
    To access my e-zine, click on the icon that says Magazine.

    • Chris M
      Chris M says:

      You’re a TOO reader and you use the phrase “African-American.”

      In the spirit of free speech, and with all due respect (and I mean that, I am not being condescending) that was a hard comment to get through.

      What I mean is, that you feel the need to list your “I’m not a racist and let me prove it to you” credentials in order to make a point. Instead of sparing us your biography and simply making your point.

      During segregation there were signs that said, “Whites Only.”

      Today it’s

      “Groveling: Whites Only”

      Only Whites do that. And it’s the reason we’re in this situation in the first place.

  5. Tom
    Tom says:

    Racial alienation does strange things to otherwise normal brains. Saini’s racial instinct rebelled against her minority status in British society so she decided to play the victim and adopt an anti-white racist attitude since it’s infinitely better to blame one’s alienation on the host society rather than on those who brought her to England in the first place. When immigrant leftists demand that western societies admit non-whites, what they don’t realize is that they are doing so in order to make their host country racially compatible to them – ergo, for racist reasons. The hypocrisy is laughable.
    As for the leftist denial that race exists, I often prefer to use the word breed instead whenever I encounter the nonsense of race-denial. It’s worth pointing out that there are breeds of men, as a result of natural selection, in the same way that there are breeds of dogs. After all, what self-respecting leftist doesn’t believe in evolution?

    • Richard B
      Richard B says:

      Spot on. But the origin of this is something I rarely hear mentioned and then only by me.

      The West devolved by social class first.
      Race inevitably followed.

      Just read Ortega’s The Revolt Of The Masses.

      In fact, we could take your comment and rewrite it to illustrate the point.


      “Saini’s racial instinct rebelled against her minority status in British society so she decided to play the victim and adopt an anti-white racist attitude since it’s infinitely better to blame one’s alienation on the host society rather than on those who brought her to England in the first place.”

      We can write it like this

      The masses social instinct rebelled against their class status in society so they decided to play the victim and adopt an anti-elitist attitude since it’s infinitely better to blame one’s alienation on social class rather than on their own limitations and imperfections.

      • Richard B
        Richard B says:

        The success of Class Envy opened the door to the even more successful (way more successful) Race Envy.

        The middle class philistines* and cultural philistines** were The Original Snowflakes who either stupidly or willingly sold their soul to the Zionist/Communist Devil.

        *People convinced there’s no need at all for culture.
        **People convinced that their interpretation of culture was the final word (when in fact it was just a pretentious, vain and self-serving interpretation).

        Both were united in the middle class conviction that real culture was useless because it had nothing to do with making money.

        The consequences were the same in both cases: Cultural Impoverishment and the eventual destruction of the very civilization they inherited but didn’t understand.

        Thanks to this mentality and its representatives (who are very much still with us) it’ll take a miracle for Whites to survive til the end of the century. Or, if some do survive, to live in a way other than designated scapegoats and sex slaves.

        This shouldn’t come as a surprise. Not just because in the 19th century many of our culture heroes said in so many words that the middle class will destroy Western Civilization, but because this is basically what the middle class do throughout the world.

        Even in the I Ching the middle class of thousands of years ago in China were represented by three broken lines – – -. symbolizing Insecurity!

        The middle class are the cancer of the White Race, just as the you know who is the cancer of the human race.

  6. Fenria
    Fenria says:

    Anyone who argues for the continued busing and forced integration of public schools with black students has never attended one of these idiotic misery factories. Both comic / tragic, and horrifyingly ultra-violent in nature, these institutions will pump out two kinds of white people from their depleted stocks; those whites steeped in self hatred and convinced that they must eternally flagellate themselves over some perceived wrongdoing, and hardcore NatSocs like myself.

    As for blacks, the only thing that is going to improve their educational prospects is 10-20 more IQ points, and no amount of liberal chest thumping funded by deep pocketed jews with ulterior motives is ever going to give them what they truly need.

  7. Pat Etheridge
    Pat Etheridge says:

    Many grievance processes in academia, government, etc., are formulated to channel and control and smother dissent, not to provide genuine redress. As we increasingly come to resemble an occupied country, dissent will either grow and become uncontrollable, or the mechanisms for effectively silencing dissent will become more authoritarian and thorough. My money is on the latter. The crowning touch is that countless millions of our countrymen have been successfully beguiled into perceiving no reason for dissent at all.

    A standing ovation for Dr. Scott’s courage and stamina.

  8. Forever Guilty
    Forever Guilty says:

    This is why, in the centuries that followed, nobody could ever quite pin down the thing we now call “race”.

    That’s funny, show Angela Saini picture from article to anybody and he would say that picture of Indian female. If we ran genetic analysis on her it would be clear as well. Did she really think that is impossible to find difference between blacks, Whites, or Indians?

    So her basic assumption is false and future reading of her article could only present interest for forensic analysis as done by prof. MacDonald

  9. Joiner
    Joiner says:

    If they really wanted to help blacks, they would get on boats at Ellis Island and go back to Europe with millions of others. The Immigration Act of 1924 did a lot more to help blacks than busing.

  10. Richard B
    Richard B says:

    “Mehler “immediately saw parallels between the far-right network of intellectuals and the rapid, devastating way in which eugenics research had been used in Nazi Germany, terrifying him with the possibility that the brutal atrocities of the past could happen once more.”

    If serious history could were taken seriously this whole lie would be exposed. And it could be, but for one thing. Whites just do not protect and defend each other.

    THAT is the real problem. Everything else is so patterned and predictable.

    I was amused to read in the actor Robert Mitchum’s wiki page that when asked if the Holocaust really happened responded with “So the Jews say.”

    They no doubt include that in Wiki so that we’ll all respond with “Oh, how could he say that? How horrible.”

    But now that so many are waking up, the more typical response is a rolling of the eyes followed by “Pfft. Whatever.”

    I’m also pleasantly surprised that Paul Craig Roberts is writing more about the dilema Whties face today. His most recent might sound a bit harsh to some, asking if Whites are too stupid to survive, but it’s certainly not without some justification.

    Really though, it has far less to do with intelligence and much more to do with will. Maybe Whites know something in their bones that non-Whites are too stupid to even recognize, let alone understand, ie; that the human race is not long for this world. It very well may be.

    • Richard B
      Richard B says:

      “And Mehler, having stated his concern that eugenics leads to a holocaust for Jews”

      No. It’s that all of this science could expose Jewish psychopathy and everything that goes with it; chronic, pathological lying, criminality, lack of empathy (what Dostoyevsky referred to as their “mercilessness”) and lack of shame, not to mention their world famous hatred (Nietzsche called them the world-class haters par excellence).

      All of their lies and slanders are designed to remove their lust for power and control with impunity.

      They’re Psychopaths.

      That’s why their condemnation of Whites means nothing anymore. Nothing.

      They’re a dangerous menance (even to their proxies; but let them figure that out for themselves) and the real cancer of the human race.

      • Richard B
        Richard B says:

        Sorry, should be…

        All of their lies and slanders are designed to remove any and all obstacles to their lust for power and control with impunity.

    • TJ
      TJ says:

      Dr. Roberts got into serious trouble with jews 10-15 years ago and almost lost his career. He had to do some serious ass kissing to get it back.

      Some of his columns were astonishing. For example: “Here, I am using Marxist analysis.” This happened more than once. Was he made an offer that could not be refused?

      • Chris M
        Chris M says:

        “Was he made an offer that could not be refused?”

        Yep. With all of the examples we have of this happening I’ve become convinced that this is simply how they operate – across the board.

        “Do what we tell you, or else!”

        It’s basically The Samson Option applied in all situations.

        “Do what we tell you or we’ll kill you or someone you love.”

        How else could explain all of the forced groveling, ruined careers, people gone missing, or winding up dead, assassinations, etc.?

        There’s just no other explanation.

        After they do that they follow it up by doing what Christopher Bollyn said they did for 911,

        Destroy The Evidence
        Control The Narrative and
        Enforce The Law (on anyone looking for evidence to question the narrative).

        Stone Cold Evil.

  11. Charles Staples
    Charles Staples says:

    Very pleased to see the extensive comments on Occidental Observer articles these days – with people leaving their full names. A notable change.

    Let us all speak the truth as we see it, and do so proudly.

    • Chris M
      Chris M says:

      “Very pleased to see the extensive comments….with people leaving their full names.

      Let us all speak the truth as we see it, and do so proudly.”

      Provided it doesn’t put our families lives at risk.

      Please see the above comment by TJ and my response to it.

  12. Ningauble
    Ningauble says:

    What perplexes me about the whole education and blacks issue is that supposedly they need to be integrated with whites in elementary and secondary school at all costs, yet higher education is littered with all these historically black colleges and even medical schools and other professional schools. There are at least two historically all black colleges near where I live. I’ve heard it’s very hard for White professors to get tenure in these institutions. There are at least three historically black medical colleges: Howard, Meharry, and Morehouse. The graduates sometimes get into lucrative, competitive residencies. So what’s the magic fix? This state of affairs seems self contradictory. Do they need to be with us or separate from us to succeed? They enjoy the best of both worlds.

    Many of the top 50 medical schools have black enrollments ranging from 10 to 12%, very nearly mirroring their percentage population in the United States nationally. One has to assume that there is a very generous affirmative action to accommodate this number of them at places such as Pritzker, so taking everything together, blacks are at a substantial advantage vis-à-vis White for becoming doctors on a per capita basis. Again, it’s poor whites who feel the squeeze of all this.

Comments are closed.