A Credibility Test

A Credibility Test

Thomas Allen

The following is a test to decide if a person is credible and has a rudimentary knowledge of recent American political history. It is especially useful for politicians and political commentators. (This article is an expansion of the credibility test given in “More Political Thoughts.”)

Does the person believe or act as though he believes:

1. The official story of the Kennedy assassination. (Along with the many other flaws and anomalies of the official story, the person believes that Lee Harvey Oswald was a lone assassin who killed President Kennedy by firing three shots from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository. He believes that Oswald could fire three shots in six seconds and hit two men 200 feet away with a cheap, low-quality, defective rifle. Further, he believes that a single high-powered rifle bullet penetrated both Kennedy and Governor Connally causing seven wounds, shattering a rib and wrist bone, and emerging in almost pristine condition. Also, he must believe that all the eyewitnesses whose accounts contradict the official story deliberately lied. Moreover, he believes that the statements in the Warren Report that have subsequently been shown to be inaccurate or untrue are still true and accurate. On the other hand, he must ignore (1) evidence that more than three shots were fired, (2) the overwhelming evidence that shots were fired from the Grassy Knoll, (3) evidence of more than one rifle being used and more than one shooter, (4) the lack of evidence that places Oswald on the sixth floor of the Depository at the time of the shooting and the evidence that he was not on the sixth floor at that time, (5) no evidence that Oswald ever had possession of the rifle used in the assassination (moreover, the scope on the rifle was adjusted for a left-handed shooter; Oswald was right-handed), (6) a tree branch prevented a clear line of sight from the window of the sixth floor of the Depository, (7) Oswald never achieving marksmanship standard when he was in the Marines, (8) the paraffin test made on Oswald on the day of the assassination suggesting that he had not fired a rifle that day, (9) evidence that the FBI put Oswald’s finger prints on the murder weapon after he died, (10) the scientific evidence that different bullets struck Kennedy and Connally, (11) Connally’s claim that different bullets hit him and Kennedy, (12) the poor quality superficial autopsy, (13) the Dallas doctors claiming that Kennedy had a large hole in the right rear of his head while the Bethesda doctors claimed that the wound stretched from the upper side of the rear to the right front, (14) Kennedy’s body being wrapped in a white sheet and placed in an expensive bronze casket in Dallas for transport to Bethesda and arriving at Bethesda in a black zipper body bag inside a cheap military shipping casket, (15) changing the location of the entry wound between Kennedy’s shoulder blade that exited through his throat, which required the bullet to travel in an upward direction, by raising the entry wound to fit the official story, (16) the throat wound being smaller than the back wound, which suggests that the bullet entered the throat and exited the back. (17) evidence that three bullets hit Kennedy instead of two, and (18) the Commission not being allowed to see the autopsy photographs and X-rays. Moreover, he must ignore the Commission, FBI, and other federal agencies suppressing evidence that conflicted with the official story, changing evidence to support the official story, and harassing and intimidating witnesses whose testimony conflicted with the official story. Also, he must disagree with members of the Warren Commission who later questioned the conclusions of the Warren Report. Above all, he must believe that the Kennedy assassination involved no conspiracy.

2. The official governmental conspiracy theory of 9-11. (A gang of Muslims, who could hardly fly trainer aircraft, hijacked four passenger airplanes. They flew two into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, which caused the two buildings to collapse at near free-fall speed into their footprints. Somehow, they also caused Building 7 to collapse at near free-fall speed into its footprint. Moreover, they made an impossible turning maneuver to fly an airplane into the Pentagon so that they could avoid hitting the side of the building, which required no turn, where Rumsfeld’s office was. Instead, they made an impossible turn and hit the side of the building where an audit of the Department of Defense’s expenditures was occurring. Remarkably, they managed to do this by causing a hole in the building much smaller than their hijacked airplane and causing no damage to the adjacent lawn. If such miracles were not enough, they managed to create a fire hot enough to vaporize aluminum, greater than 4400̊F, yet cool enough not to incinerate human bodies, less than 1400̊F. Further, the hijackers caused several simulations of hijacked aircraft to occur while they carried out their dastardly deed. Moreover, they changed the standard operating procedures for intercepting hijacked airplanes. Additionally, the hijackers sent intercepting jets from airfields far enough away and at slow enough speeds so that they could not intercept the hijacked aircraft before they crashed into the buildings. Moreover, the United States have the most incompetent intelligence agencies that have ever existed throughout history [If this notion is rejected, then the other two choices are {1} high-ranking governmental officials knew that the attack was going to happen and let it happen or {2} high-ranking governmental officials collaborated in the attack.])

3. That the Democrats did not steal the 2020 presidential election but won it fairly. (Thus, the person believes that 81 million people hate America so much that they voted for its destruction by putting the great destroyer in office, who has done an excellent job in destroying the country.)

4. That White replacement is a hoax. (No program exists to replace Whites [Aryans, Homo albus] in Europe, the United States, and the White Anglophone countries with people of color: Negro [H. niger], Melanochroi [H. brunus], Turanian [H. luridus], Indo-Australian [H. australis], and  Khoisan [H. khoisanii]. [Being racial nihilists, most conservatives and libertarians, or albusphobes, most liberals and progressives, they refuse to acknowledge the facts that prove that White replacement is true.])

If a person answers “yes” to any of these statements, his credibility is questionable. If he answers “yes” to two or three, he has no credibility. If he answers “yes” to all four, he is ignorant beyond repair and is irredeemably stupid.

Copyright © 2022 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More political articles.

Black Replacement

Black Replacement

Thomas Allen

In “They’re Replacing You, Black America” (June 2, 2022, https://www.takimag.com/article/theyre-replacing-you-black-america-2/), Ann Coulter argues that immigrants are replacing Blacks and not Whites. As the following table shows, immigrants are not replacing Blacks. They are replacing Whites.

Coulter is a Dixiephobe and a Negrophile. With the possible exception of the American Negro, she is a racial nihilist who practices the new morality of sacrificing the races on the altar of humanity. Concerning the American Negro, she partially proclaims the old morality of racial preservation although she probably does not object to Blacks marrying outside their race, which destroys racial preservation.

Also, she believes that Republicans are the saviors of Blacks while Democrats are the enslavers of Blacks. Unfortunately, Blacks fail to recognize Republicans as their saviors and Democrats as their enslavers.

As the following table shows, the percentage of the White population has been declining since 1950. With the passage of the 1965 immigration act, the Regan amnesty, other acts and policies favorable to nonwhite immigrants, and the open-door policies of Clinton and the following administrations, the percentage of the White population has plummeted. On the other hand, except for 2020, the percentage of the Black population has been rising. Thus, immigrants are replacing Whites and not Blacks. (The non-Hispanic Whites percentage may be a better indicator of White replacement. Most Hispanics identify themselves as White although only about 20 percent are White. Except for Hispanics from the Caribbean, who are mostly Negroes and mulattoes, most Hispanics are Turanians [American Indians] and mestizoes.) Although the percentage of the Black population dropped in 2020, its total population rose. However, the White population dropped in total number in 2020. It fell from about 224 million in 2010 to about 204 million in 2020.

Coulter’s concern is about Blacks losing job opportunities to immigrants instead of Blacks falling behind in population. With some justification, she argues that immigrants, who are mostly people of color, are filling set-asides, quotas, and affirmative action jobs reserved for Blacks. (Apparently, employers have found that these immigrants are better and more competent workers than Blacks and that they satisfy the diversity and inclusiveness goals of discriminating against Whites — especially White males.)

Coulter claims that the purpose of the 1965 immigration act was to flood the country with cheap labor. (No, the real purpose was to genocide Whites.) She claims that employers have lost their source of cheap labor with the death of slavery and Jim Crow. (Slavery was dying because slave labor was becoming more expensive than free labor. That is, slaves were losing to the cheap labor of free Whites. Under Jim Crow, the Black middle class was rapidly growing, which is why the communists sought to destroy Jim Crow. Blacks had to provide services for Blacks that they could not readily obtain from Whites.)

Coulter asserts that “black academics, intellectuals and activists have been screaming from the rooftops about the devastating impact of mass third world immigration on African Americans.” (These Black academics, intellectuals, and activists must be an extremely small minority of the Black leadership as one rarely hears them.) Yet, most self-appointed Black leaders and politicians support unlimited third-world immigration.

Although Coulter moans about these third-world immigrants replacing Black workers, she places none of the blame on Blacks. Perhaps, if Blacks showed enough ambition to abandon their criminal and welfare state of mind, were more responsible, acquired a basic education not based on equity, developed a better attitude, and disposed of their entitlement mentality, they would be more employable and marketable and could successfully compete with third-world immigrants. After all, with set-asides, quotas, and affirmative action, the system is rigged in favor of Blacks and against Whites. Unfortunately, for Blacks, nonwhite immigrants have learned to game the system, and employers prefer them to satisfy their antiwhite agendas because they are more competent than Blacks.

Nevertheless, the real blame for replacing both White and Black workers with third-world people of color lies with the political leaders and the people who support them. With the 1965 immigration act, they opened the United States to third-world nonwhite immigrants. Further, they have encouraged ever-increasing numbers of nonwhite immigrants with various laws and policies.

Further, Coulter complains about Blacks losing their political power to immigrants. (Although nearly all these immigrants are people of color, most have no use for Blacks. For the most part, their opinion of Blacks is lower than that of the stereotypical Klansman. Even Black immigrants have a low opinion of American Blacks.)

Democrats take Blacks for granted. Blacks are going to support the Democratic Party no matter how poorly the Democrats treat them. (This attitude is not restricted to Blacks and Democrats. Most White conservatives still support the Republican Party despite the poor treatment the Republican leadership, especially at the federal level, gives them.)

Pessimistically, Coulter concludes with “without the tiniest sliver of hope that historic black America will ever notice that the Democratic Party is screwing them six ways from Sunday.”  Thus, by stating that Blacks are too stupid to learn that the Democratic Party is using them, Coulter proclaims the low intelligence of Blacks. (Like many Blacks who are too stupid to realize that they are being used, many Whites also suffer from this handicap.) She chastises Republicans who waste resources trying to win the Black vote.

In any event, Whites are suffering much more from the large-scale immigration of nonwhites than are Blacks. This nonwhite immigration is slowly genociding Whites.

 

Appendix. Glenn Beck

Glenn Beck, who like Coulter, is a racial nihilist and a Dixiephobe, agrees with the progressives about White replacement. On his radio program, he declared that White replacement was a hoax, a conspiracy theory. Obviously, he has not looked at the US population statistics for some decades. ("Conspiracy theory" is a derogatory term used to smear someone without offering any proof that he is wrong.)

Cochran’s Law Lexicon defines conspiracy as “an unlawful combination or agreement between two or more persons to carry into effect a purpose hurtful to some individual, or class, or the public at large.” Thus, when two or more people collaborate to carry out an act that harms an individual, class of people, or the public, a conspiracy exists. White replacement requires more than one person to carry out, and it is harmful to White Americans as it ultimately genocides them. Therefore, White replacement is a conspiracy fact and not a conspiracy theory.

Copyright © 2022 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More social issues articles.

The Threat to America

The Threat to America

Thomas Allen

The following identifies several threats to the United States. The threats are listed in order of importance.

1. America’s leaders. American leaders, which include political, business, religious, and academic leaders, are the greatest threat to the United States. They are destroying the country with wokeism, political correctness, multiculturalism, and multiracialism and with a growing police state and welfare states. Further, they are deliberately destroying the economy. Also, America’s leaders promote policies that genocide the White race.

2. China. Second is China. America is rapidly becoming an economic colony of China. With America’s leaders destroying the country from within, China will soon become the world’s sole superpower. Then, following the US post-cold-war example, China will impose its will on the United States and establish Chinese hegemony. 

3. Latin Americans. Third are the nonwhite Latin American immigrants. Nonwhite Latin American immigrants, both legal and illegal, are flooding the country. These nonwhite Latin Americans, people of color, cannot be assimilated, and many do not want to assimilate. These nonwhite immigrants cannot truly and fully assimilate without destroying themselves biologically. (White Latin Americans can assimilate and most want to assimilate.) These nonwhite immigrants are changing the demographics and culture of the United States.

4. Zionist Jews. Fourth are Jews, especially Zionist Jews. Their control of and influence on politics, the economy, academia, entertainment, and the media far exceed their numbers. Moreover, Jews have captured and control most of the Christian Churches in the United States. Consequently, America has an Israel-first foreign policy. Thus, America’s leaders willingly destroy America for the benefit of Israel. (Although they lack the power and influence of Zionist Jews, Christian Zionists are almost as destructive as Zionist Jews. If they had the power and influence of the Zionist Jews, Christian Zionists would be as destructive as the Zionist Jews.)

5. Asian Indians. Fifth are Asian Indians, nearly all of whom are people of color, Melanochroi. Their numbers and influence are growing rapidly, and they are given advantages not available to most White immigrants and even White Americans. Like most Latin Americans, Asian Indians cannot truly and fully assimilate without destroying themselves biologically. Moreover, next to the Jewish Cabala, India is the source of most of the cults in the United States. Because it is the most subtle threat, it is one of the most dangerous.

6. Muslims. Sixth are the Muslims. They are a threat because American leaders have made them a threat and in the process enriched the military-industrial and security-industrial complexes, which control America’s leaders. With no navy worthy of the name and an air force that cannot cross the Atlantic, they cannot attack the United States from without. Muslims can only threaten America when they are allowed into the country. (Muslims did not plan, organize, orchestrate, or carry out 9-11. They were just the patsies. The primary purpose of 9-11 was to establish a police state, protect Israeli imperialism by destroying its enemies, and, most important, transfer more power and wealth to the rich and powerful.)

7. Russia. Seventh is Russia. The only real threat that Russia offers is its nuclear arsenal. If America does not threaten Russia, Russia is no threat to the United States. If America makes Russia believe that its only choice is to surrender to the United States and die, it may strike with its nuclear weapons. Such an attack would utterly destroy the United States, which many of America’s leaders seem to want.

The second through the seventh threats depend on the first threat. America’s leaders have built up China’s economy while dismantling America’s. American leaders have allowed massive immigration of nonwhites from Latin America, India, and other nonwhite countries. They have even imported these people to replace White American workers. Moreover, American leaders have surrendered to the Zionist lobby. Further, American leaders continue to threaten Russia. Worst of all, American leaders have brainwashed many Americans to promote and even demand their own annihilation.

Copyright © 2022 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More political articles.

The Spirit of Man

The Spirit of Man

Thomas Allen

In “The Soul,” I showed that the Hebrews believed that the soul was mortal and ceased conscious existence when the body died. On the other hand, pagans believed that the soul was immortal. When the body died, the soul was liberated from the body to continue conscious existence elsewhere. In that article, I mention the spirit of man in passing and that like the soul, it ceased to exist when the body died.

In Babylonian Connection Between Ancient and Modern Religions (Phoenix, Arizona:  America's Promise, 1978), Stephen E. Jones gives an excellent explanation of the spirit of man (pages 20-23). A summary of his explanation follows.

Some theologians argue that the spirit of man is that part of human nature that allies with God. Also, some identify the spirit of man as what makes man a rational being. Nearly all believe that the spirit like the soul is immortal and continues to exist beyond the death of the body.

However, the Hebrew understanding of the spirit of man is the breath of God that animates the soul, which gives the body life. Thus, the soul of man contains the life-giving spirit of God. That is, the breath of life is the spirit of life. The Hebrew word for “breath” and “spirit” is the same word.

And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. (Gen. 2:7)

According to Genesis 2:7, God gave man whom he formed from dust life when He breathed the breath or spirit of life into his nostrils.

(For my life is yet whole in me, And the spirit of God is in my nostrils); (Job 27:3)

As stated by Job, a person lives if he continues to breathe. Once he ceases to breathe, his body, soul, and spirit die and cease to have any conscience existence.

According to the Hebrews, man is not a spirit. Man is composed of a body (flesh) and soul (blood). His spirit is merely the air in his lungs. When one breathes, the lungs give life (spirit) to the blood (soul). Then, the blood transfers life-giving air to the body. Thus, the spirit gives life to a person, but it is not the actual person. Like the air that a person breathes, the spirit is something that the person uses, but it is not the person.

At death, the body, soul, and spirit return to the original state where they wait until the resurrection. Upon death, the body returns to dust; the soul returns to Sheol (Hades), i.e., nonexistence; the spirit returns to God from where it came. Consequently, death is a reversal of creation.

At death, the spirit (breath) separates from the soul (blood). “When the breathing stops, the blood loses its life supply, and both flesh and blood begin to corrupt in death. The air (spirit) neither lives nor dies; it simply gives life for a season and then returns from whence it came” (pp. 21-22). 

The Bible describes death as follows:

and the dust returneth to the earth as it was, and the spirit returneth unto God who gave it. (Eccl. 12:7)

Thou hidest thy face, they are troubled; Thou takest away their breath [spirit], they [the people themselves] die, And return to their dust. (Ps. 104:29)

According to Acts, David is not in heaven. (For David ascended not into the heavens: . . . [Acts 2:34]) Therefore, “that the spirit returning to God does not imply that the person goes to heaven” (p. 22).

Likewise, when Jesus said, “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said this, he gave up the ghost” (Luke 23:46), his spirit went to God, but he did not spend three days in heaven with his Father. John 20:17 proves that he did not go to heaven when he died. Jesus said to Mary, “Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended unto the Father.” Furthermore, Peter states that Jesus’ soul went to Hades, oblivion, where it had no conscience existence (Acts 2:31). 

Thus, neither man’s soul nor spirit is immortal. They cease existence when the body dies. Only when God resurrects the body do they return as they returned to Jesus when God raised Jesus from the dead.

Copyright © 2022 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More religious articles.

No Longer a Federation of Republics

 No Longer a Federation of Republics

Thomas Allen

The United States are no longer a federation of republics. That federation and the original Constitution died with Lincoln’s War. Now the United States is (notice the change in the verb from the previous sentence) a judgeocracy with an imperial president and an impotent Congress.

John Marshall, Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court, laid the foundation for a judgeocracy. President Abraham Lincoln established the imperial presidency with his war to suppress Southern independence. Presidents Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt carried the imperial presidency to completion.

By the middle of the twentieth century, the judicial coup d’etat had been completed. Chief Justice Earl Warren completed what Marshall had started. Now the United States are a judgeocracy with an imperial president.

Under judicial rule, federal judges under the supervision of the Supreme Court have usurped the legislative authority of the State legislatures. Federal courts have absolute control over the States even to the point of forcing State governments to levy taxes to spend on a judge’s predilection. Federal judges even intervene on purely political issues like drawing boundaries for legislative districts. The States have been reduced to little more than personal fiefdoms of federal judges.

Also, federal judges under the supervision of the Supreme Court have usurped the legislative authority of Congress. Judges, especially those on the Supreme Court, have usurped the power to rewrite laws that Congress has enacted to suit their preferences. If Congress enacts a law that they do not like, they veto it. If Congress fails to enact a law that the Supreme Court desires, it will enact such a law with a ruling on a related issue. Thus, the Supreme Court is an unaccountable legislative body. 

Moreover, the Supreme Court has even usurped the authority to amend the Constitution — however, without changing the words of the Constitution. Why bother getting two-thirds of each house of Congress and three-fourths of the States to agree on an amendment when five judges can amend it with their rulings?

What does the Supreme Court use as a guide for amending, vetoing, and promulgating laws? It certainly is not the Constitution. Instead of the Constitution, the Justices of the Supreme Court use their personal biases and prejudices.

Thus, the Supreme Court has elevated itself above the Constitution. It has claimed the sole and final power to decide what the Constitution means, and it amends the Constitution with its rulings to conform with its whims. Whatever the Supreme Court rules is the supreme law of the land. Its rulings are superior to the Constitution. (The Supreme Court gives the Constitution only cursory and perfunctory notice.)

Federal judges no longer seem able to distinguish between the judicial function and the legislative function. Since Marshall, personal biases and personal preferences are much more of a guide in their ruling than is the Constitution and even the clear wording and intent of the law.

Similarly, the executive branch has usurped the legislative authority of Congress  — often with Congress delegating its legislative power to the executive branch. Congress has created numerous regulatory agencies that have the authority to issues regulations that have the effect of law. Further, the President often issues executive orders that have the effect of law. Consequently, Congress enervates its vitality.

Thus, the United States became a judgeocracy with an imperial president, an impotent Congress, and emasculated States. The federation of republican States (nations) that the Constitution established died long ago never to be resurrected.

Copyright © 2022 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More political articles.

The Effects of School Integration

The Effects of School Integration

Thomas Allen

Adherents of school integration promote the integration of public schools to raise the self-esteem of Blacks and, by that, eliminate the academic gap between Blacks and Whites. Furthermore, integration should lead to better race relations.

At least the self-esteem of Blacks has been raised. Now, no other racial group approaches the self-esteem of Blacks. Yet, the academic gap between Blacks and Whites remains as far apart as ever. Moreover, race relations have only improved by Whites becoming self-hating racial nihilists, many of whom are consumed with political correctness and wokeism. Many Blacks despise Whites more than ever. (How can any self-respecting Black, or any other person, respect any White person who hates his own race so much that he wants to genocide it?)

Along with its failures to close the academic gap, integration has brought many other undesirable effects. The following is a list of some of these effects.

– Integration has caused many Whites to flee cities in large numbers. As a result, many major cities have become majority-run Black cities with the accompanying deterioration.

– Integration has increased interracial marriages, and, thus, is genociding the American Negro.

– In integrated schools, Black girls suffer from White girls taking away potential boyfriends. (These White girls need to explain why they want to genocide Blacks.)

– Once the student body becomes about 20-percent Black, Black culture and customs begin to dominate, and the school is lowered to the level of Blacks.

– Instead of Whites making Blacks better students by becoming a model for Blacks, Blacks become a model for Whites. Consequently, many Whites begin acting like Blacks.

– Although integration is supposed to raise the academic standards of Blacks, it has failed to do so. Not only has it failed to raise the academic standards of Blacks, but it has also often lowered the academic standards of Whites.

– Blacks in integrated schools often have lower test scores than Blacks in predominantly Black schools. Thus, Blacks in integrated schools often feel more intellectually inferior to Whites than do Blacks in predominately Black schools.

– Although integration offers some academic advantages to the more intelligent Blacks, it demoralizes the less intelligent Blacks. (The less intelligent Blacks far outnumber the more intelligent Blacks.)

– Though standard test scores for Blacks have risen during the era of integrated schools, the rise was similar for Blacks in integrated schools and Blacks in predominantly Black schools. Therefore, integration is not the cause. Nevertheless, the gap between Black and White students remains about the same no matter whether Blacks are in integrated schools or predominantly Black schools.

– At least, integration has shown that Blacks do not need to be in integrated schools to learn. Further, they do not need to sit next to a White person to learn. They can learn just as well, if not better, in a predominantly Black school. (Although they will not admit it, most integrationists believe that Blacks are so inferior that they cannot learn unless they sit next to Whites.)

– Integration has led to a large number of Blacks dropping out of school before they graduate — especially when they attend schools in White neighborhoods. 

– Integration leads to the resentment of Black parents about their children being disciplined more often than White students.

– Also, integration has reduced role models for academic success for Blacks because fewer Black adults teach Black students. Often, Black students do not relate to White teachers.

– Frequently, integration removes teachers from the neighborhood in which they teach, i.e., the teachers live in one neighborhood and teach in another. Thus, teachers are less involved with their students. Under segregation, Black teachers were part of the Black community, remained in contact with parents, and provided Blacks with the support that they needed.

– Integration destroys community cohesion, especially for Blacks, as students are assigned to schools outside their community. This is also true for Blacks when Whites are assigned in large numbers to previously Black schools.

– Moreover, integration has led to school systems working so hard to achieve integration that they neglect the children.

– Integration has taught many Blacks that integration is not necessarily the best means for achieving quality education for their children. However, integrationists, White and Black, such as the NAACP types, have never learned this lesson — probably, because of their low opinion of the common Black.

– Also, integration leads to the disdainfulness of Blacks for the paternalistic attitude of White integrationists, who believe that Blacks cannot learn unless Whites are in the classroom and cannot succeed without the company of Whites.

– Further, integration raises the racial consciousness of Blacks and causes Whites to have a more negative attitude toward Blacks. Accordingly, integration reinforces Blacks’ stereotypes of Whites and Whites’ stereotypes of Blacks. (Studies have shown that 75 percent of racial stereotypes are at least partially accurate and 50 percent are completely accurate.)

– Although integration has failed to reduce White prejudice toward Blacks, it has increased Black prejudice toward Whites.

– Overall, Whites students have suffered from integration. Black students are a bad influence on Whites. Moreover, academic standards have been lowered to accommodate Blacks, who on average are less intelligent than Whites.

For the most part, nearly all the predictions about the great results of school integration that the integrationists made before the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 was enacted have turned out to be wrong. The opposite of what the integrationists predicted has come to past, which the opponents of the law predicted would happen.

Reference

Wolters, Raymond. Race and Education, 1954-2007. Columbia, Missouri: University of Missouri Press, 2008.

Copyright © 2022 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More social issues articles.

Gottfried and Equality

Gottfried and Equality

Thomas Allen

In “Flawed Reasoning on CRT,” Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture, September 2021, page 9, Paul Gottfried discusses equality. This article is somewhat confusing —at least to me. At times, he writes as though he favors equality of opportunity while at other times he seems to believe that equality of opportunity is unachievable because of genetics. Thus, to seek to achieve equality of opportunity leads to a loss of liberty. (He is ambivalent about genetics. Most of the time he appears to hold that genetics are irrelevant — not so much in this article as in others.) Moreover, he seems obsessed with equality but writes that people should not be obsessed with it.

Gottfried writes, “In America we are committed to the proposition that ‘all men are created equal’ [Lincoln’s assertion].” He continues, “America stands for equality of opportunity [the neoconservative position], not equality of results [the progressive position]. . . .” Since he is not a fan of Lincoln and disagrees with many of the neoconservatives’ positions, that he would support their positions on equality seems strange. His opposition to equality of results is in keeping with his political philosophy.

Yet, he opposes the obsession with equality and making it the overriding goal of the country. He prefers “a government under the law providing its citizens with ordered liberty.”

According to him, until the country “achieves a more level playing field,” equality of results is a more correct answer than equality of opportunity. However, he fails or refuses to recognize the importance of genetics. Genetics prevents a level playing field.

Equality of opportunity is more of a chimera than equality of results or equity as it is now commonly called. Does a five-foot, fat, klutz have the same opportunity of becoming a professional basketball center as does a seven-foot, agile, athlete? Does a dimwit have the same opportunity of becoming a doctor or engineer with a Ph.D. as does a genius? The answer to both questions is “no” although proponents of equality of opportunity would have to argue otherwise. For the klutz, their solution is more training though training will not overcome his genetically caused height disadvantage. For the dimwit, their solution is more education although education will not overcome his genetically caused low IQ. 

However, the proponents of equality of results can give the illusion of equality by forcing a professional basketball team to use the klutz as its starting center. Also, they can force a company to hire the dimwit as an engineer or doctor instead of the genius. Moreover, they can force the company to use the work of the dimwit engineer or doctor.

Genetics guarantees that some will have an advantage over others at the starting gate. At conception, genetics predestine some people to be tall or geniuses and others to be short or dimwits; most fall in between. Environment decides how people will use their physical and mental abilities or to compensate for their lack of these abilities. Even then, genetics influence the how.

Only despotism can retard and suppress the more gifted and advance and raise the less gifted. But even here genetics will dominate. Genetics give some people the advantage of becoming a despot. Thus, genetics along with opportunity will be a major factor in deciding who will be the despot. 

Where a despot exists, equality cannot exist. Of necessity, despotism divides society into two classes: the ruler and the ruled. Only a few have the opportunity of being the despot; thus, equality of opportunity does not exist. Moreover, equality of results cannot exist in a despotism since the ruler has the power and the ruled are his slaves, which is a highly unequal result.

People should learn to live with the hand that Deity, fate, or nature dealt them and cease being obsessed with equality — be it equality of opportunity or equality of results. Their lives would be much happier.

An obsession with equality leads to envy, and envy leads to an obsession with equality. Envy is highly destructive and results in misery. Consequently, God commands people not to envy.

Copyright © 2021 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More political articles.