200706 American Renaissance

8/7/2019 200706 American Renaissance

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/200706-american-renaissance 1/16

American Renaissance - 1 - June 2007

Continued on page 3

There is not a truth existing which I fear or would wish unknown to the whole world.— Thomas Jefferson

Vol. 18 No. 6 June 2007

A Setback for Le Pen; a Victory for ‘Lepenism’

American Renaissance

On the campaign trail with‘The Boulder.’

by Frédéric Legrand

Only 11 percent. This is not anopinion poll; this is the share of the vote for Jean-Marie Le Pen

in the first round of the2007 presidential elec-tions. It is the evening of April 22, and the disap-pointment is crushing. Thecandidate for the NationalFront had never been sofavorably positioned. Edi-torialists and the big me-dia had stopped wonder-ing about a runoff betweenSocialist Ségolène Royaland the liberal-conserva-tive Nicolas Sarkozy, andwere preparing for a battlebetween Mr. Le Pen andMr. Sarkozy. At NationalFront headquarters in theParis suburb of SaintCloud, and at campaignheadquarters at the Equinox The-ater downtown, champagne is cooling.No one thinks of uncorking it.

So much hope, work, and effort to endup fourth! Not only behind Mr. Sarkozyand Miss Royal but to be beaten by thelatest product of the media, the centristFrançois Bayrou, who is so much a pris-

oner of both right and left that he doesn’teven know whom to vote for in the run-off on May 6 (in the French system, if no candidate gets at least 50 percent inthe first round, the voters choose fromthe top two candidates in a runoff twoweeks later).

Eleven percent is Mr. Le Pen’s worstshowing in the 20 years he has been run-ning for president. And yet, never hashe been so well received by the pressand on the campaign trail. What went

wrong? There may be clues as we look back on the last major campaign of the78-year-old man they call “The Boul-der.”

The Kickoff

September 20, 2006. We are at Valmyin northwest France. Jean-Marie Le Pen

makes his first speech of the campaign.In a text drafted in part by the “progres-sive” ex-Marxist Alain Soral (see “Con-versation with Alain Soral,” AR, March2007), he strikes familiar themes: cul-

ture wars, loyalty to France rather thanthe European Union. But he goes fur-ther, castigating narrow “commu-nitarian” loyalties, arguing that the Re-public is greater than ethnic parochial-ism.

From the beginning, his daughterMarine, campaign manager and heir ap-parent, has three big strategies: First,mainstreaming the party. She makes surewe will see a kinder, gentler Jean-MarieLe Pen. He now calls himself “center-right,” and one of his campaign postersshows him posing with a mulatto girl (see“The National Front: Going Soft or Get-

ting Wise?” AR, March2007). Marine has alsoforbidden one of Mr. LePen’s favorite tricks—stirring up the press withdeliberately provocativeremarks. Marine and herteam, younger and moremoderate than the oldguard, will make surethat known hell-rais-ers—Carl Lang, BrunoGollnisch, Jean-ClaudeMartinez—stay out of the limelight.

Second, Marine willbe everywhere. Her fa-ther will stay in the shad-ows while she paradesthe party’s new “moder-

nity” and openness to moder-ates. Le Pen will give only five majorcampaign speeches before the first roundof voting, counting on breaking newsabout crime to work in his favor, just asit did in 2002, when he made it into therunoff against Jacques Chirac.

Finally, Mr. Sarkozy and his UMP

(French initials for “Union for a Popu-lar Movement”) will be the NF’s mainbogeyman. The party will hammer awayat his failure as interior minister to put adent in crime. Mr. Le Pen will grouseabout the man’s Hungarian origins, im-plying that he is not entirely French.However, The Boulder will not give himthe savage treatment Mr. Chirac got, not-ing that Mr. Sarkozy “is a man we cando business with.”

‘Emergency numbers: Police, Fire, National Front. Join the FN.’

Eleven percent is Mr. LePen’s worst showing in

the 20 years he has beenrunning for president.




Letters from ReadersSir — Jared Taylor’s thoughtful and

intelligent review of Shots Fired: SamFrancis on America’s Culture War (see

“An Old Friend Speaks,” AR, March2007), will no doubt help immensely toperpetuate Sam’s influence.

To ensure that influence continues, Iwould like to correct one aspect of thereview that I believe mischaracterizedSam’s thinking on elite behavior. “Samwas inclined,” Mr. Taylor wrote, “tothink globalists and liberals knew verywell what damage they were doing theircountry and race and reveled in it.” Hethen expressed his own disagreementwith that assessment, adding that he be-lieved “vanity, self-deception, incompe-

tence and just plain selfishness” werebetter explanations than malevolence.

I think the review missed the broader,central argument of the critique Samexplored in much of his writing. Sambelieved (based on the work of JamesBurnham and others) that America hadundergone a social and political revolu-tion in which a new managerial eliteemerged as the country’s ruling class.This new elite is waging war inside theUS against the economic, social, culturaland political institutions and customsthat sustained the older bourgeois, pre-

managerial elite, whose values Sam be-lieved had been absorbed by America’sbroad white middle classes. Sam be-lieved the new elite imposes its new ide-ology by undermining and subvertingold bourgeois customs and values at ev-ery turn.

This attack on the habits, values, cus-toms, and remnant institutions of the old,white American elite constituted thethreat Sam saw facing whites today. Thenew elite perceives the old ways and

values as “racist” and reactionary, andinimical to its interests. The elite’s newvalues include multiculturalism, multi-racial cosmopolitanism and globalism,to be smuggled into popular acceptance

as “diversity.” Sam did not believe theattack on whites was motivated simplyby malevolence (although that may wellbe a component in the motive of someforces allied with the new elite). Rather,he believed that a profound, culture-widesocial and economic process was at work undermining US sovereignty and Ameri-can white identity.

Given the racial nature of the attack,Sam believed the only possible success-ful resistance lay in the development of a white racial self-consciousness.

Jerry Woodruff, Middle American

News, Raleigh, N. C.

Sir — “Hispanic Consciousness, PartI” in the April issue is, in equal parts,degrading and disgusting. It’s degradingto realize that a once-great nation couldsink to this level, and disgusting thatwe’re allowing ourselves to be takenover. We’ve brought this calamity onourselves with our obsession with “di-versity” and “multiculturalism.”

For Mexicans, America is not a coun-try, but a playground, a sort of cultural

casino where taking a relatively smallrisk (border jumping) stands a goodchance of paying out a jackpot in theform of jobs, welfare, medical care, edu-cation, and a “path to citizenship.” If there are a few bumps along the way likedeportation, so what? Mexicans can al-ways sue us over the slightest offense,and the odds of winning are again prettygood.

You have to wonder what is going on.In Europe, fanatical Muslims call the

tune. In the UK, traditional hot-crossbuns are frowned upon for fear of of-fending non-Christians. When absurdi-ties like these occur with alarming fre-quency, it certainly seems like the end-of-the-world preachers are on to some-thing.

O.M. Ostlund, Jr,. Altoona, Penn.

Sir — By coincidence, I was readingJared Taylor’s “Hispanic Racial Con-sciousness, Part II” in the May issue onthe same day Hispanic activists wereholding pro-immigration rallies. Itboggles the mind that they can paradewithout fear of deportation while theirleaders openly plot “Reconquista.”

I learned recently that Sen. HillaryClinton named Raul Yzaguirre, formerlypresident of the National Council of LaRaza, as her 2008 presidential campaign

co-chairman. I wonder if the media willask Sen. Clinton whether her co-chair-man wants the southwestern UnitedStates given to Mexico or turned into inindependent Republica del Norte?

George Monroe, Chillicothe, Ohio

Sir — Your March issue was tops. Thereport on Jean-Marie Le Pen (“The Na-tional Front: Going Soft or GettingWise?” by Frederic Legrand) was illu-minating. I had always considered theNational Front a bunch of racist rabble-

rousers, but now I know they are patri-otic nationalists. I would appreciatemore articles like this—AR offers infor-mation entirely absent from the main-stream media. The “Conversation withAlain Soral” allowed glimpses intoFrench politics unavailable elsewhere.

Robert Briggs, Sarasota, Fla.

Sir — I’m pleased AR has finallygiven black author Shelby Steele someof the credit he deserves (see “To theEdge of the Precipice,” May 2007). He

is one of those rare mainstream authorswho almost never hits a wrong note onrace—which is why he is almost com-pletely unknown. I wonder, though,whether your reviewer is right to say Mr.Steele believes whites must not have ra-cial consciousness. Whatever he mayfeel compelled to say in public, I sus-pect he is too fair-minded really to be-lieve whites have no right to interests asa race.

Karl Frederick, Baton Rouge, La.






lic. Marine’s “mainstreaming” strategyseems to be working.

It is Valentine’s day, and Mr. Le Penand his wife Jany are having dinner atan up-scale Italian restaurant in aStrasbourg suburb. Customers recognizethem. One comes up cautiously to theirtable, then two, then a group. They ask

for autographs. When he and Jany fin-ish their meal and get up to leave, in-stead of the usual insults there are criesof “bravo!” Mr. Le Pen, who always asksfor a table in the darkest corner, makesa veritable hero’s march to the exit.Times are changing.

Feb. 18. Four days after his dinner inStrasbourg, Mr. Le Pen is in the north of France. He burns incense at a cemeteryfor Chinese who died in the First WorldWar. Coolies attached to the British armyfell here behind the trenches. MichelLétocard, the mayor of Noyelles-sur-

Mer meets Mr. Le Pen with a scowl. Hekeeps his hands clasped behind his back so as not to have to shake hands with themonster . . . but the Chinese guests atthe ceremony applaud the leader of theNational Front.

It is freezing cold. Mr. Le Pen inviteseveryone, including the press, the dig-nitaries, and even the rubberneckers to join him for a drink at the local café. Themayor is unbending, but his deputyClaude makes a point of seeking out Mr.Le Pen and greeting him warmly. Themayor is shocked. He had

always thought his deputyvoted for the Green Party.It is clear he is no Green.“We’ve got to stop immi-gration, Mr. Le Pen” hesays. “We get 300,000people every year! That’swhy the French can’t find jobs.”

In the back of the room,a badly-dressed youngman is joking with twoolder men. “That Le Pen,he’s the real thing,” says

one of the older menadmiringly. “Yeah,” saysthe young man, “a real rac-ist, just like me. I don’t likeArabs. They’re all bomb-throwers.” This scares theolder men, who don’t wantthis kind of talk going onin front of journalists. “Wait a minute,”says one. “Le Pen himself has said heisn’t a racist.” The youngster bursts outlaughing. “And you believe that?” he

asks.But this, too, is a sign of the times.

All over France people are no longerafraid to say they are going to vote forMr. Le Pen. Kristina, a pretty 18-year-

old, wears a button that says “Le Pennow, right now.” She is just old enoughto become a party member. “I’ve ex-plained it to my friends,” she says. “Irespect them, and they must respect me.”

Catherine teaches English at a highschool in the country, where she over-heard students talking politics. One sayshe is going to vote for Le Pen. The other

takes it in stride. “Fine, you

vote for Le Pen; I’m votingfor [Olivier]Besancenot[the candidate for the Revo-lutionary CommunistLeague].” Catherine, a se-cret Lepenist, is pleasedthat the exchange is so civil.

At Saint-Etienne in theRhône-Alpes region, it istow-headed Pascal, his facelined with fatigue but witheyes sparkling with anger.At age 30 he has finallystarted to make a decent liv-

ing. “The governmentnever did a thing for me,”he says. “But these foreign-ers get everything: housing,money, TV sets. The gov-ernment even gets them jobs. I had to work like adog to get into the plumb-

ing business, but plenty of my pals arestill unloading trucks.” He will vote LePen. “Things are going to explode if wedon’t put the French first.”

Is Mr. Le Pen the champion of thepoor? “Seven million Frenchmen livebelow the poverty line,” he says, “andthere are 14 million working poor.” Heblasts the authorities for doing nothing.

March 2. Two weeks before the dead-line, Mr. Le Pen still needs signatures.This is serious because the party hasborrowed 7.5 million Euros to financethe campaign. That is how much it willget from the government if Mr. Le Penwins at least five percent of the vote. If he can’t even run, the party gets noth-ing, and will have to sell its Saint-Cloudheadquarters, which is mortgaged to the

banks.

Mr. Le Pen sounds the alarm: “As therepresentative of six million voters in the

last election, it would be scandalous if Icannot run.” He says nearly 100 electedofficials who promised to sign have re-neged. Why? People posing as journal-ists phone up, claiming they have heardfrom the FN itself that the mayor is go-ing to sign for Mr. Le Pen. They threatento write nasty articles if he does.

March 5.A police investigation findsthat someone hacked into a computerwith the list of officials who promisedto endorse Mr. Le Pen. It might have

Typical caricature: Nazi Le Pen gives orders to fellow monsters.

‘The pig will be at Metz onNov. 19. Let’s stop the Fascistsby any means necessary. Noneighborhoods for Nazis.’




been an inside job because the break-inseems to have come from another com-puter on the FN network. The police holda front employee for questioning but re-lease him for lack of evidence. Mr. LePen rails against the pressure on his sup-

porters, and begs them to keep theirpromises.

Who should come to the rescue butNicolas Sarkozy? Because he is the headof a mainstream party, he has no troublegetting 500 signatures (even the leaderof the Revolutionary Communist Leaguealready has his 500) and can easily per-

suade politicos to back Mr. Le Pen. Fivedays later he goes on television and an-nounces that “in the name of democracy”

he will see to it that a man who repre-sents millions of French voters has achance to run for president.

Mr. Sarkozy has reasons to be gener-ous. He knows that if he faces SégolèneRoyal in the runoff he will need all theFN votes he can get. He also knows thatif he stands by with his arms folded andkeeps Mr. Le Pen off the ballot, manyFN supporters will punish him by vot-

ing for Miss Royal. He and Mr. Le Pencontinue their battle on the campaigntrail, but UMP officials begin to sign as

FN sponsors. On March 14, just beforethe deadline, Mr. Le Pen finally has his500 signatures. It is less than a monthbefore the vote.

Le Pen Dominates the Campaign

March 18. Mr. Le Pen keeps climb-ing in the polls. People say he will get20 percent. His opponents, who can holdtheir fingers to the wind as well as any-one, have taken over Mr. Le Pen’s is-sues of the past 30 years: crime, immi-gration, French identity, national sym-bols.

It is a first in the history of Socialistparty rallies when the Marseillaisebreaks out at the end of a speech bySégolène Royal. On the 17th, she wenteven further, gushing about the nationalanthem. “This is the song we must all

sing together,” she says. The audienceobliges, but she keeps her mouth shut.Mute, motionless, solemn, it is as if she

thinks the audience issinging about her, not thenation.

March 27. SégolèneRoyal keeps a Frenchflag in her kitchen. Frontsupporters snicker whenFrançois Hollande, MissRoyal’s “partner” and in-dispensable side-kick,sees fit to mention this in

a television interview.Nicolas Sarkozy promises he will cre-ate a Ministry of Immigration and Na-tional Identity. People notice that he nowmakes it a point to clap his hand overhis heart when he hears the Marseillaise.It is finally Marine who calls a cease fire.On the big radio station RMC she says“It is not the job of a politician to forceevery Frenchman to keep a flag.”

What a strange campaign! As the can-didates come down the home stretch they

seem to have forgotten politics asusual—jobs, schools, taxes, Europe,defense, and even crime—to concentrateon France’s identity.

Of course, it is mostly the fault of theSocialists that French identity is at issueat all: massive amnesties for illegals, theestablishment in 1984 of the hyperac-

tive anti-racist group SOS-Racisme, of-ficial declarations that “foreigners arenow at home in France.”

Nicolas Sarkozy himself was behindthe law of Nov. 16, 2003 that abolisheddouble jeopardy for immigrant crimi-nals. Now, after they serve their sen-

tence, they are not deported but are re-leased back into French society. It wasalso Mr. Sarkozy who, before the cam-paign, wanted to give foreigners the voteand backed “positive discrimination” fornon-whites. Later he backpedaled andsaid he meant preferences based on need,not race.

March 28. Big news. There are raceriots at the Gare du Nord railroad sta-tion in Paris. It was Nicolas Sarkozy’s

good fortune that just that morning heofficially left his post as Minister of theInterior to run for president fulltime(which he has been doing for months).But just two days before there had beena nasty scuffle in a tough Paris neigh-borhood when police tried to arrest anillegal. His tenure as the country’s topcop is tarnished.

Everyone knows that riots are good

Marine Le Pen.

François Bayrou.

Nicolas Sarkozy.

Ségolène Royal. Riot police at the Gard du Nord.




for the FN. Dominique Jamet, editor-in-chief of France-Soir declares that Mr.Sarkozy has been a failure as interiorminister and says that Mr. Le Pen nowhas the inside track:

“All it took was for a conductor toask a passenger to show his ticket andwe got a night of rioting. . . . Today, justas it was in November 2005, one littlespark can set things blazing. We mustface facts: The regime that is on its wayout and the candidate who was, until yes-terday, interior minister have not solved

the ‘delicate’ problems of immigration,social cohesion and employment . . . Atthe Gare du Nord, people were disgustedwhen all the riot police did was separatethe rioters from law-abiding passengersrather than make arrests. Thispassivity was certainly not thefault of the men in blue; theywere obviously doing as theywere told. . . .”

That day there is a meetingat FN headquarters in Saint-Cloud. What to say about theriots? Party leaders are di-

vided. Should they put theblame squarely on immigra-tion as the source of France’stroubles and risk losing thegains they think they are mak-ing among immigrants? Mr.Le Pen decides not to issue apress release. Marine and herfather decide to say only thatthe voters will understand that eventsprove the FN right. Nothing more. Someactivists are disappointed. They wanted

a fierce statement about an event so strik-ing that the news clips are shown overand over on television. They think astrong position on the riots would be asure ticket to the runoff.

April 1. At headquarters in Saint-Cloud, champagne glass in hand, Mr. LePen gets confidential with journalists

about the runoff. “There’s a good chanceI’ll make it. And it will be Sarkozy andme because the left has never been soweak and divided.” And Mr. Bayrou?“He’s out of gas.”

Nicolas Sarkozy himself does not ruleout a final showdown with Mr. Le Pen.He would love to face him rather thanSégolène Royal becausehe would be sure to win,but in private, even be-fore the train station ri-ots, he was saying pollsundercount the FN vote.

During a trip to Marseilleon March 27 he pre-dicted that Mr Le Pen’s“results will surpriseyou.”

The establishment istaking the FN more seri-ously than ever. “Sarkozyand Le Pen are the bigwinners when the discus-sion turns to crime,” saysJérôme Fourquet of thebig polling company IFOP. “Sarkozy ismore credible because people think he

can do a better job of putting downcrime. Le Pen is more legitimate becausehe has been sounding the alarm foryears.”

April 7. There is anxiety over the lat-

est IFOP poll. No fewer than 26 percentof people who support the front say they

have “more confidence” in Mr. Sarkozyto “guarantee the security of persons andproperty.” The candidate of the UMP hasexperience and heft. Perhaps he can getmore done than a man who has neverbeen in power.

There is worse: Of the people whovoted for Mr. Le Pen in 2002, 34 per-

cent of the farmers, 37 percent of com-pany employees, and 39 percent of man-agers say they will probably voteSarkozy this time. They don’t want theFN to face a socialist in the runoff be-cause that would be a big win forSégolène Royal and mean five years of leftist government.

Polls are now giving the front 14 to15 percent of the vote—not enough fora breakthrough, but better than Mr. LePen was polling at this time in 2002.

April 12. Mr. Le Pen will have to dobetter than his 2002 first-round performance of 16.9percent. The left is not asfractured as it was last time,and voters are thinkingahead to the runoff. Mr. LePen will need 20 percent atleast. The Boulder claims tobe unfazed. “Who do you

think the 17 percent whorefuse to talk to pollsters aregoing to vote for?” he asks.And what about the 18 per-cent who are never polledbecause they don’t havelandline telephones? LouisAlliot, General Secretary of the FN says even 24 percent

would not be out of the question.April 17. France votes in just a few

days. Mr. Le Pen visits the fishermen of

Immigrants . . .

. . . keep them employed.

France can go up in flames any time.




Boulogne-sur-mer, and gets a warmwelcome. It’s almost a homecomingbecause Mr. Le Pen is the son andgrandson of fishermen, and workedon a boat when he was young. Mencomplain about European Union in-spectors who fine them if they catchunderweight fish or take small clams:“Mr. Le Pen, you’ve got to take usout of the European Union.” TheBoulder agrees, adding “fishing isthe hardest job in the world, and allthose bureaucrats just make it

worse.”Mr. Le Pen returns to his theme

as man of the people. “Ségolène,Sarkozy, Bayrou, they all claim to bepopulists, but they have all been ingovernment. They have all had ahand in this disaster. They are the elites.I am the only candidate for the littlepeople.” He leaves with sacks of fish andseafood pressed on him by enthusiasticfishermen.

April 19. The latest poll puts Mr. LePen at 20 percent. The president of theFN seems pleased, but his advisors are

concerned. What will the voters think?Even hardened activists now say openlythey will vote for Mr. Sarkozy! “Le Penand Royal in the runoff? That would putthe left in power. That means amnesty,massive immigration, Negro cabinetministers, crime. Sorry, but that’s toomuch. I’d rather see Le Pen at 17 per-cent. That way he could have a big im-pact on the right’s program, and maybeeven get electoral alliances with the rightfor local and legislative elections.” It is

rumored that even a few people at FNheadquarters see things this way.

But most activists are dreaming im-possible dreams: Their hero in the run-off, the system buckles, proportional rep-resentation in the National Assembly[which would mean FN deputies; thereis none now], cooperation with the right,

and the end of the Chirac-leftist alliancethat has kept the front out in the cold.April 22. The results are in. It’s go-

ing to be Sarkozy vs. Royal in the run-off. This is the first real step backwardsfor The Boulder since 1988. He is not insecond-place this time; he is not eventhird. The 200 or so activists gatheredat campaign headquarters in the Equi-nox Theater console themselves withcheese and sausages, and give Mr. LePen a big welcome when he shows up at8:15 p.m.

He has just been on television to make

a confession that is a strange mix of ironyand bitterness. “I got it wrong,” he saysinto the cameras. “I thought the Frenchwere unhappy, but I guess they aren’t.The French must be very happy, since

they just voted in—and with room tospare—the parties that are in power. Ifear this euphoria will not last long.”

One of the themes around the buffettables is contempt for Mr. Sarkozy. AlainSoral is bitter: “What is so terrifying isthat the two leading candidates are bothmediocrities that the media have forcedon the people. It shows how strong thesystem really is. Le Pen was worthy of France, but I’m not sure France wasworthy of Le Pen.” He is in the anyone-

but-Sarko camp, and says he will voteSocialist on May 6.

Thomas, 29, will vote for the UMP.“Sarko is not Chirac. He will be smarterand will take us seriously.” His girl-friend, 22-year-old Elodie, is afraid Mr.Sarkozy has unpleasant surprises instore: Islamicization, homosexual mar-

riage, who knows what else? She saysthe vote on May 6 will be like “choos-ing between cholera and the plague.”Thomas sees a clear choice; for him it’s“anyone-but-Ségo.” “The lefties will beout there fighting Sarko,” he says, “andwe will be fighting them.”

At 9:15 the party begins with the Marseillaise. Jean-Marie Le Pen leadshis wife onto the dance floor where theysway to a disco beat. Young peoplecrowd the floor; older people waltz inan adjoining room. Mr. Le Pen and Ma-rine insist that the champagne be brought

out. The labels have pictures of himon them. The crowd drinks up—whatbetter way to handle bad luck?—butmany find the taste bitter.

Still, Mr. Le Pen’s recommendationon how to vote in the runoff will weighon the results, and the UMP candidatewill be courting FN voters.

April 23. Scores are being settledwithin the front. Marine has en-emies—people who were pushed outwhen the new team came in, peoplewho opposed the strategy of “reach-ing out.” They are good soldiers and

are silent in public, but anyone whohangs around the FN or talks to old-timers over a drink gets an earful.

Xavier Van Lierde of the national-ist paper Monde et Vie points the fin-ger: “Marine, who ran her dad’s cam-

paign, has direct responsibility. If theelectoral winds and the ideological cur-

The left thinks Mr. Sarkozy is almost asmuch a Nazi as Mr. Le Pen . . .

. . . and that he is also too pro-American.

. . . because they sound alike (‘Anyone whodoesn’t love France should leave.’) . . .




rants were with us then only pilot errorexplains if not outright shipwreck thencertainly failure.” Jean-Claude Martinez,Euro-deputy and vice president of thefront, strikes a theme that will echothrough the party for months: “We putthis campaign in the hands of babies!”

A meeting this afternoon of the party’s

political bureau cannot paper over thedifferences. Marine’s campaign got herfather 1,000,000 fewer votes than in2002, and this in an election with a turn-out of 84 percent, the highest since 1965.The results are even worse than theyseem. In 2002, ex-FN leader BrunoMégret got 600,000 votes. This year, hedid not run, and urged his supporters tovote Le Pen, so some are arguing thatMarine cost her father 1,600,000 votes!For many, these numbers are an eloquentrebuke to Marine and her team of “ba-bies.”

But is this criticism fair? NicolasSarkozy shamelessly stole the FN’sclothes and poached its supporters. Hisclear shift to the right unquestionablyhurt Mr. Le Pen. Many voters who pre-fer the front are convincedthat Mr. Sarkozy not onlyhas a real chance of beingelected but has enough re-spect, experience and con-viction to do a credible jobon what really matters: im-migration.

Jean-Claude Martinez,

vice president of the FN,puts it this way: “The tra-ditional supporters of thefront voted for NicolasSarkozy in the belief thathe could achieve the goalsof the FN better than Jean-Marie Le Pen himself.”Bruno Gollnisch, who is nofriend of Marine, agreesthat Mr. Le Pen did not losevotes; the UMP candidatewon them. He points outthat Mr. Sarkozy some-

times seems to understandwhat is really at stake, re-minding FN colleagues that the formerinterior minister once said, “We are thelaboratory of ideas of this Fifth Repub-lic, which may be on its last legs. . . .Maybe we have been the victims of thesuccess of our own ideas.”

Still, the back-biting goes on. “EitherLe Pen and his daughter learn their les-sons or the party remains a backwater,”says one FN leader. He wants Bruno

Gollnisch and Carl Lang to “make itclear that they disagree with Le Pen andMarine.” Will the complaining reach TheBoulder himself? Will the people who

think he sold out say so to his face? Mr.Le Pen does not even admit that this ishis last campaign. “Who know?” he says.

“Life is a series of battles, and it’s thelast one that really counts.”

Still, the results have strengthened thehands of those who never liked the com-promise of “mainstreaming,” and has

weakened Marine in thestruggle for succession asparty leader. Mr. Gollnishis first in line, now thatMarine is under a cloud,but at least in public he isstill the good party man:“This is not the end of thehouse of Le Pen.”

April 25. Mr. Le Pen isupbeat: “We won the battleof ideas. France, patrio-tism, immigration, andcrime were at the heart of our opponents’ campaigns.Only yesterday they wererunning away from theseideas.” There are rumorsthat Mr. Sarkozy is work-ing out a deal in return foran endorsement. Offi-cially, the parties deny anycontact, but there has been

talk of the right treating theFN as a possible ally in the

future rather than as a pariah. One of Mr.Sarkozy’s advisors, Brice Hortefeux, hasurged a return to proportional represen-tation in the National Assembly. “In thename of democracy,” he says, a partywith so much support must be “legiti-mately represented.” No one in JacquesChirac’s circle ever talked like that. Inany case, Mr. Sarkozy can hardly ignorethe four million Frenchmen who voted

But everyone agrees that the other candi-dates have stolen the FN’s clothes. Sarkozy:‘Wow, she’s scary!!!’ Le Pen: ‘Everyone’s

poaching on my territory??’

Le Pen, especially when so many peoplewho voted for the third-place finisher,François Bayrou, are leftists who willvote Socialist in the runoff.

May 1. Five thousand activists havegathered to support Mr. Le Pen in histraditional May Day parade. At noon,after having left everyone in suspense

since April 22, he finally unbosoms him-self of his advice on how to vote in therunoff. “I invite those voters who showedtheir confidence in me to vote neitherfor Miss Royal nor for Mr. Sarkozy, andto abstain massively.” He explains: “Itwould be illusory and dangerous to votefor a Socialist out of vengeance againstNicolas Sarkozy for stealing our pro-gram. Likewise, it would be crazy to turnover our votes to a candidate who con-tinues to treat us as extremists and whorefuses to allow a proportional represen-tation that would give our millions of

voters a voice in the National Assem-bly.” The discussions with the UMP musthave gone nowhere.

Many FN supporters are disap-pointed. Most will vote for Mr. Sarkozy,whom they see as vastly better than anyleftist. This is especially true because of yet another news story: A policewomanhas just been raped by a black. It turnsout this is the second crime of this kindin just six weeks, but the press nevermentioned the rape of the first police-woman. It is Mr. Sarkozy whom Frenchpatriots want in office at a time like this,

not Miss Royal. By demanding absten-tion, Mr. Le Pen sounds like a bad loser,closing himself off from politics. Veryfew people will follow his advice any-way. At the very least he should havetold his people to vote as they see fit.

May 6. Mr. Sarkozy wins with 53.1percent of the vote, even getting 52 per-cent of the female vote. Most FN sup-porters voted for him, and turnoutmatched the very high 84 percent of thefirst round.

Activists are relieved they will nothave to face five years of pinko simper-

ing from Ségolène Royal. The hard core,however, are planning for the legislativeelections this June—in which the partywill have to prove it is still a force to bereckoned with—and for the presidentialelection five years from now. Their eyesare gleaming. By 2012, PresidentSarkozy will have accomplished littledespite his tough talk. And with a newleader at the head of the National Frontthere is no telling what the patrioticmovement could do.

Sarkozy explains positivediscrimination: ‘For example,let’s give the presidency to the

son of an immigrant fromHungary who is short.’

Ω






and Sub-Saharan Africa.Profs. Lynn and Vanhanen point out

why conventional theories about under-development cannot explain thesethings: “they do not pay any serious at-tention to human diversity.” Some soci-eties stay poor because their populationsare not, on average, intelligent enough

to run an efficient economy.The authors begin their analysis of intelligence with a short history of IQtesting, and explain concisely why IQhas a heritability of approximately 0.88and is so little subject to environment.Aside from twin studies, some of themost persuasive evidence comes fromordinary families. IQ scores in childhoodpredict adult socio-economic status bet-ter than parental status does. Some 25

percent of children will end up withhigher or lower status than their parents,and IQ is the best indicator of which waythey will go. Likewise, within the samefamily, children with the highest IQs tendto be the most successful. IQ, then, is

one of the best predictors of virtuallyevery desirable—or undesirable—socialoutcome. Smart people tend to makemore money, get more education, com-mit fewer crimes, have fewer illegitimatechildren, stay healthier, and live longerthan dim people.

The main argument of this book, as itwas with IQ and the Wealth of Nations,is that just as an individual’s intelligenceexplains a great deal about him, the av-erage intelligence of a nation’s popula-

tion explains a great deal about it. Thecentral methodology of this book, there-fore, is to compare IQ data for differentnations to national well-being. The au-thors have found good testing data forno fewer than 192 countries, and haveleft out only tiny places like Vatican City,Monaco, San Marino, Lichtenstein,

Nauru and Tuvalu.Clearly, there are better IQ data forsome countries than others, but this book probably reflects the most thoroughcompilation of world-wide intelligencetesting reports available anywhere, andincludes an extensive listing of thesources. Where possible, Profs. Lynnand Vanhanen have cross-referenced IQdata to international comparisons in suchthings as mathematics ability; high na-

tional IQ scores correlate closely withhigh academic ability.

There are many measures of nationalwell-being, and the authors have chosena mix of five such measures againstwhich to plot IQ. The first is per capita

gross national income. This is modifiedto reflect purchasing power parity be-cause the same dollar often buys morein a poor country than in a rich one. Thesecond measure of national well beingis adult literacy, and the third is the per-centage of the population with post-sec-ondary education. The authors note thatabove a certain percentage, the numberof people in college probably has littleimpact on the economy. Higher educa-tion becomes a consumer good rather

than career training—especially in richcountries where large numbers of col-lege-educated women are mothers firstand workers second—but the extent towhich it is a self-improving luxury is asign of a nation’s wealth and priorities.

The fourth measure of well-being theauthors chose is life expectancy at birth,

and the fifth is the level of democratiza-tion. Democracy will strike many read-ers as both hard to measure and of sec-ondary importance in evaluating a na-tion, but one theory is that representa-tive governments arise when wealth isso widespread that no single group candominate the others.

Profs. Lynn and Vanhanen have cal-culated a composite of these five mea-sures, which they call the Index of Qual-ity of Human Conditions. They cross-check this index and its componentsagainst the UN’s Human Development

Index, which includes such things asundernourishment and infant mortality.They also mention other measures likethe corruption index (MohammedSuharto is reported to have embezzledas much as $34 billion from Indonesiaat a time when its gross domestic percapita income was less than $700 perperson), and measures of national hap-piness.

The theory of this book is that IQ hasa strong positive correlation with theIndex of Quality of Human Conditions(QHC), and of course it does. The chart

on the previous page plots QHC on ascale of 0 to 100 against IQ for 192 coun-tries. The regression line on the chartshows a very solid correlation, whichwill surprise only the most militant IQ-atheists. Countries full of smart peopleare better places to live than countriesfull of dullards.

The chart on this page plots nationalIQ against national per capita gross in-come alone. Here, the regression line isa curve, and suggests that an increase inaverage IQ at the lower levels—from the60s to the lower 80s, for example—does

not produce much economic benefit. Itseems that only in societies with an av-erage IQ at least in the mid-80s is therethe capacity to build a modern economythat produces real wealth. IQ increasesfrom that point produce very significantgains.

Perhaps the most interesting results,however, are the outliers—the countriesthat fall well above or below the trendlines. Which countries are more of a suc-cess or failure than one would expect




from the intelligence of their popula-tions—and why? The table at the top of this page lists the outliers in both direc-tions. Profs. Lynn and Vanhanen use theterm “residuals” to describe either nega-tive or positive distance from the trendline, and have measured that distance in

standard deviations.According to this table, which some

readers will find the most fascinating inthe book, there are four countries withpositive residuals of as many as four orfive standard deviations (SDs) as calcu-lated by plotting IQ against the five com-ponents of the Index of Quality of Hu-man Conditions. This does not mean thatBarbados and St. Kitts, for example,outscore Norway and Switzerland inQHC. It means that these four countriesare vastly better off—by four or fiveSDs—than national IQ alone would have

predicted. The authors note that they areall island nations and popular tourist des-tinations. A huge influx of wealthywhites has been a great benefit to thesecountries.

Otherwise, the 34 countries with posi-tive residuals of two or three SDs arethe ones one would expect: advancedWestern democracies and oil producers.Equatorial Guinea is two SDs better off than expected, not because it is a pleas-ant place to live—it is a pesthole—but

because oil money has pushed it abovethe level at which its low national IQwould otherwise have kept it.

The countries with substantial nega-tive residuals also show certain patterns.Many have fought civil wars, and manyare former communist countries. Profs.

Lynn and Vanhanen note that Muslimcountries tend to end up among theunderperformers because they do noteducate women, and thus deny them-selves the benefits of a more capablepopulation. Also, they have generallykept out Christian missionaries, whoeducated the early leaders of many

former colonies. Two countries—Singapore and Hong Kong—are in thisgroup, not because they are miserableplaces but because they fall short of whatis promised by very high average na-tional IQs in the 105 – 110 range.

China has great potential in terms of IQ but has been held back by terrible

government. From about 1000 to 1500AD it was more advanced than Europebut it stagnated under imperial rule andsuffered grievously under Communism.Now that its rulers have understood theimportance of private initiative it iscatching up quickly.

The table at the bottom of this pagehas grouped the 192 countries of thisstudy into regions so as to offer a racialcomparison. The headings in the tablerepeat the five components of the Indexof Quality of Human Conditions. N isthe number of countries in the group or

region, IQ is average IQ for the group,QHC is the Quality of Human Condi-tions score, PPP GNI is per capita grossnational income expressed in dollars,Literates is the percentage of the adultpopulation that can read, Tertiary Enroll-ment is the percentage of adults whohave gone to college, LE is life expect-ancy, and ID is index of democratiza-tion.

The comparisons are instructive.Profs. Lynn and Vanhanen find that theMiddle East and North Africa, with anID of 6.0 is even less democratic than

Sub-Saharan Africa with an ID of 7.7.Otherwise, back Africa is at the bottomon all counts. East Asia is clearly notmeeting the potential that is suggestedby a regional IQ that is almost 10 pointshigher than that of Europe and its off-shoots.

The graph on the next page plots the




average IQs of the six regions set out inthe previous table against Quality of Human Conditions. The results are notsurprising, expect perhaps for the largepositive residual for Latin America andthe Caribbean, which are probably ex-plained by tourist activity in the Carib-bean and close American involvementin Latin America. Although the authorsdo not say so, the graph also explainsthe direction of mass immigration.

People move out of areas with low QHCscores into white countries with highscores. They would be pouring into Ko-rea and Japan if those countries wouldlet them. If enough lower-IQ immigrantsarrive they will, of course, lower theQHC scores of the receiving nations.

One interesting peripheral finding inthis book is that IQ correlates better withlife expectancy than with any other mea-sure of well-being. High national incomesimply by itself does not seem to im-prove life expectancy. For example, oilproducing countries may have high in-

comes but this does not mean their popu-lations live any longer than would beexpected based on national IQ.

In this connection, the authors notethat in the year 1000, life expectancy atbirth is thought to have been essentiallythe same everywhere in the world: about24 years. By 1820, the regional varia-tions were as great as they are today,though since the 19th century life expect-ancy has doubled everywhere.

Profs. Lynn and Vanhanen report a

number of interesting parallels, one of which is the very strong correlation of 0.806 between national IQ and what iscalled the Monaco-Uganda index, or theshape of the population pyramid.Uganda is at one extreme, with a youngpopulation and a squat pyramid. Monacois at the other, with a population “pyra-mid” that looks like a telephone pole:Each age group survives largely intactinto old age, and each generation essen-

tially replaces itself rather than repro-duce frantically. The closer a country isto the Monaco model, the higher its na-tional IQ is likely to be.

Another measure of national well-be-ing can be constructed by asking peopleto rate themselves on various scales of how happy they are. The results, at least

at the national level, have no correlationwith IQ. The smartest populations areno more likely than the stupidest to saythey are happy. There is a modest corre-lation between happiness and per capitaincome—extreme misery must makepeople unhappy—and a weak one withlife expectancy.

The authors point out that if neitherwealth nor intelligence are necessary forhappiness, international developmentefforts may be misguided. It is hard,probably impossible, to drag most poorcountries out of poverty. But if rich coun-

tries insist on believing it is their respon-sibility to help the poor, it may be pos-sible to shore up whatever it is in poorcountries that makes people happy.

No one will try this, however, becausethe people of rich white countries think everyone wants to be just like them: rich,urban, college educated, only moder-ately religious, sexually “liberated,” andcommitted consumers who have smallfamilies and representative government.An inability to imagine that anything elsecould be fulfilling is part of the unac-knowledged arrogance of the West.

The Heart of the Question

As usual, Richard Lynn and TatuVanhanen have gone straight to the heartof a vitally important question. Theyhave shown the folly of trying to imple-ment development policies without re-gard to the limits set by national IQ.Nations, just like individuals, differ dra-matically in their abilities, and in the kindof instruction from which they can profit.

The great obstacle these remarkableauthors face is hysterical liberalism that

refuses to recognize group differencesin IQ. An American society that thinks—or at least pretends to think—that Con-gress can pass laws that will bring black test scores up to the white level is toodeluded to understand why Africa is poorand Japan and Korea are rich. This book should have been published by a majorNew York house. Instead, it bears theimprint of a plucky but small regionalpublisher that does not have the muscleto get it widely reviewed or carried in

IQ and Global Inequality concludes withJohn 12:8: ‘The poor you always have with

you . . . .’




book stores.This book is mainly about the inabil-

ity of the West to understand Third-World economies. At a deeper level, it

is about the inability of the West even tounderstand itself.

O Tempora, O Mores!

Taylor at Clemson

On April 9, at the invitation of theClemson Conservatives, AR editor JaredTaylor gave a talk on the subject of ra-cial diversity to an audience of 125 atClemson University. He spoke for about40 minutes, and then spent nearly anhour answering questions. Students wereclearly fascinated by a point of view they

rarely hear. The audience, which waspolite and even favorable, wrote ques-tions on note cards, so there was no “anti-racist” filibustering. There were a fewhostile questions, including one that re-ferred to Mr. Taylor as an “arrogant, rac-ist white man.” When Mr. Taylor repliedthat to call him a “racist” was merename-calling and that name calling is themost pathetic way someone can admithe has lost the argument, there was abrisk round of applause.

The Campus Conservatives wanted tohold a debate on racial diversity, but

even with the help of at least one othercampus group they were unable to findanyone willing to defend the orthodoxview. The local NAACP was one of theorganizations that declined to debate, butthis did not stop it from later complain-ing that the mere fact of giving Mr. Tay-lor an opportunity to speak was a dis-turbing example of “campus racism.”

Suspension Gap

In the school district of Charlotte-Mecklenburg, North Carolina, blacks are

suspended at six times the white rate(45.9 per hundred students vs. 7.4 perhundred) and Hispanics are suspendedat twice the white rate (17.2 per hun-dred). In North Carolina as a whole, thesuspension rates for blacks and whitesare 44 per 100, and 12 per 100.

For once, the difference isn’t beingblamed on discrimination or “institu-tional racism.” Charlotte-Mecklenburgschools have “zero-tolerance” for vio-lence, and Ralph Taylor, the district’s

safety director (who is black) says blacks

get most of the suspensions because theydo most of the fighting. “We have a lotof kids who are involved in gang activ-ity, and they bring that stuff to schooland they get in trouble for it,” he ex-plains. “I don’t think by any means thatit’s somebody singling black kids out.”

Charlotte-Mecklenburg schools handout a lot of suspensions but very fewexpulsions. Last year, the district threwout just six students—five were black—out of nearly 124,000, and some offi-cials want more. A mere six is “too lowa number, I’ll tell you that,” says school

board member Larry Gauvereau. [AnnDoss Helms, CMS Discipline Gap Wid-ens, Charlotte Observer, April 5, 2007.]

Words of Wisdom

This is from a speech by Booker T.Washington after he received an honor-ary degree from Harvard in 1896:

“In the economy of God, there is butone standard by which an individual cansucceed [and] there is but one for a race.This country demands that every race

measure itself by the American standard.By it a race must rise or fall, succeed orfail, and in the last analysis mere senti-ment counts for little. During the nexthalf century and more, my race mustcontinue passing through the severeAmerican crucible. We are to be testedin our patience, our forbearance, our per-

severance, our power to endure wrong,

to withstand temptations, to economize,to acquire and use skill; our ability tocompete, to succeed in commerce, to dis-regard the superficial for the real, the ap-pearance for the substance, to be greatand yet small, learned and yet simple,high and yet the servant of all. This, thisis the passport to all that is best in thelife of our Republic, and the Negro mustpossess it or be debarred.”

Rap Flap

Rodney Jean-Jacques is a Philadel-

phia fireman and aspiring “rapper.” In2005, he came up with a rap on firesafety. The fire department liked it, andit was broadcast during a Philadelphia-Dallas football game. Mr. Jean-Jacques’latest effort is less civic-minded. “I gottasurprise for them cops,” he chants to thesound of gunfire. “I hope the news istaping this, cause I’m gonna turn pigsinto bacon bits.”

Bob Eddis of the Philadelphia branchof the Fraternal Order of Police calls thesong a “disgrace” and says Mr. Jean-Jacques must apologize or be fired: “He

is a city employee and he should be heldaccountable for making these state-ments.” The city put Mr. Jean-Jacqueson administrative leave while it investi-gates. [Philadelphia Police OutragedOver Firefighter Rappers Lyrics, AP,April 17, 2007. Robert Moran, Fire-fighter Who Called Police ‘Pigs’ in Rapis Put on Leave, Philadelphia Inquirer,April 20, 2007.]

Injustice

Sue Carol Browning is a judge in

western Kentucky who takes illegal im-migration seriously, once ordering ille-gal immigrants appearing before her toleave Kentucky within 72 hours as acondition of probation. Last summer,Judge Browning ordered police to arrestHispanics pulled over in traffic stopswho failed to present any identification.She then ordered them held without bailwhile federal authorities investigatedtheir status. This led to a complaintagainst her by Paul Witte, a pastoral as-

Ω




National Foot-ball Leagueplayers arrestedsince 2006. Find

the two whites.




sociate for St. Susan Catholic Church inElkton, Kentucky, who works with the“undocumented” community. “She wasbeing very harsh in her treatment of them,” he says.

On April 19, the state Judicial Con-duct Commission found Judge Brown-ing guilty of violating judicial ethics by

denying bail, and suspended her with-out pay for 15 days. Although the com-mission found no evidence of “racism,”it said she “created an impression” thatshe had “a racial prejudice or bias”against Hispanics.

Judge Browning is not fighting thesuspension but says she locked the His-panics up because she didn’t know theirlegal status or criminal history, and hadseen them in her courtroom again andagain, under different names. [BrettBarrouquere, Judge Suspended for Jail-ing Immigrants Without Bail, AP, April

19, 2007.]

National Felons League

Since the beginning of 2006, 41 Na-tional Football League (NFL) playershave been arrested—someseveral times—for anythingfrom drunk driving to aggra-vated assault (see photos, fac-ing pagee). Chicago Bearsdefensive tackle Tank Jonesis serving a four-month sen-tence on weapons charges

and had to get special permis-sion from a judge to play inthe Super Bowl. TennesseeTitans cornerback Adam“Pacman” Jones has been ar-rested five times and ques-tioned by police five moretimes since joining the leaguein 2005. He faces a felonycharge for starting a brawl ata Las Vegas strip club in Feb-ruary that led to a triple shooting. He isalso charged with obstruction of justicein Georgia. His college roommate, Cin-

cinnati Bengals wide receiver ChrisHenry, has been arrested four times inthree states in 14 months. The most se-rious charge is aggravated assault witha firearm.

The NFL’s former policy outlawedcriminal behavior but did not permitfines or suspension until a player wasconvicted. The team itself can alwaysfire a trouble-maker, as the New EnglandPatriots did when tackle Kenyatta Jonespoured scalding water on a teammate,

but managers don’t want to release a starplayer with a multi-year, multi-milliondollar guaranteed contract.

Recent high-profile NFL arrestsprompted Commissioner Roger Goodellto change the rules. There are now largerfines and longer suspensions, and play-ers who are arrested repeatedly may be

punished without a conviction. Teamsthemselves can be punished if they haverepeat offenders on their rosters. Mr.Goodell applied the rules right away,suspending Chris Henry for eight gamesand “Pacman” Jones for the entire sea-son. [Jarrett Bell, NFL Will ConfrontDiscipline Issue, Unveil New PolicyWithin Days, USA Today, April 9, 2007.Tom Weir, New NFL Policy Has TeamsTrying to Avoid ‘Bad Apple,’ USA To-day, April 19, 2007.]

Defending the Faith

In Malaysia there is so much interestin the supernatural that a museum in thesouthern state of Negeri Sembilan puton an exhibit of ghosts, ghouls, and crea-tures from local legends. The display

included a vampire carcass and a phoe-nix, and drew more than 25,000 visitors

since opening on March 10, but the stategovernment will now close it down. Thereason? It offends Muslims. The Na-tional Fatwa Council ruled that the ex-hibit could “undermine” Muslim faith.Council Chairman Abdul Shukor Husinsays, “We don’t want to promote a be-lief in tahyul (supernatural) and khurafat(superstition) which we do not knowabout.”

About 60 percent of Malaysia’s 26million people are Muslims, and are sub-

ject to all Fatwa Council edicts whetheror not they are within national law.[Ghost Museum Closes After MuslimsComplain It’s Detrimental to Faith, AP,April 14, 2007.]

Swapping Refugees

Australia and the United States haveagreed on a particularly stupid way todiscourage Third-World refugees fromarriving by boat: They will exchangethem. Any Haitians who manage to getto the United States will be sent DownUnder and any Iraqis who make it toAustralia will get to come here. Bureau-crats in both countries seem to think thatthe prospect of ending up in a differenthemisphere will make people stay home.The plan covers only legitimate refugees.

The Australian Labor Party’s immi-gration spokesman, Tony Burke, sees

through this silliness: “If you are in oneof the refugee camps around the world,there is no more attractive destinationthan to think you can get a ticket to theUSA. What Prime Minister JohnHoward is doing is saying to the people

around the world, if you wantto get to the US, the way to itis to hop a boat and go toChristmas Island (a remoteAustralian territory).”

A better policy would be forthe US to adopt Australia’smethods. It intercepts boat

people at sea and plonks themon the Pacific Island of Nauru,where they may sit for years.Since it started doing this in2001, Australia has had onlya trickle of boat people. Whenword gets out about the newdeal with the US, the tricklewill become a torrent. The firstpeople likely to be swappedare 83 Sri Lankan and eight

Burmese who will have to say good byto their home in Nauru and come to theUS. [Kathy Marks, Australia and US

Sign Pact to Swap Refugees, Indepen-dent (London), April 19, 2007.]

Here They Come!

Thousands of Hutu from Burundihave been living in camps in Tanzaniasince 1972, when the Tutsi drove themout of the country. Tutsi and Hutu wenton to slaughter an estimated one millionof each other in 1994. The US govern-ment now plans to invite up to 9,000 of

They caught one in Malaysia.



C of CCNational Conference

The Council of Conserva-tive Citizens will hold anational conference in

Greenville, South Carolina onJune 1-2, 2007.

Speakers include:Jared Taylor, American Re-

naissanceSonny Landham, ActorJames Edward, Radio HostCol. Robert Slimp (expert on

South Africa)Lt. Lou Calabro (European

American Issues Forum)

For information, please call(636) 940-8474 or

(843) 278-5081

these homeless Hutu to America. Thefirst 3,000 should arrive by the end of September, with another 5,000 in fiscal2008. “They will resettle all over thecountry,” says Deborah Stein, a program

manager for New York-based Episcopal

Migration Ministries. She says cities arechosen according to whether they canhandle the refugees’ “needs,” which areconsiderable. The Burundians have beenliving in primitive camps for more than30 years. Most have no more than agrade school education, and many areilliterate.

Chattanooga, Tennessee, is one of thelucky cities. It can count on at least 70Burundians, according to Anne Curtis of Bridge Refugee and Sponsorship Ser-vices. Since 1996, her agency has re-settled 600 refugees from Bosnia, Viet-

nam, Cuba, Liberia, Sudan, and othercountries—all in Chattanooga. [KarinaGonzales, Help Sought to Resettle Refu-gees Here, Chattanooga Times-FreePress, April 16, 2007.]

Maybe the Aussies would like a fewBurundians.

Cop Quotas

Two years ago, the British govern-ment announced that police forces in

England and Wales must be four percentnon-white, but the police have fallenshort: they are only 3.7 percent non-white. This year the government hasraised the goal for 2009 to seven per-

cent, a figure it says is“demanding but realis-tic.” The Association of

Chief Police Officers(ACPO) says that undercurrent employment lawthat goal cannot be metuntil 2020 at the earliest.The solution? Policechiefs want to change thelaw to allow quotas andblatant anti-white dis-crimination. As PeterFahy, Chief Constable of Cheshire explains, “If there is no change in thelaw, politicians, media

and the public will haveto accept that the goal of a representative work-force will take many moreyears than they mightwish.”

Trevor Phillips, the in-veterately anti-white headof the Commission forRacial Equality, opposesquotas but only because,

as a spokesman says, “these forms of reverse discrimination could actually in-crease community tensions, rather than

ease them.” The anti-racism sleuthsclaim quotas and preferences are notneeded; if the police would only over-come their racism they could attractplenty of non-white officers.

The Conservative Party sounds justlike the Commission for Racial Equal-ity. Nick Herbert, shadow police minis-ter, agrees that “greater efforts need tobe made to encourage black and ethnicminorities to join the police,” but thatpreferences are not the answer, since theywould be “divisive and counter-produc-tive, potentially increasing racial ten-

sion.” Not even the conservatives areprepared to say that racial preferencesare unfair to whites. [Nigel Morris, RowOver Quotas for Black and Asian Po-lice Officers, Independent (London),April 20, 2007.]

Death in Haiti

Thousands of people die of AIDS andmurder every year in Haiti, and the num-ber of corpses is driving up the cost of

funerals. The average burial now costs$540, more than most Haitians earn in ayear. Deforestation makes wooden cof-fins unaffordable for most families, andhas led to a market for second-hand cof-fins. Grave robbers are only too happyto supply them. Many bereaved nowsmash coffins to keep them from being

plundered and recycled. Others makecoffins out of papier-mâché.If someone does not die at home but

ends up at a morgue, relatives have to

pay to pick up the body. The cost runsfrom $27 for bodies the police or hospi-tal staff dropped off to $47 for bodiesmorgue workers had to pick up off thestreet. This is too much for the averagefamily, so most bodies go unclaimed andare dumped in mass graves.

The free market works even in Haiti.A professional funeral now costs somuch that a new industry has sprungup—freelance undertaking. “Sometimesyou can see the economic situation of the person and you can negotiate a lowerprice,” says self-styled “undertaker” CarlFanfan. “I’m human, too, so it affectsme when people want to bury a relativebut can’t pay.” [Stevenson Jacobs, InHaiti, Burying the Dead is a Luxury, AP,April 19, 2007.]

Burundian refugees. Check to see if your cityqualifies for resettlement.

Ω

Documents

200706 American Renaissance