Joe Feagin Hates White People (Part I)

A review of Racist America: Roots, Current Realities, and Future Reparations by Joe R. Feagin. [Joe R. Feagin, "Jorf," as he's known by his colleagues, is Professor of Sociology at the University of Florida in Gainesville and is currently President of the American Sociological Association. (]

by Matt Nuenke and Alex Linder

Reality is for people who can't handle sociology...

Executive Summary: The commie chieftain of the ASA has come out with a race book squeezed from the cheeks of idiocy and ideology. Marxist Joe Feagin serves up a Special Olympics drag race between Big Daddy Burning Factual Ignorance and Red-Hot Hatred of Whitey Jr. that even the old mystagogue himself would have a hard time topping. Both parachutes fail and his funnycars rebut themselves on the retaining wall of reality, but at least we get a clear picture of where the "abolish Whiteness" movement is headed -- and a chance to reinforce a few documented racial truths for readers preferring racial fact to religious fiction.

It's all calculated. Don't ever believe that the Left acts spontaneously. Even when it is intuitive, it is an intuitive drive for power. These people want to be in control, and the only way they can do this is by exerting moral blackmail on everybody else. (Russian dissident Vladimir Bukovsky)

Unlike most behaviorists, Hans Eysenck accepted both the 'reality' of intelligence differences and their mainly biological origins; and he had already upset social scientists in Britain by claiming that Nationalists and Communists might have underlying psychological traits of illiberalism, insensitivity and spitefulness genetically in common. (Brand, 1996)

Sociology has always been a discipline long on ideology and short on facts, and Marxist Joe Feagin, head of the American Sociological Association, carries on that noxious tradition in his long and lie-filled opus, Racist America. It's about what you'd expect: a rotten succotash of facts-that-aren't mixed with asinine, hate-filled ideology stewing in a Marxist pot until it ferments into the same old Revolution -- he hopes. Idle theorizing about issues already resolved by hard study by honest men might seem useless or destructive to you or me, but then we belong to the class that accepts reality as its starting point. Sociologists, as a rule, don't. Certainly, King Feagin doesn't. (The discipline itself reflects an inbuilt bias few Socs rise above: that people are more influenced by other people than by their own genes or ideas.) It's one thing to be disposed to view the world in a certain way, but if factual honesty and reality and coherence and integrity have any meaning -- and the Feaginoids probably would dismiss them too as social constructs -- it's that the honest man must deal with evidence contradicting his thesis. But maybe that explains the success of the "social construct" brigade. No need to submit to any discipline, just tennis with the net down; hacking away in the lab until you come up with some new permutation of angrified injustice and scream it on the world as the tantrum this time. All very tiresome for those who believe reality is real. Reality is for people who can't handle drugs, said Janis Joplin. In a similar vein we might say: Reality is for people who can't handle sociology. We can only hope that one day his puker will back up just like Janis', because Lord knows we're drowning in crap after reading this book.

And the hate: Boy oh boy does this guy hate White people. Not even the timidest most milquetoast Semitically Correct individualist conservative dogmatist could escape questioning the motive at work here when it jumps out at him from virtually every paragraph. We would like to say we found it necessary to "deconstruct" the motive or purpose of this diatribe against Whites, but it's more like we had to scrape it out of our face like jungle foliage. One couldn't ignore it, even out of misplaced politeness -- it's the it and the all of this screed. The ressentiment is everywhere and unavoidable. Feagin hates Whites, White males, WASPs, Martha Stewart and probably snow and rice and white mice -- for no reason and every reason. Feagin is a Marxist and uses his dialectics to tell a story about how White Anglo-Saxon Protestants (WASPs) are the vilest oppressors ever to inhabit the earth: vicious murderers/enslavers of Africans, Native Americans, Indians, non-cigarette Camels, non-acronym Wombats, Three-Toed Sloths, Gnus, Left-Handed Mosquitoes, and extinct trilobytes. And he is intent on proving that this horrible legacy of oppression continues today. Yes, just head on down to the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and pick up your very own smallpox-infested blanket while supplies last...

Ugh. We've heard it all before: American history is nothing but the history of White racism, and all White accomplishments and wealth would have been impossible without it. Nary a forest would have been cleared, save for colored oppression. Nary a cotton would have picked, saved for Leroy. Nary an oscillometer, nary a suspension bridge emerged from the drafting board save Uncle Remus' patient calculations. But as we say, he doesn't stop there. Nothing as evil as the White man could ever change or reverse course -- just reappear in new and more sinisterly insinuating guises, like Madonna. White racism is so evil and ubiquitous and slithery it can manifest itself both in slavery, where the darkie worked for Whitey, and in affirmative action, where Whitey works for darkie. Slavery is where man exploits man: Affirmative action is the opposite. It's a sort of half-wit's unified field theory: White racism explains everything. White racism not only explains everything, it is everything. It is A and anti-A. It is a fall leaf and a spring leaf. It is leprosy and its cure. You know how if you look hard enough at a newspaper photo you see it's made up of tiny dots? Well, those dots are "white racism" to King Joe, and the world a big wirephoto.

Feagin claims there is a conspiracy among these WASPs todayrightnowthisminute to oppress and exploit Blacks. This is the much-bruited 'systemic racism' that half-wit Negro activists and their Jewish handlers yawp about when they aren't burning books or bawling for speech codes. Feagin spins some campfire tales about unfriendly Caspars to bare the internal workings of this invisible empire of oppression. The short of it's that a Mysterious Substance resides in the breasts of White WASPs like Martha Stewart (even though she's Polish) -- you know, kind of like the way a mysterious and highly wonderful substance resides in the breasts of coloreds -- diversity -- except this White WASP substance is a Bad Thing, a poison, if you will; an intent-to-dominate present in every single person of paleness (except maybe Feagin's bogtrotting forbears, one suspects). So subtle is this poison it is never spoken about, mentioned or used, yet wherever anti-White affirmative action laws are in place, you see its trail. White people are so intent on prosecuting racism against Negroes they set up special laws discriminating against Whites. Who but the White racist could possibly be so devilishly devious?

Most people who put forth stupid conspiracy theories are laughed offstage as paranoid morons. At ASA they're elected president. In academia and in the sociology 'discipline' theories without facts -- theories in contradiction to facts -- get you publishing deals and air time and op-ed space. Yes, the Marxist anti-White theoreticians pie-eyedly accept the explanations about the way the world works that would raise questions in the mind of an alert six-year-old. Yes, despite all those anti-White laws, despite all the Orwellian clamor over 'diversity,' despite the near-total lack of resistance to Mexican and Turd-World invasion (despites its celebration in the media), the learned Soc profs are just sure Whites are so many automatons, antly carrying out their orders from Caucasian Central (never quite identified is the drum major leading this charade).

Feagin's hatred of Whites in this book is just a tad less ludicrous than Malcolm X's The End of White Racism, in which Whites are portrayed as beasts with tails and all, no better than dogs. But is this hatred just another form of bigotry? Perhaps not. It has more to do with an ongoing power struggle between the old Marxists and the general White population, which is, contrary to Feagin's thesis, relatively aracial (or at least beaten by the media into hushing its true views) yet unwilling to yield to a new totalitarian egalitarian state (communism). The very fact that Whites today seem so accepting of any and all races today, unlike in the past, poses a threat to these Marxists.

Why would the current President of the American Sociological Association make such a bold indictment of a single race of people? Partly because it's safe, and partly because it pays, and partly because these Marxists feel betrayed by the very aliens they flooded the country with after greasing passage of the 1965 Immigration Act. These new "people of color" had their own ideas, weren't content to be pliable tools for Jew operators. They wanted to push air out of their own mouths rather than recite scripted lines. They were capable of causing destruction in the all-encompassing manner of the flood, the metaphor usually used to describe their influx. But the Marxists wanted a hammer they could use to smash White hegemony, and have been disappointed so far that the aliens haven't proven as solid and unified and willing to take direction as hoped.

To turn Lenin, altho the learned profs aren't interested in reality, reality is interested in them: the spice groups didn't all get along; in many cases their native stupidities and struggles were imported wholesale, just as Thomas Jefferson predicted. Even in the absence of open hostilities, the newcomers have pursued their own interests and have as much hostility for Blacks as Whites do, and very often much more (see Kevin MacDonald's paper An Integrative Evolutionary Perspective on Ethnicity). Feagin's anticipated emancipation of the oppressed leading to a unified force against Whitey hasn't materialized yet. So naturally he blames White people. Asians and Mexicans and Arabs and animists and Eskimos and Salvadorans can't all get together as one because of White racism. It's that simple and boring and stupid and wrong. How confusing the world must be to malicious idiots like Feagin. We say malicious because the immigrants, wherever they dominate, have destroyed civilized White America. We can truly lay that destruction at the feet of Feagin and the Jew-led left, and blame them for incipient genocide against the White race and culture. No doubt he's more than willing to take the credit, even if his brow is presently furrowed because the dissention hasn't yet resulted in the Revolution he prays for, just boring, non-climactic dissolution. He might be surprised to find at the end of the day that colored invaders really aren't as hot on dimwit soc profs as he thinks they should be.

Throughout the book it is apparent that Feagin is playing divide-and-conquer, logic be damned. He includes in his "people of color" category Asians, Asian Indians, North African Caucasians, Amerindians, Semites, and even Latinos. So even if you are White, if you have a Spanish surname you become a "person of color." In addition, he even seems to exclude White women from his grand conspiracy theory. Throughout the book, it is always "White men" who are the oppressors, as if the White women were some other species or race. And to complicate his xenophobia, he starts out by attacking primarily those Whites who were slave owners, and then as time goes by lumps in the same broad category those Whites who not only immigrated long after slavery ended, but also took up residence in parts of America where there were hardly any Blacks around at all. But he manages to weave his web of conspiracy through a series of "just so" stories, never providing any real empirical facts or complete explanations.

Nothing testable, nothing falsifiable, nothing hard: Feagin's book -- remember this is written by the president of the disclipline's professional association -- is more a religious screed than the science it pretends to. It is the perfect example for demonstrating just how far social science has strayed from genuine empirical science in the last few decades. Sociology, one might conclude from this book, is little more than synagogue for Marxists.

Small facts destroy grand theories. When it comes to explaining the Black-White disparity in earnings, wealth, health, and social pathologies, social scientists never include in their studies Blacks' extremely low average intelligence. If this fact were included, then the disparities make sense, and the "racism" explanation reveals itself as the excuse of a politically interested class of agitators and burrocrats. Professional Negroes and Jews squeeze money and tears out of productive Whites by claiming White racism causes black failure. Since the Jews and nigs are never taken out and horsewhipped for their oh-so-Jewish effrontery (chutzpah), the game continues. They've taken several trillion from us so far, with no signs of surcease. And that was before they hit on "Reparations."

Scientists are supposed to rely on accepted methodologies and design reproducible tests when they try to make a case. Systemic racism is about half as credible as flat-earth theory, which at least is plausible to the eye. There is no evidence backing it up. It is eyewash put out by politicians donning lab coats and goggles the way Jesse Jackson drapes his bastard-siring nigrescence in kinte cloth -- to steal respect it can't earn on its own merit. Systemic racism can't be measured, and if you can't measure something, then it ain't science. How do we know when it exists? Why, just pick up the witchfinder guide from the 1600s. If a man burns a cross then he's a racist. If he passes laws to discriminate against Whites, then he's a systemic racist. To take criers of 'systemic racism' seriously is the first step to insanity. It's a political scam run by hate-filled anti-White crusaders who will stop at nothing in pushing us down the path to White genocide they set us on many decades ago. That may sound like hyperbole, but objective analysis and a blast of hot hate from "academic" books like this make it clear it isn't.

Conceptual junk like 'systemic racism' is Dark Age crap. Cries of SR obscure the real issues, produce trillions of dollars for White-haters, and lead us all back to the mists of barbarism that only the White man crawled out of. Back to the time when people believed that spirits haunted the woods and angry gods hurled bolts of lightening at their enemies. There's little point in refuting religious gobbledygook masquerading as science -- only in opposing it, only in fighting it. These Marxists are no more scientists than an eight-year-old holding a magnifying glass over an ant to "study" it -- they are snakeoil salesmen pushing rat-poison elixirs as vitamin tonics. Their dominance in the ivies is sign of a sick, sick age.

Jensenism denied...

Fact is, last thirty years, radical environmentalists and cultural determinists have taken a hard beating, as fact after discovered fact has gainsaid their PC dogma. By the truth standard, they are getting their ass kicked, even if the political battle continues successful. Like Wile E. Coyote just starting to realize he's run off a cliff, the left's fear of impending splat is clear in its vicious personal and intellectual attacks on any idea or personage that doesn't toe the line. Whole fields such as sociobiology or evolutionary psychology become curse-words in their mouths. Anti-shibboleths that bar the door to respectful examination. Watch their bitter-lined lying faces, and you can almost hear Nicholson in the background: You can't handle the truth! Profs must be mocked and scorned, books pulped, lies lied, laws passed -- all to protect the dogma. No criticism of Jews, no criticism of Jewish myths. That's how things work these days, year of our Lord 2001.

But the reality is that today those who once attacked sociobiology no longer have any scientific standing; the debate is over (see Defenders of the Truth: The Battle for Science in the Sociobiology Debate and Beyond, 2000 ). For example, it is commonly accepted that intelligence is 60 to 80% heritable. That fact was attested by a task force put together by the American Psychological Association in response to the publication of The Bell Curve in 1994. (See Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns, 1995.) Similar concessions with regard to racial IQ differences appear to be in the offing. (We are referring, of course, to political concessions: the intellectual battle is over. Race intelligence differences are both real and significant.) (See here a review of The g Factor: The Science of Mental Ability, 1998, by Arthur Jensen, and this discussion of Jensenism in the journal Intelligence.)

Neo-Darwinism denied...

A book based on the evils of White supremacy may well appeal to the mass public. After all, it's been fed this fear of the vast right wing conspiracy for over fifty years now, and on the flip side led to believe that all that's necessary for racial harmony is for humans to be "tolerant" and "non-judgmental" and supportive of multiculturalism and diversity. Religious, political and media leaders work as one in broadcasting to the public the Big Lie that personal attitude adjustments (refusal to notice the 'nigger' in the black man) can overcome race-based behaviors and biological differences. It's the old game of: reality is whatever we pretend it is. Reality as group-fantasy.

Along these lines, Feagin makes two mistakes. First, he holds slave owners of old to the lib moral standards of 2000. Tedious ex post facto moralizing from a leftist you can bet your boots is a relativist on any other issue. Any scholar today with Feagin's credentials knows that morality changes, as it is nothing more than the prevailing ethos or value system of people at any particular time. Indeed, as we say, these same Marxist sociologists embrace moral relativism everywhere except when applied to Whites. We can't judge Aztecs ripping out hearts of sacrificial humans; we can't judge Chinese foot-binders; we can't judge puttee Indians; we can't judge clitoris-excising Hottentots -- but we can judge White slaveholders. It is obvious that professional sociologists have adopted as their first commandment: Consistency is a paste jewel.

Morality is neither constant nor absolute, so no indictment can be made against the WASP slaveholders in the United States. Let alone the fact that there were slaveholders of different races, including Blacks and Indians, over most of the world at one time or another. The moral argument simply falls flat from the historical perspective. One could more easily argue, as the conservatives do, that all races enslaved, but only the White race initiated abolition. But Feagin ignores this, and spends most of his book laying guilt for all the world's slavery at Whitey's feet. WASP Whitey, that is. Feagin wants to abolish the people who abolished slavery. I smell Morrissette.

Second, Feagin ignores group evolutionary strategies. There is no evidence that any racial or ethnic group is going to capitulate to some utopian dream of equality and voluntarily give up any acquired resources or privileges easily. Yes, humans do show some universal altruism, but only when times are flush. When push comes to shove, every group wants more wealth, status and power -- for itself. And I suspect that this desire for power and status is what really drives Feagin's hatred of White people. He wants a multicultural society because it entails the destruction of Whites, who he sees as too powerful and too successful and too in the way of world domination by crackpot Soc profs. This desire for complete control and dominance has always underlain Marxism: the masses are just a tool and excuse for destroying one's (ethnic) enemies. (See here a review of MacDonald's trilogy on evolutionary group strategies.)

Deconstructing the mind of a Marxist...

Feagin pg. 2: Police harassment and brutality directed at black men, women, and children are as old as American society, dating back to the days of slavery and Jim Crow segregation. Such police actions across the nation today reveal important aspects of the racism dealt with in this book --- the commonplace discriminatory practices of individual whites, the images of dangerous blacks dancing in white heads, the ideology legitimating antiblack images, and the white-dominated institutions that allow or encourage such practices. In the United States racism is structured into the rhythms of everyday life. It is lived, concrete, advantageous for whites, and painful for those who are not white. Each major part of a black or white person's life is shaped by racism. Even a person's birth and parents are shaped by racism, since mate selection is limited by racist pressures against interracial marriage. Where one lives is often determined by the racist practices of landlords, bankers, and others in the real estate profession. The clothes one wears and what one has to eat are affected by access to resources that varies by position in the racist hierarchy. When one goes off to school, her or his education is shaped by contemporary racism --- from the composition of the student body to the character of the curriculum. Where one goes to church is often shaped by racism, and it is likely that racism affects who one's political representatives are. Even getting sick, dying, and being buried may be influenced by racism. Every part of the life cycle, and most aspects of one's life, are shaped by the racism that is integral to the foundation of the United States.

Do you see the problem here? Socs are contractually bound by Semitical Correctness to swear allegiance to the Boasian Oath that race doesn't exist. That makes it very difficult to write books about race. So they end up like king of the dipshits here, tacitly conceding the existence of race in their obsessive focus on racial differences, but renaming these differences "racism." Get it? Simple racial differences -- obvious to anyone with open eyes -- become taboo, but they reappear all lint-free and long-faced in the brand new suit of "racism." Ah, epiphany! In the hands of the Feagin ilk, "racism" is simply demonized biology. It's all very much like nutjob C.S. Lewis turning every attempt to approach Christian claims rationally as the work of the devil (Screwtape Letters). Very, very similar. It wouldn't make either the professional Christian apologists or the Beanie Baby race-liars happy to hear, but, by God we have mouths and we'll speak and laugh! Here's the jig: we are allowed to talk about racial differences, but only if we don't call them by their true name: only if we accede to the Jewish Big Lies that they are iniquitous "racism" that is the product of magical "culture" that can be radically changed by following the advice of wise Marxists. "Racism" is a made-up term; a useful nothing that covers everything. Whites like to live around, marry their own kind? "Racism" -- a religious anathema masquerading as scientific explanation. "Racism" is a moral judgment, not an explanation. Christ how dumb we've become; whenever some sci-pseud yawps, we all jump to salute. Global warming, "racism," "Holocaust" -- it's all spinach, and I say to hell with it.

Instead of singing along with Cantor Feagin and throwing a ten spot in the collection plate, let's look at some racial facts free of dogmatic doctrinal demonization. Let's examine some of the facts Feagin fears. For instance, there is sound evolutionary evidence that people like to associate with and marry others who are like themselves. Blacks are more comfortable with Blacks, Jews with Jews, Asians with Asians. In fact, studies have shown that, the relatively few times races cross, they mingle and marry with other racial groups most like their own. Sameness attracts. Difference repulses. For example, genetic studies put East Asians and Whites closer together genetically than even Eastern Asians and South Asians. There is a degree of mixing between these groups. On the other hand, few White men would marry a Black woman. Men prefer lighter-skinned women, according to evolutionary studies, and they also want mates of similar intelligence. But White women are willing to marry Black men in cases where the men have resources (O. J. Simpson) or where the women thinks she can cut a better deal with a Black man than with a White (she's uglier/stupider than her White sisters in the competition for White males). But Blacks and Whites do not marry often because genetically they are just too dissimilar. These are facts, demonized as "racism" or not. Groups are real. Race is real. Feagin's make-believe must be taken into account politically, but not intellectually. Even among the Jewish liars who demonize discussion of White-Black differences racial barriers not only are acknowledged but are sanctified. The same Alan Dershowitz speaking out of one side of his mouth about Whites needing to accept diversity goes home and, among his own, speaks out of other side of his mouth denouncing Jewish exogamy. I strongly suspect this chronically Jewish double standard biologically inheres in the Jewish race.

Feagin, p. 3: No other racially oppressed group has been so central to the internal economic, political, and cultural structure and evolution of American society -- or to the often obsessively racist ideology developed by white Americans over many generations. Thus, it is time to put white-on-black oppression fully at the center of a comprehensive study of the development, meaning, and reality of this nation. In this book I develop an antiracist theory and analysis of the white-on-black oppression that is now nearly four centuries old. Theory is a set of ideas designed to make sense of the empirical and existential reality in and around us. Concepts delineating and probing racism need to be clear and honed by everyday experience, not framed from an ivory tower. Here I attempt to develop concepts, in language understandable to the nonspecialist, that can be used for an in-depth analysis of this racist society. These concepts are designed to help readers probe beneath the many defenses and myths about "race" to the often painful racist realities. They are useful in countering inaccurate assessments of the society's history and institutions. They can be used to reshape the socialization that hampers insight into the operation of this society. A critical theory of racism can help us better understand the racialized dimensions of lives.

Interpretation? Feagin is going to tell us one sob story after another, and in our weeping we will come to see that this theory of racism is correct. But of course, everyone has a sob story, and it proves little or nothing. Feagin's theory is a sieve, but he does do a good job as a soc Johnny Appleseed, spreading bigotry and hatred against all White people wherever his argument takes him. Feagin, in short, is a crank moralist whose anti-White animadversions are protected by tenure. Impotent and seething in his sinecure, he shrinks from epirical data like a vampire from sunlight. Vainly spying through his telescope, he searches the heavens and highways for portends of the New Bolsheviks to make Order out of his orthodoxy.

Feagin pg. 4: Currently, we have theoretical traditions that are well developed in regard to the systems of class and gender oppression. There is a well-developed Marxist tradition with its many important conceptual contributions. The Marxist tradition provides a powerful theory of oppression centered on such key concepts as class struggle, worker exploitation, and alienation. Marxism identifies the basic social forces undergirding class oppression, shows how human beings are alienated in class relations, and points toward activist remedies for oppression. Similarly, in feminist analysis there is a diverse and well-developed conceptual framework targeting key aspects of gendered oppression. Major approaches accent the social construction of sexuality, the world gender order, and the strategy of consciousness-raising. Feminist theorists have argued that at the heart of sexism is the material reality of reproduction and sexuality, the latter including how a woman is treated and viewed sexually and how she views herself In both the Marxist and feminist traditions there are also well-developed theories of resistance and change.

The real Marxist theoretical tools are jackboots on balls, and reeducation up the ying-yang. What, maybe 100 million dead who failed to see the light last century? Feagin wants more. Of course he doesn't put it that way, but that's where his train leads.

[p. 5]: As I will show in this book, however, the central problem is that, from the beginning, European American institutions were racially hierarchical, white supremacist, and undemocratic. For the most part, they remain so today.

Imagine you boated somewhere, disembarked, and were confronted by half-dressed, filthy creatures living in mud huts, eating crayfish, and neither writing nor reading. And then hundreds of years after the fact some numbnut prof came along and denounced you for not according these savages equal rights. How stupid is that? What utopian country would Feagin like us to emulate that is nonhierarchical and democratic? What is democracy? Does he mean real democracy or representative democracy? Has there ever been a country with direct democracy? Are not humans naturally hierarchical? And aren't all ethnic groups supremacist in preferring their own? Again, Feagin is doing nothing more than advertising his hatred of Western culture. He hates Whites and he will throughout this book try to slander us with terms like racist, supremacist, oppressive, etc. Yet he offers no evidence that any other nation or ethnic group acted differently, or could have.

So what do we stand accused of? As Michael Levin states in his superb book Why Race Matters, "Calling claims of genetic race differences 'racist,' in particular, begs not one but four questions: (1) Are race differences in themselves bad? (2) Is believing in race differences bad? (3) Is saying there are race differences bad? (4) Is studying race differences bad? Once it is realized that an affirmative answer to each of these questions must be established before the charge of racism can be made to stick, the charge itself collapses." There's some real sick 'n' twisted psychology going on here, even apart from the obvious political motives. "Race doesn't exist" -- the shibboleth of the academic left since the arrival of anthropology's Jew Boas early in the 20th century -- well, they all say it, but then they turn around and write huge tomes on the subject. So we've got a little cognitive dissonance, to use one of those clever Jew-terms: i.e., not-much Gussied Up. A sociologist writing about race is like a fireman not believing in fire. When you get down to the rat-killing, sociology fails as a concept. Libertarianism blinds itself to the group; sociology blinds itself to the individual. But it also blinds itself to the biologically generalizable. Sociology is more of the social construction it is committed to finding everything else in the world to be than any sort of objective discipline. The possibility of objectivity is not forsworn at the outset by the conducting of investigations in its name, but the very limited set of tools socs have to employ must make it very difficult not to fall into the sort of gibberish and mystagoguery and dogmatic jargonized drivel the Feagins exhibit. Maybe there should be a discipline simply called man, with sociological tools kept in a more capacious chest. Sociology has the same problem that psychology does: ignoring biology. Psych and soc are nothing but observations and guesses; the real work starts with understanding the biology of the brain and body, and there psychology has little to offer. The boys with the scanners have to do their work before we even know if there's anything left for the Jewish necromancers to fiddle with. And, just like Karen Carpenter, they've only just begun to eat their way through the gray matter.

Let's make one more attempt to explain Feagin: He's a religious nut. A leftist Marxist extremist seeking to impose his morality on us (as the leftists like to say). His morality is that we must all pretend not to notice that races and racial differences exist, even as we feverishly study same to "prove" why evil people who won't make believe like we do are the source of these nonexistent problems. Trillion-dollar industry is founded on this childish crap. In the spirit of the noble coiner of "Shit happens," I'd like to steal this bumper-sticker truth from my good friend Jack Halliday and commend it to Fagin: Black people are real. Just admit it, feckless Feagin. Hughes Mearns, children's poet, knew the truth about race and racial differences that escapes evil Fagin. He captured perfectly the fear and "projection" of the demonizers:

As I was walking up the stair
I met a man who wasn't there;
He wasn't there again today.
I wish, I wish he'd stay away!

But race won't stay away, no matter how fervently we wish it.


Back to VNN Main Page

Click Here!