African Americans

Academic Hysteria, Part III

In the previous two parts of this essay (here and here), I discussed my experiences as a faculty member at a far-left American academic institution, and how the social justice hysteria was affecting what was going on at the school. What has been occurring more recently?

This is amusing, as I have experienced truly grotesque Black females talking about how “beautiful” they are; further, one can overhear comical examples of inflated self-esteem, such as such students, who are barely passing basic coursework, talking among themselves about how much money they will make as doctors or lawyers (possibly not so far-fetched, what with affirmative action and the move away from standardized tests and objective grades and toward “holistic admissions reviews”),and how they won’t take the last names of their potential husbands, but vice versa. (If they do become professionals, then the Black male peers they fantasize as their husbands will instead be pursuing White women.)

Read this, which is very similar to some of my own experiences.

After finishing grad school, I began teaching at universities across the US. It was as a professor that I began noticing patterns in black behavior: a sense of entitlement, a lack of discipline, a bad attitude, disrespectfulness, and aggressive behavior. And the more black students a college had, the worse their behavior was. I was always reluctant to share these observations with my colleagues for fear of being called a racist. … Most blacks have an entitlement problem. They feel that they can behave in any way they want because they are black, and if you call them out, they accuse you of racism. 

Black students, particularly Black females, do indeed manifest the most outrageous entitled and obnoxious behavior. They have no shame to go to the offices of faculty and scream like lunatics at the faculty, demanding to be given credit for wrong quiz and exam answers, because the faculty doesn’t “understand my point of view” (in other words, if the Black students say a wrong answer should be right, then they must be given credit for it: my truth).

These students will cheat on exams, cry racism when caught, and then brag how “I can get away with anything” when the administration inevitably backs down. They will contact faculty and demand special treatment; for example, more time to complete projects because they are “real busy.” They’ll come late for exam reviews and demand that the faculty go over all that was missed; if you balk, then you are “racist.” And if you need to do practice interviews with these students for, say, law school or medical school interviews, and/or if you have to read any personal statements, all you’ll hear is the most extremely self-obsessed rambling about race. Everything is racist, everything revolves around their single-minded obsessive focus on their racial identify and their racial grievances. The legal system is racist. The medical system is racist. Medical instruments are racist. (I kid you not; I’ve read or heard statements about “racist stethoscopes” and “racist blood pressure monitors — apparently, these devices were designed by hateful Whites with the intention of “destroying Black bodies.) Higher rates of Black incarceration are due to a racist criminal justice system. If Blacks have higher rates of certain diseases — even when objective evidence suggests those differences are due to rampant Black obesity or from racial genetic differences — that is due to “the legacy of slavery” and “stress from White racism causing Black Fatigue.”  Also, if there is an attractive White female professor or teaching assistant involved, the jealous Black female students spew their venom on their poor victims. That these students are academically incompetent, cognitively deficient, and lacking in logic and common sense goes without saying. If you put a “filler” “joke” answer to round out a multiple choice question answer list, you can bet one of these students will choose it. And they’ll have a bizarre explanation for their choice. And as stated above, they’ll demand credit for their answer.

Other non-White students often mirror the entitlement and poor behavior of Black students, although typically not as consistently or to the extreme. I note that Jewish students invariably identify as minorities, at odds with the dominant White American Christian culture, often making common cause with Blacks and other non-Whites as fellow victims of hatred and discrimination. Jewish students will invent special joint Jewish-Black celebrations, such as joint Passover dinner combined with a celebration of “Black emancipation” — Jews and Blacks together celebrating their similar d history of liberation.

Considering the issue of Black (and POC, in general) entitlement and poor behavior, we can consider the Ilya Shapiro controversy. It’s not enough that the Negroes wanted Shapiro out, they had other needs as well:

At another juncture, a student demanded that the dean cover for the classes that the activists had missed as a result of the sit-in, suggesting that the move should be part of a “reparations” package for black students. She followed up by insisting that students be given a designated place on campus to cry. “Is there an office they can go to?” she asked. “I don’t know what it would look like, but if they want to cry, if they need to break down, where can they go? Because we’re at a point where students are coming out of class to go to the bathroom to cry.”

“And this is not in the future,” she added. “This is today.”

The administrators took the law student’s query seriously. “It is really, really hard to walk out of class or a meeting in tears, and you should always have a place on campus where you can go,” Dean Bailin told her. “And if you’re finding that you’re not getting the person that you want to talk to or not getting the space that you need, reach out to me anytime — anytime — and we will find you space.”

Besides censoring academic critics of affirmative action, and besides demanding a dedicated crying space, the Black students also demanded that (White) classmates be “reminded” how much they owe to Blacks and to stop critiquing Black activists:

Yet another student pressed the deans to send out an email attacking BLSA’s critics. “Something that’s important is to remind our classmates that are attacking us that they are only here because our ancestors were sold for them to be here,” she said. “And I think it’s a very important fact that is not talked about explicitly enough, because we are still being attacked. So I just would appreciate in whatever message that’s going out [to the student body], that our classmates are explicitly reminded: Do not attack the people who were sold for you to have this opportunity. . . . That needs to be something that these people are reminded of, because they continue to attack us as if it is not on our backs that they are even here.”

Of course, in reality, Blacks need Whites and not the other way around; further, it is the case that everything Blacks have “achieved” — or have been handed to them — in America has been on the backs of the long-suffering White American people, who are the economic equivalent of slaves since they must work to pay taxes that support Blacks and other People of Colors.  See this as well.

Of particular interest is this anti-Shapiro tweet by  a Black professor, Aderson Francoisaderson francois 🇭🇹 14th Amendment Baby @abfrancois Replying to  @ishapiro 

Mr. Shapiro, as one of your future Georgetown colleague, I am curious: is your phrase “lesser Black woman” meant to describe a particular Black woman or do you intend “lesser Black woman” to encompass the general set of Black women under consideration for the seat?

 Of course, it should be “colleagues” not the grammatically incorrect “colleague.”  Any halfway literate middle school student would realize that, but apparently this “professor of law,” who is a Georgetown faculty member, can’t reach a twelve year old’s standard of English proficiency.

Thus, I can ask: Mr. Francois, as one of the readers of your tweet, I am curious: are you a functionally illiterate affirmative action hack or did you intentionally set out to prove Shapiro’s criticism of affirmative action to be correct?

An anecdote comes to mind. I remember a Black male professor who came to my institution as a candidate for a position at my school. I saw this candidate walking with the “chief of diversity” with the Negro stating that he “likes what he sees” and implying that the decision whether he becomes a faculty at the institution is up to him alone (entitlement complex again). What I noticed is that this Negro’s shoes were completely untied; he was trailing the laces behind him like tails, with the loose shoes flopping around as he walked. I saw the same person a while later and the shoes were the same. I remember thinking what kind of buffoon comes to an interview and doesn’t know or doesn’t care that his laces were untied and he was flopping around all day like a retard. Fortunately, and surprisingly, this person was not hired, but he exemplifies many Negro academics — a clownish inept buffoon who is nothing more or less a creation of quotas and set asides, reeking of unjustified self-esteem and a sense of extreme entitlement. Black and other Colored students that I deal with on a regular basis exhibit the same behaviors.

Speaking of hiring, it is interesting that every time new faculty and, even more importantly, new administration, are hired at my institution, they always turn out to be hard leftists. In my last essay, I mentioned the political contribution database of the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and how the data there can reveal the politics of academics.  Indeed, new hires at my institution typically show up at that database, reflecting their extreme “progressive” politics. Possibly this may inform us on how leftist control of academia is maintained. It is interesting how the current crop of faculty and administration always manage to recruit and hire individuals who are exclusively on the Left. One can argue this is simply due to the law of probability; the vast majority of academics are leftists, so one would expect that even a random draw of candidates would be enriched in SJW types. There may be some truth in that, but that is hardly the full picture.

First, nowadays, many institutions require candidates to openly express a commitment to “woke” politics; indeed, many institutions require candidates to present tangible proof of how committed they are, and what they did to promote “diversity, equity, and inclusion” at their previous employment), and to present plans on how they would promote those objectives if hired for the present position being offered. But this is still not at the fundamental level by which leftist academic hegemony is maintained, as that hegemony was entrenched long before “diversity statements” became a requirement of the hiring process.  No doubt I’m not the only one at my institution studying the FEC database. Would a professor with a record of donating to, say, the Trump campaign, be hired?  Would they even be invited to an interview in the first place, regardless of their objective qualifications?  And even if they avoided that pitfall, and the even more obvious pitfall of leaving a digital political footprint via social media and other avenues of expression, then there is the interview process itself. Even if they got through meeting with the “Dean of Diversity and Equity” — and even if we consider the time before such deans existed — the candidate has to get through the gauntlet of interviews and “informal” dinner meetings, etc. where astute interviewers will try to extract from the candidate some inkling of their political and social views.  A comment dropped, a facial expression, a hesitation, anything can be a clue to disagreement with SJW politics; conversely, the candidate can demonstrate genuine enthusiasm for leftist ideas and cheerfully agree with the comments and opinions ever so “casually” dropped during conversation.  And if a “dissident” somehow gets hired, they can always be weeded out via the renewal, promotion, and tenure process.

How did I get in then?  I was hired long ago when the institution was much smaller and did not have the same political vetting system in place; further, I presented a very neutral persona and did not have a digital trail of political contributions or other “warning signs” that I was not one of them. I was very careful in interviews and in the “informal” dinner meetings. I went into the process with “eyes wide open,” assuming everyone I interacted with was a leftist hack looking to uncover hidden signs of “unacceptable beliefs.”  And, as stated, the vetting was not as well organized as it is today; I slipped through the cracks. But my advancement has been negatively affected by not being a supporter of the leftist agenda. Very likely, in today’s hysterical climate, I would not be hired. Currently, as I stated above, it is not sufficient to merely avoid what is perceived as “negative beliefs” but need to embrace, and show evidence for, “progressive” politics.

And let us consider the flip side of this.  Even if a rightist does somehow get in and survives the rough-and-tumble of academic politics in which the word ‘politics’ means far more than the usual beyond petty academic infighting to include rigid adherence to progressive orthodoxy, they will likely find the environment unpleasant and unwelcoming, and may voluntarily leave academia for other occupations. Thus, through a variety of direct and indirect stratagems, leftist academic hegemony is maintained.

My Journey to Racial Consciousness

I grew up In a middle class household where we were told that all humans were equal and that skin color was the only thing made us different. I firmly believed this until I reached my teens and started my path to becoming a race realist. When I was a child, I was the only  White child on a school bus full of Asians. Asians for the most part were very friendly and they had the same drive to succeed as  Whites. I had many Asians friends as a child but learned in my late 20s that they will sacrifice a  White friend to grovel to the negro in order to win his favor. Even a  White friend that you knew since you were a child. I rode this bus full of Asians to a public school full of negros in a Black part of town. That part of town was famous for race riots committed by Blacks in 1960s, and it never recovered . I quickly learned from attending this school that Black children have very filthy mouths and most are illiterate. In elementary school they are already running around calling each other “nigga,” a trait most likely learned by the positive Black role models in their lives. They were also very race conscious for their age, something that I had been taught by my parents that was bad. They never failed to know how to blame the  White children if things did not go their way.

When I reached middle school I started noticing my fellow  White class mates obsession with negro culture. Talking “hood” and listening to rap were never things that appealed to me. From a very young age I saw that hood culture was a culture of ignorance and was not fooled by the idolization that my  White peers held for negro culture. When I transitioned to high-school I ended up going to a school that was 80 percent  White and 20 percent Black. 70 percent of my fellow  White students dressed hood and talked like they were Black. They would often pick fights and terrorize normal  White students to impress their negro friends. Despite their vain attempts to impress the negros they idolized so much they would often get beat up if they dared utter the word ‘nigga’, the word they so often heard their Black idols repeat . After a couple of years of this I slowly began to wonder what had happened to  White people my age that made them hate their own culture while putting the Black culture of ignorance on a pedestal. The trend of illiteracy in Black students that I noticed in elementary school was carried into their high-school years. The Black students would often would run around and cause chaos in the classroom while getting multiple warnings before being disciplined. I noticed that my  White counter parts that did the same thing were immediately punished. I learned that most Black teenagers thought that learning was considered “acting  White”.

It was also at this time that I was the victim of my first hate crime. One night I snuck out of my parents’ house to meet up with a friend, on my way to his house I was approached by a Black man in his late 30s and a group of older Black teens. The Black man asked for a lighter so he could light his cigarette, and I gladly obliged as I was not very street smart at the time and still had the non-judgmental attitude instilled in me by my parents. The Black man proceeded to punch me in the face as he was handing the lighter back to me, his counterparts howling with laughter as I lay on the ground begging for my life. I thought I was going to be murdered, but they walked off howling with laughter as I wondered what I had done to deserve it. And then I dawned on me that this is what the typical negro will do to get even with the  White man. I decided at that moment that I would never beg a negro for my life ever again. Because of this I would learn how to box and later in my adult life get a concealed carry permit for a pistol. Now that I am older, I have become a lot more street savvy and do not trust Black men after dark. I believe it was the Al Sharpton that once said “If I am on a street at night and I encounter a group of  White people I am relieved, if I encounter a group of Black people I start to worry.”

I would go on to work as a mental health outreach clinic after High school. I would see affirmative action at work as in one instance I saw a Black co-worker punch a client in a fit of rage because the client said something that she did not agree with. Working at this clinic also taught me that negros will often try to fake a mental disorder to get a disability check. At this clinic I had many clients but one stuck out the most, an elderly Black man who was mentally retarded and collected a disability check. It so happened that this Black man’s landlord was the payee for his disability check. This typical Black landlord spent the check on herself and my client never saw a dime of it. I was charged with contacting the Social Security Administration to get his payee changed to someone more honorable. I managed to do this, but was forced to drop the case. The elderly Black man came in to my office one day in fear for his life, apparently his landlord had her sons gang up on him and threaten to beat him up if he had his payee changed. This showed me the lengths that negros would go to get government handouts.

I decided to leave this job around the time of the 2016 election. For the first time I was made aware of “The Great Replacement” and how my people were being displaced in the Great Civilization they had created. I felt compelled to become as educated on the plight of my people. This led me to sites like Amren, Vdare and YouTube channels like Red Ice and The Golden One. I am truly grateful that I was introduced to all these wonderful sources before big tech brought down the hammer of censorship. I hope by writing this article I am helping others to awaken their racial consciousness.

The Axeman of Tacoma: Revisiting a Forgotten Black Serial Killer

 The mainstream media and the neoliberal bioleninist state that they empower operates from an outdated script. This is part stupidity and part laziness, but at its core, it is about maintaining the narrative. See, for instance, publicized hate crimes in the United States. Whenever the supposed victim is non-White, the media and politicos jump to the conclusion of pasty-faced perpetrators as if we still live under Reconstruction. The most famous recent example of Jussie Smollett, who fabricated a hate crime in 2019 in order to further his flagging career, was bought hook-line-and-sinker by Democrats like Kamala Harris, who used her Twitter account to call the faux crime a “modern day lynching.” When it came to light that the noose and bleach attack on Smollett was carried out by his paid (and Black) accomplices rather than rednecks in MAGA hats, the moment became fodder for jokes rather than a serious condemnation of the elite class’s implicit anti-White bias. Instead of demanding hate crime charges against Smollett and his ilk (after all, their false accusations amount to blood libel), people made memes and mocked Smollett as a weird aberration.

Fake hate crimes became something of an industry after the 2016 presidential election, with Daily Caller reporting over twenty well-publicized fake hate events, most of which involved Blacks blaming Whites for their own devious behavior [1]. Black academic Wilfred Reilly wrote an entire book on the hate hoax phenomena, blaming its visibility post-2016 on a multiplicity of factors, from increased reporting from federal and state agencies to the serial corruption of “fake news” [2]. Reilly writes in his book Hate Crime Hoax that the combination of fake allegations and “the real, but anti-White, wave of backlash crimes” carried out by non-Whites get used by the left-wing media to print article after article about the worsening racial situation in the United States [3]. Again, the media wants racial conflict front and center because the neoliberal state (the combination of Wall Street, academia, and the permanent bureaucracy) uses the false idea of rampant and violent White racism to justify further oppression via high taxes, historical erasure, and anarcho-tyranny against the Historic American Nation. It is also true that the current regime is full of people who sincerely believe that White people are always bad and need to be punished.

Arguably, no outdated script used by the media is more blindly accepted than the notion that serial killers are always White men. The idea of White male murderers is embedded in popular comedy, movies, and mass culture generally. True crime aficionados gobble up documentaries, podcasts, and books about such “golden age” monstrosities as Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, and Jeffrey Dahmer. These are the men who helped inspire the FBI to coin the term “serial killer” in the first place, and since the 1970s they have provided the archetype of serial killers in the popular imagination.

The truth is that most serial killers in the United States are Black. White people, who are 76.6-percent of the U.S. population, represent about 58-percent of all serial murderers [4]. As with violent crime in general, White males are underrepresented when it comes to serial killers. Blacks, on the other hand, are overrepresented. This trend began in the 1980s, which “was the first decade in which White serial killers only just had more than half of the share” of crimes. In the 1990s, the U.S. saw more Black serial killers than Whites, and in the 2000s, “just 32% of US serial killers were White, while 54% were Black and 11% were Hispanic” [5]. In plain language, Blacks “have been the outright majority of serial killers since the 1990s” [6]. Despite this fact, and despite some well-known Black serial killers like Lonnie David Franklin, Jr., alias the Grim Sleeper, and Samuel Little, the Black serial killer who may have killed 93 victims, the general public still persists in the delusion that White men should be feared more than Black men.

The Black serial killer is not a new phenomenon, nor is it confined to just Black Americans. South Africa has one of the “highest numbers of serial killers in the world” [7], and as a Black majority state, one cannot blame such actions on racism or institutional injustice against Blacks. As for motivations, Black serial killers tend to have the same motivations as their White counterparts—deviant sexual desires, an overactive fantasy life, mental disturbances, etc. However, Black serial killers are unique in that they are more likely to target non-Black victims than White serial killers. John Douglas, one of the most famous members of the FBI’s Investigative Support Unit, noted in his book Mindhunter the higher rates of interracial violence carried out by Black offenders as compared to White offenders [8]. Douglas himself worked on two such cases: George Russell Jr., who strangled three White women to death in Seattle between 1990 and 1991, and William Henry Hance, aka the Stocking Strangler who murdered and sexually assaulted six elderly White women in Georgia in 1978. Prior to Douglas’s career and even the term “serial killer” itself, there were Black serial killers who targeted White women. Jarvis Theodore Roosevelt Catoe, whom the Washington, D.C. newspaper called the Dupont Circle Killer, raped and strangled several White and Black women between 1929 and 1941 [9]. The infamous Servant Girl Annihilator of Austin, Texas, who butchered at least eight White and Black women between December 1884 and December 1885, was most likely a Black drunkard and local ruffian named Nathan Elgin [10].

But of all the Black serial killers to prey on White women, the worst of the bunch was the Axeman of Tacoma, Jake Bird. These days, Tacoma is an outpost of the Black Lives Matter hegemony. The city’s police chief, Don Ramsdell, has voiced total support for the movement. Such placating has done nothing to deter several BLM and Antifa riots in the city since last summer [11]. Back during the Great Depression, the city lacked both masked anarchists and Afro-Marxists, but it was still a violent place populated by rough loggers and weather-beaten railroad workers. Jake Bird was one of these men.

Bird did not come from Tacoma originally. Born in Louisiana in 1901, Bird grew up in a violent and unstable home (which is all too common in Black families even to this day). At age nineteen, he left home and began riding the rails. Bird “fit the bill as a stereotypical hobo, sneaking into train cars only to hop off once the train reached town” [12]. Eventually, Bird found his way to Tacoma, the city then known as the City of Destiny.

Little is known about Bird’s activities between 1930 and 1947. He lived an indigent lifestyle of seasonal work. However, it is highly likely that Bird murdered White women in the states of Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Wisconsin over a span of several years [13].  Little is known about these individual crimes, although suppositions can be made based upon the double murder that we know Bird committed for sure—the October 30, 1947 slaying of Bertha Kludt and her daughter Beverly June. Bird entered the Kludt household at 1007 South 21st Street in Tacoma and attacked both women with an axe. Although he surprised both women, they managed to scream and scream loud enough to alert their neighbors. Tacoma police officers arrived quick enough to find Bird still at the scene and covered in blood. Bird attempted to escape by slashing one officer’s hand with a knife and stabbing another in the shoulder. The wounded officers took these blows before ultimately tackling Bird and arresting him [14]. While imprisoned in Tacoma’s Old City Jail, the loquacious Bird confessed to forty murders across the United States. A Washington jury later convicted him of eleven murders, although most suspected him of at least forty-four murders in total [15].

Prior to his execution in 1949, the story of Jake Bird, the Axeman of Tacoma, took a bizarre turn. At his trial, Bird yelled out, “I’m putting the hex of Jake Bird on all of you who had anything to do with my being punished. Mark my words. You will die before I do.” It turned out that this “hex” had legs, as six men involved in the case died of natural causes between the trial and Bird’s execution. Judge Hodge, the presiding judge in the case, died of a heart attack one month after Bird’s sentencing. Next came Joe Karpach, a police officer involved in the case, who also died of a heart attack. Chief court clerk Ray Scott, Lieutenant Sherman Lyons of the Tacoma Police Department, Bird’s defense attorney J.W. Selden, and corrections officer Arthur A. Seward all died of heart failure, thus becoming the final four victims of the Axeman of Tacoma’s curse.

Bird may or may not have had Black magic powers, but he was certainly demonic. Little is known about the particulars of Bird’s crimes, which is in keeping with most Black serial killers. It seems the general public, true crime addicts, and the FBI are just not that into Black serial killers, although their reasons likely differ. That said, given Bird’s choice of weapon (the axe) and given his choice of victims (White women), it can be theorized that Bird was motivated by lust. Like the so-called Man from the Train, whom authors Bill James and Rachel McCarthy James believe murdered somewhere around one hundred people between 1898 and 1912, Bird used the railroads to move from town to town and leave just as quickly. And like the Man from the Train, whom James and James theorize murdered out of a deep-seated attraction to prepubescent females, it appears that Bird murdered White women because that was who he fancied the most. It is not impossible that Bird might have been motivated by racial animosity. Such murders are not unheard of. The Zebra Killers of 1973-1974 shot, stabbed, and mutilated White San Franciscans as an act of racial revenge spurred on by the anti-White vitriol of the Nation of Islam. In June 2019, 23-year-old Black criminal Temar Bishop beat and raped a White woman on the roof of his Bronx apartment. One eyewitness later testified that Bishop justified his actions by saying, “‘She was a White girl. She deserved it because us minorities have been through slavery.’” Vanderbilt football player Cory Batey said much the same thing after he raped a White woman in 2013. Specifically, Batey was heard to yell, “That’s for 400 years of slavery.” In Europe, Black Africans and Muslims from North Africa and the Middle East routinely sexually assault native women and blame their crimes on “racism,” “colonialism,” and “Islamophobia” [16]. Bird may have had these same thoughts, but we will never know as he was sent straight to hell almost seventy-two years ago.

While the Axeman of Tacoma’s motivations can only be guessed, what is not unknown is the fact that Black males in the United States not only commit violent crime at higher rates than other races, but they have been the majority of serial murderers since at least the 1990s. Jake Bird was merely one of the earliest and most prolific of these Black serial killers, and his signature of attacking White woman is sadly not uncommon among Black offenders. These days, in the age of “White privilege” and the proliferation and support of Critical Race Theory, unhinged Black criminals have an overabundance of justification for their anti-social behavior. There may be multiple Jake Birds waiting in the wings, just sharpening their axes and preparing public defenses full of CRT loanwords as we speak.

[1]: Peter Hasson, “Here’s A List of Hoax ‘Hate Crimes’ In The Trump Era,” Daily Caller, Feb. 18, 2019,

[2]: Larry Elder, “The Fake News ‘Surge’ in Hate Crimes,” Real Clear Politics, Apr. 11, 2019,!.

[3]: Wilfred Reilly, Hate Crime Hoax: How the Left is Selling a Fake Race War (Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, 2019): Kindle edition.

[4]: Mackenzie Samet and Jackie Salo, “New profile of serial killers debunks long-held myths,” New York Post, Aug. 14, 2018,

[5]: “Black Serial Killers vs White Serial Killers: Stats, Figures (Shocking Truth),” Ways to Die,

[6]: Robert Hampton, “Most Serial Killers Are Black,” American Renaissance, May 30, 2019,

[7]: “Black Serial Killers vs White Serial Killers”

[8]: John Douglas and Mark Olshaker, Mindhunter: Inside the FBI’s Elite Serial Crime Unit (New York: Gallery Books, 2017): 214.

[9]: Peter Vronsky, American Serial Killers: The Epidemic Years, 1950-2000 (New York: Berkley, 2020): 49-51.

[10]: Skip Hollandsworth, Midnight Assassin: The Hunt for America’s First Serial Killer (New York: Picador, 2015): 216.

[11]: Jason Rants, “Jason Rantz: I was inside Antifa riots in Tacoma—this is what I saw,” Fox, Jan. 26, 2021,

[12]: Steve Dunkelberger, “Jake Bird: The Strange Story of a Tacoma Serial Killer and the Hex that Made Him Famous,” SouthSound Talk,

[13]: Vronsky, American Serial Killers, 36.

[14]: Dunkelberger, “Jake Bird.”

[15]: Martin Gilman Wolcott, The Evil 100: Fascinating True-Life Tales of Terror, Mayhem, and Savagery (New York: Citadel Press, 2002): 129.

[16]: Raymond Ibrahim, “Europe: Rape Victims Accused of Racism,” Gatestone Institute, July 11, 2020,


Black Brains Shatter: The Intellectual and Ethical Bankruptcy of Black Lives Matter

If you’re looking for a truly powerful pleasure-drug, then forget heroin, cocaine or crystal meth. They’re crude, fast-fading and unreliable. No, for a real rush that’s guaranteed not to fade or falter, you need what Black Lives Matter (BLM) and their allies are on — the three most powerful pleasure-drugs known to humanity.

History’s greatest drug-dealer

The three drugs are called narcissism, self-righteousness and malice. And not only are they completely legal and available in unlimited quantities at no cost to the addict, you can receive full instructions in their use from the most prestigious and respected institutions in the Western world. From the Ivy League to Oxbridge, from the New York Times to the Guardian, from the ADL to the BBC, expert drug-dealers are ready and eager to teach you everything you need to know about where to obtain your supplies and how to inject.

But the greatest drug-dealer of all lived and died in the nineteenth century. Fortunately, we still have his instruction-manuals and a host of his disciples have worked to interpret and explain them for each new generation. And who was that world-historic dealer in narcissism, self-righteousness and malice? It was Karl Marx (1818-83), of course. Marx himself never won the power he longed to wield and abuse, but the “toxicity” of his ideas (as Guardianistas would put it) was just as apparent to some of his contemporaries as it was to those who suffered under Marxist regimes during the twentieth century. The Polish philosopher Leszek Kołakowski (1927-2009) lived through Stalinism and his magisterial critique Main Currents of Marxism (1978) reported the prophetic words of the Russian anarchist Mikhail Bakunin (1814—76):

Bakunin … not only combated Marx’s political programme but, as he often wrote, regarded Marx as a disloyal, revengeful man, obsessed with power and determined to impose his own despotic authority on the whole revolutionary movement. Marx, he said, had all the merits and defects of the Jewish character; he was highly intelligent and deeply read, but an inveterate doctrinaire and fantastically vain, an intriguer and morbidly envious of all who … cut a more important figure than himself in public life. (pg. 248) Bakunin … inveighed against universities as the abodes of elitism and seminaries of a privileged caste; he also warned that Marxist socialism would lead to a tyranny of intellectuals that would be worse than any yet known to man. (Main Currents of Marxism, Vol. I, The Founders, Clarendon Press, Oxford, pg. 250)

Yes, Karl Marx was indeed highly intelligent and fantastically vain, but his latter-day disciples in Black Lives Matter are only fantastically vain. High intelligence is not characteristic of Blacks and BLM are not bucking the trend. Their crusade is emotional, not intellectual. And it’s emotional in the most direct and satisfying way, being fuelled by those three mighty pleasure-drugs of narcissism, self-righteousness and malice. But I think Black brains would shatter if they were asked to properly address one simple question: Why are Whites the evil exploiters and Blacks the virtuous victims?

Omnia Ex Alea

On a progressive reading of history and human biology, there is only one possible answer: It was pure, unadulterated chance. Whites are evil exploiters and Blacks are virtuous victims simply because that’s the way the historic dice happened to roll. If the dice had rolled another way, it would have been the other way around. Blacks could just as easily have enslaved Whites, just as easily have set forth from the heartless headquarters of a cruel capitalist Africa to ravage the gentle, egalitarian societies of a peaceful pastoral Europe. After all, progressive dogma insists that “We Are All the Same Under the Skin” and that “There Is Only One Race — the Human Race.” But Blacks themselves haven’t created that dogma or imposed it so effectively on academia and the media. Blacks don’t have the necessary intelligence and ability to spin seductive webs of high-sounding words.

Progressive dogma: “There is Only One Race — the Human Race!”

But Jews do. And it’s Jews who have been the most effective creators of and propagandists for the progressive dogma of absolute and unequivocal equality between all human groups. “There is only One Race — the Human Race.” Furthermore: “There is Only One Brain — the Human Brain.” The Jewish progressive Stephen Jay Gould (1941–2002) preached those falsehoods throughout his career in award-winning best-sellers like The Mismeasure of Man (1981). And the Jewish progressive Jared Diamond (born 1937) continues to preach them. Diamond is perhaps the greatest living exponent of the idea that the superiority of White Europeans in warfare, technology and science is owed to mere biogeographic accident. You might say Diamond preaches the doctrine of Omnia Ex Alea — “all things from the dice.” In other words, all apparent White achievements are the product of undeserved luck. But Diamond’s underlying goyophobia, or hatred of White gentiles, is apparent even as he preaches this supposedly objective doctrine. Why did Europe conquer Africa and not vice versa? It was Omnia Ex Alea, ladies and gentlemen — the biogeographic dice just happened to roll in Europe’s favour:

All of Africa’s mammalian domesticates — cattle, sheep,  goats, horses, even dogs — entered sub-Saharan Africa from the north, from Eurasia or North Africa. At first that seems astonishing, since we now think of Africa as the continent of big wild animals. In fact, none of those famous big wild mammal species of Africa proved domesticable [Gregory Cochran disagrees]. They were all unqualified by one or another problem such as: unsuitable social organization; intractable behaviour; slow growth-rate, and so on. Just think what the course of world history would have been like if Africa’s rhinos and hippos had lent themselves to domestication! If it had been possible, African cavalry mounted on rhinos or hippos would have made mincemeat of European cavalry mounted on horses. But it couldn’t happen. (Why Did Human History Unfold Differently on Different Continents for the Past 13,000 Years?)

Diamond obviously likes the idea of Blacks making “mincemeat” of White gentiles. You can see the same hostility to White gentiles in Diamond’s award-winning best-seller Guns, Germs and Steel (1997), when he imagines “bedraggled” Spaniards being “driven into the sea” by Aztec cavalry:

That’s an enormous set of differences between Eurasian and Native American societies — due largely to the Late Pleistocene extinction (extermination?) of most of North and South America’s former big wild mammal species. If it had not been for those extinctions, modern history might have taken a different course. When Cortes and his bedraggled adventurers landed on the Mexican coast in 1519, they might have been driven into the sea by thousands of Aztec cavalry mounted on domesticated native American horses. Instead of the Aztecs dying of smallpox, the Spaniards might have been wiped out by American germs transmitted by disease-resistant Aztecs. American civilizations resting on animal power might have been sending their own conquistadores to ravage Europe. But those hypothetical outcomes were foreclosed by mammal extinctions thousands of years earlier. (Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies, 1997, ch. 18)

Jared Diamond isn’t conducting objective science and dispassionately analysing history, as Kevin MacDonald saw during “a talk by Diamond at a large packed lecture hall at Cal Tech in the early 2000s. When he gleefully fantasized about Africa conquering Europe, the crowd burst into applause.” Diamond’s fantasies appeal to the envy and malice of non-Whites and Jews, and to the misguided individualism of Whites, who enjoy punishing members of their own race for ethical transgressions (see the concept of “altruistic punishment”). As Diamond himself put it, Whites are tainted by the “stink of racism.” But if Diamond’s ideas are true, there is no stink and no true ethical transgression. It’s the impersonal forces of biogeography and chance that have governed history, not innate differences between human groups. We are all the same under the skin, but we don’t all occupy the same environment, which is the only reason that some groups have conquered or out-performed other groups.

Leftists pursue power, not truth

It follows, then, that Evil Exploiters and Virtuous Victims can occur in all possible permutations of colour and creed. But it also follows that exploiters aren’t “evil” and victims aren’t “virtuous.” Such terms don’t make sense in leftist ideology, because all groups — Whites and non-Whites, men and women, gays and straights — are capable of any kind of behaviour in the right (or wrong) historical circumstances. However, leftists don’t care when their ideas don’t make sense. Leftism isn’t designed to explain reality or to correct its alleged faults, but to win power for leftists and to meet their emotional needs. That’s why you’ll never see any hint from BLM and other high-priests of anti-racism that non-Whites can be “racist” too, or that non-Whites are capable of abusing the power that they are demanding so self-righteously.

Blacks as Foot Soldiers for What Is Essentially a Jewish Coup: Where Jews lead, Blacks follow: Saul Alinsky, Godfather of Political Chaos

After all, if the high-priests admitted all that, they couldn’t be self-righteous. And self-righteousness is central to the protests and riots organized by BLM. It’s both highly satisfying in itself and highly effective as a stimulus for action. BLM is powered by the idea that Blacks are innately virtuous and Whites are innately evil. That idea makes no sense by progressive ideology and the Omnia Ex Alea school of history, but ideas don’t have to make sense to inspire action and change history. And speaking of history, here is a highly eloquent indictment of its chief villains. Indeed, its only villains:

If America is the culmination of Western white civilization, as everyone from the Left to the Right declares, then there must be something terribly wrong with Western white civilization. This is a painful truth; few of us want to go that far. … The truth is that Mozart, Pascal, Boolean algebra, Shakespeare, parliamentary government, baroque churches, Newton, the emancipation of women, Kant, Marx, Balanchine ballets, et al., don’t redeem what this particular civilization has wrought upon the world. The white race is the cancer of human history; it is the white race and it alone — its ideologies and inventions — which eradicates autonomous civilizations wherever it spreads, which has upset the ecological balance of the planet, which now threatens the very existence of life itself. [italics in original] (See “Susan Sontag’s Jewish World,” Kevin MacDonald, The Occidental Observer, 17th October 2017)

That is the “highly intelligent” and “fantastically vain” Jewish ideologue Susan Sontag (1933–2004) supplying more  ammunition for the unintelligent but still “fantastically vain” non-Whites of Black Lives Matter. I disagree with Sontag, of course. I don’t think the White race is the cancer of human history. If human history has a cancer, that cancer is Jewish ideology and the Jewish Culture of Critique that simultaneously — and self-refutingly — preaches the Absolute Equality of Humanity and the innate depravity of White gentiles.

The Cause of the Second Civil War in America

In 1991 the USSR, beset with problems of debt, glasnost/perestroika, failure of national leadership, democratization, and out-of-control military spending, broke apart into 16 separate countries—some autonomous, others partially so.  Notably, for the most part, this process occurred peacefully, that is, without the central ruling elite unleashing the might of its army against those regions, and without the terror/suicide bombing of the institutions of the then Soviet Union that we see today as a pretextual political statement in other parts of the world.

It was a significant transition made even more so by the fact that the citizens of the 16 regions achieved separation of their geographic areas, then formed governments, when they had never before participated in a fully operational democratic process at the national level.  In other words, the citizens avoided what could have been, in an earlier time in history, a casus belli, by participating in an unprecedented civic event.

It was also unusual that the central state did not resort to force of arms to compel the 16 regions to remain within the united government.  Why it did not do so is, as they say, “complicated.”  But the simple overarching reason is that the citizens of the USSR who also composed the entire geography of the country’s 16 regions spoke clearly that they did not want to live and work together as part of, and be governed by, the same political entity.

They, the citizens, desired to be part and parcel of an area where they exercised their right of governance as they defined it to control their own land mass according to their own geopolitical expectations, be those based on culture, religion, race, ethnicity, language, or a combination of any of these.1  In order to utilize “might” to maintain a functioning central authority, the USSR would have found it necessary to make war against a sizeable population living within the boundaries of the entire country.

When comparing the dissolution of the USSR with that of the United States one hundred and fifty-seven years ago, one must ask why the North and the South could not have split apart, gone their separate ways, and become two distinct governing regions of one contiguous geographic mass? It would have been mutually beneficial—the South providing cotton and tobacco to the North, and the North maintaining its manufacturing infrastructure to weave cloth from the South’s cotton and to sell farming implements and other goods to the South. Read more

“The New Jim Crow” As Seen from the Right.

Michelle Alexander’s The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness is a text I’ve come across many times over the years. In fact, I don’t know if there is a single time I have walked into a major bookstore and have not seen the book displayed in prominence on an end cap or center aisle table. I’ve encountered all the arguments made within the text over the years in articles, during debates, and in university classrooms as an undergraduate. Perhaps the significance of Alexander’s work is best assessed in the foreword by Cornel West: “The New Jim Crow is the secular bible for a new social movement in the early twenty-first-century America.” Although the data and arguments found within have been seen both before and after Alexander’s work, this is perhaps the most definitive and comprehensive work on the topic of Black crime and mass incarceration in America, as seen from the left.

The overarching premise is that mass incarceration, Jim Crow laws, and slavery have been the three primary measures adopted as public policy in the U.S. as a means to control the Black population. Several of Alexander’s contentions jumped off the page at me from the very beginning of the introduction, where she states that an essential goal of the Founding Fathers was to ensure citizenship to Blacks would be denied. In a way, I was thoroughly impressed, aghast even. I hear noxious phrases like “we are a nation of immigrants,” “America is for everybody,” and “this is a homeland for all,” almost daily, be it on social media, from politicians, the press, or in the media. And to see an author who has declared her goal is an “egalitarian democracy,” to be so honest, so frank, and so correct, is in many ways to be welcomed. Alexander displays from page one that she has a grasp of historical racialism as it pertains to the foundation of the U.S. and the Founders’ intentions. She finds this to be an unacceptable position, of course, but her admission that the U.S. was founded as a White nation is exceedingly rare nonetheless. Read more

Who Commits Murder in America?

Most Americans suspect that Blacks commit the majority of crime in this country. They are, in a word, correct. However, the government takes great strides to cover this up. From the federal on down to the city level, our rulers are loathe to release data on crime that includes racial breakdowns. Such data disrupts the preferred narratives about race in this country.

However, there are a handful of cities that do let the public see the numbers, and, no matter the city, it is Blacks who are running riot. Philadelphia is one those few forthright cities, so we will start there. To begin, here are the demographics for the city in 2016, according to the US Census:
44.2% Black
34.9% White
14.4% Hispanic
7.4% Asian
2.6% mixed
0.9% American Indian
0.2% Hawaiian/Pacific Islander

Here is the demographic makeup of arrestees for shootings, both fatal and non-fatal, that same year in Philadelphia:

For shootings, Blacks were just shy of doubling their share of the general population, with 80.3% of arrests. Whites were the opposite — just shy of halving their population share at 18.5% of arrests. Asians arrest rates, at 0.6%, are about one twelfth their share of the population. Read more