American Renaissance
Previous Story       Next Story       View Comments       Send This Page       Date Archives       Category Archives

Madison Grant and the Racialist Movement

More news stories on American History

George McDaniel, American Renaissance, December 1997

Perhaps more than any other man, Madison Grant created what we might call the “racialist moment” in American history. This was the period beginning approximately with the administration of Theodore Roosevelt (who wrote that the Negro was a member of “a perfectly stupid race”) and continuing through the administration of Warren Harding, during which the country discarded its remaining, melting-pot sentimentalism about blacks and foreign immigration. The period also saw the emergence of a new science, eugenics, which promised to banish inherited evils. This era of explicit, intellectual racialism lasted until approximately the Great Depression, then withered under Franklin Roosevelt’s massive shift to the Left, and finally collapsed during the war with Nazi Germany.

grant
Madison Grant (1865–1937)
 

Madison Grant (1865–1937) worked tirelessly for the racialist movement for almost this entire period. He joined, chaired, and often founded its organizations. He counted among his closest associates U.S. Presidents, top industrialists, best-selling writers, and some of the greatest scientists of the time. And he wrote two of the seminal works of American racialism: The Passing of the Great Race (1916) and The Conquest of a Continent (1933).

Grant was born in New York in 1865, just as the first of the modern white-against-white conflicts was closing. He was descended from Jacobites who came to the colonies from Scotland after the defeat of “Bonnie Prince Charlie” in the Forty-Five uprising (1745), and throughout his life retained the Jacobite brand of conservative fire. He was graduated from Yale in 1887 and received a law degree from Columbia in 1890.

The Passing of the Great Race was published in 1916 to immediate popular success. It established Grant as an authority in anthropology, and laid the groundwork for his research in the emerging science of eugenics. It was read by presidents, dictators, scientists, and common people alike, and even today—excoriated as it is—it has much to teach. The impact of the book can be understood only in the cultural milieu in which it appeared.

quotation1

Immigration just after the War Between the States proceeded at great speed. The decade of the 1880s saw the arrival of 5,246,613 immigrants, and in 1882 alone, 788,992 were admitted. Two hundred twenty thousand Chinese came from 1854 to 1882. Subsiding a bit in the nineties, the influx rose again after the turn of the century, averaging over 800,000 arrivals each year between 1900 and 1914. Most of these were immigrants from parts of the world unfamiliar to Americans: Russia, Poland, Austria-Hungary, Italy, the Balkans, and Turkey. Many newcomers brought Marxist and anarchist ideas alien to the old American stock.

Just as it does today, the American identity faced a two-pronged threat: a large influx of aliens and the presence of a large Negro element. Negro migration to the Northern industrial cities brought a slow awakening to the entire country of the true nature of the race problem, and Thomas Dixon’s 1905 novel, The Clansman, was one of the first works in the new century to focus on it. The book’s sympathetic account of the first Ku Klux Klan encouraged a reappraisal of often-sentimental notions about blacks.

In a sense, this reappraisal came to a head in August, 1908, in Lincoln’s own Springfield, Illinois. A black habitual criminal attacked a white girl in her bedroom and, while being pursued by her father, turned and killed him with a razor. At least one other attack on a white woman was also reported, and the white people responded by killing two blacks and burning down a crime-ridden black neighborhood called the “Badlands.” Thousands of local blacks fled Springfield. It was this event that inspired the creation of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People in Springfield in 1909.

In 1915, a new entertainment medium widened the audience for the racialist message when D.W. Griffith debuted his film masterpiece, Birth of a Nation. Based upon The Clansman, and, to some degree, on Dixon’s 1902 novel, The Leopard’s Spots, this movie was hailed as a technical triumph even by its harshest critics. Nevertheless, the NAACP, along with other black and some Jewish organizations, picketed the movie and threatened violence in the cities where it opened.

The success of the film was in some doubt when Dixon contacted his old Johns Hopkins classmate, President Woodrow Wilson, and arranged a special showing at the White House. Wilson is said to have leapt to his feet, exclaiming, “It is like writing history with lightning. And my only regret is that it is all so terribly true.”

With the news that the President loved it, audiences flocked to see Birth of a Nation. During its opening in Atlanta, William J. Simmons announced the founding of the second Ku Klux Klan, in nearby Stone Mountain, Georgia. This Klan organization went on to sweep the country, becoming especially strong in the Midwest.

The Passing of the Great Race was published the next year, in 1916. Grant intended it as a call to American whites to counter the dangers both from blacks and non-traditional immigration. Adopting the then-popular racial taxonomy of William Z. Ripley in The Races of Europe, Grant describes the three European subraces of Nordic, Alpine, and Mediterranean. As was common in his day, he unabashedly favored the Nordic and went to great pains to contrast Nordic civilization and traits with that of other races and subraces. For example, he faulted Nordic, altruistic devotion to blacks and other unsuccessful groups, a devotion that always proves self-destructive.

Grant concluded that America should abandon a largely open-door immigration policy. He favored a eugenics program that would promote the Nordic race and discourage the expansion of the colored races in the white world. In particular, he condemned miscegenation.

quotaton2

It is worth noting that one of the reasons Grant and other racialists opposed the new immigration was that it brought alien ideologies. The First World War had seen the triumph of Bolshevism, and continuing immigration from Eastern Europe brought Marxists. Like most racialists, Grant saw socialism as unfit for Nordics. When he was helping found the Galton Society in 1918, he wrote to the other organizers: “My proposal is the organization of an anthropological society . . . confined to native Americans, who are anthropologically, socially, and politically sound, no Bolsheviki need apply.”

The Passing of the Great Race became an immediate best-seller, with new editions in 1918, 1920, and 1921, multiple printings, and translations into German, French, and Norwegian.

It was reviewed favorably by Science, the journal of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and by periodicals as diverse as the Journal of Heredity and The Saturday Evening Post. The editor of the Post commissioned a series of articles on immigration in a similar vein, and in an editorial in the May 7, 1921, issue wrote: “Two books in particular that every American should read if he wishes to understand the full gravity of our present immigration problem: Mr. Madison Grant’s The Passing of the Great Race and Dr. Lothrop Stoddard’s The Rising Tide of Color. . . . These books should do a vast amount of good if they fall into the hands of readers who can face without wincing the impact of new and disturbing ideas.”

The Passing of the Great Race did indeed fall into the hands of such readers, turning up in the personal libraries of some of the most important figures of the day. It was typical, for example, that Dr. Rupert Blue, Surgeon General of the United States, gave a copy personally to Sir Henry Wellcome the British pharmaceutical manufacturer.

Grant was not alone in sounding the alarm. Some of the other books published during this period include: Mankind at the Crossroads by E.G. Conklin (1914); America’s Greatest Problem: The Negro by Major R.W. Shufeldt (1915); The Rising Tide of Color Against White World Supremacy by Lothrop Stoddard (1920, Introduction by Grant); Race and National Solidarity by Charles Josey (1923) (reviewed in AR, Aug. 1992); Applied Eugenics by Paul Popenoe and Roswell Johnson (1923); and The Fruit of the Family Tree by Alfred E. Wiggam (1924). These were all intended for a mass audience, but academic textbooks soon joined them, including Genetics and Eugenics by W.E. Castle (1916) and Evolution, Genetics, and Eugenics by H.H. Newman (1921).

The effect was felt at both the state and federal level. Twenty-four states passed laws encouraging sterilization of those who were retarded, insane, or had criminal records. At the Federal level, in 1921, Albert Johnson, head of the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, began a series of hearings on immigration. He appointed Harry Laughlin, who in 1922 would be one of Grant’s co-founders of the American Eugenics Society, as an expert witness on eugenics. In 1922, Laughlin reported extensively on racial differences in IQ as measured by the new army intelligence test.

In 1923, Grant’s close friend Henry Fairfield Osborn, the famous paleontologist who named “tyrannosaurus rex,” spoke enthusiastically about intelligence testing: “We have learned once and for all that the Negro is not like us.”

capitol
Congress restricts immigration.
 

This was precisely the kind of thing Grant and others had been saying for years. These ideas helped pass the Johnson Act of 1924, which established national origin immigration quotas of 2 percent of the number of foreign-born already in America as determined by the census of 1890. This greatly reduced the flow of immigrants from non-traditional sources, a policy that remained essentially unchanged until 1965.

Grant called the act a “new Declaration of Independence,” and his entry in The Dictionary of American Biography credits him with helping it pass. In its 1937 obituary, the New York Times said of Grant’s book: “Besides being a recognized book on anthropology, it has often been called to Congressional attention in the passage of restrictive immigration laws. . . . Mr. Grant . . . helped frame the Johnson Restriction Act of 1924.”

Eugenics

Grant was active throughout the 1920s, serving as president of both the Immigration Restriction League and the Eugenics Research Association. He was also treasurer of one of the most important events in the history of eugenics, the Second Eugenics Congress of 1921. This event continued the pattern of the First Eugenics Congress, which had been held in London in 1912, with Winston Churchill as one of the sponsors and at which Prime Minister Arthur Balfour delivered the inaugural address. The second congress was hosted by the American Museum of Natural History in New York. More than 300 delegates came from Europe, Latin America, Asia, Australia and New Zealand. No German scientists were invited because of the policy of ostracism that continued after the war.

Among the notables in attendance were future President Herbert Hoover, Alexander Graham Bell (the Congress’s honorary president), conservationist and future Governor of Pennsylvania, Gifford Pinchot, and Leonard Darwin, son of Charles Darwin. Henry Fairfield Osborn, director of the museum, was president. Harry Laughlin was in charge of exhibits, and Lothrop Stoddard handled publicity. One hundred eight papers were presented on topics ranging from plant and animal genetics to anthropology and political science. The conference signaled the vitality of a young science that was nevertheless destined to die an early death.

Madison Grant continued to lobby for immigration control even after the passage of the Johnson Act. In 1927, he and other eugenicists signed a “Memorial on Immigration Quotas,” urging the President and Congress to extend “the quota system to all countries of North and South America . . . in which the population is not predominantly of the white race.”

Grant continued to write. In 1930, along with Lothrop Stoddard, Harry Laughlin, Charles Davenport, Paul Popenoe, and Henry Fairfield Osborn, and others, he contributed to The Alien in Our Midst, subtitled Selling Our Birthright for a Mess of Pottage.

The book was Grant’s idea and—like Conquest a few years later—was written to defend the 1924 immigration act. It included essays on race and immigration from both contemporary writers and from great Americans of the past like Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, James Madison, and George Washington. The book was widely distributed to legislators and editors by the American Coalition of Patriotic Societies.

In 1933, Grant’s second major work, The Conquest of a Continent, appeared. In it, he explained why he wrote the book:

“A controversy immediately arose over this new basis [the national origins immigration quotas], as it was to the interest of every national and religious group of aliens now here to exaggerate the importance and size of its contribution to the population of the country, especially in Colonial times. . . . The purpose of this opposition was to warp public opinion in regard to the merits of various national groups and to exaggerate the non-Anglo-Saxon elements in the old Colonial population. This book is an effort to make an estimate of the various elements, national and racial, existing in the present population of the United States and to trace their arrival and subsequent spread.”

He then embarks on what Henry Fairfield Osborn in the introduction calls the “first racial history of . . . any nation.” Especially interesting today is Grant’s analysis of the Negro problem. He writes: “Among the various outland elements now in the United States which threaten in various degrees our national unity, the most important is the Negro.” He discusses several proposed solutions.

First, “slow amalgamation with the Whites,” he rejects immediately, arguing that this would “produce a racial chaos such as ruined the Roman Empire.” He considers repatriation at somewhat greater length, but rejects this as well, for reasons no longer applicable in our time: “Today, [repatriation to Africa] is not possible, because Africa, with the exception of Liberia, is under the control of white states, which certainly would not welcome such an enormous addition to their own color problem. . . .”

The third solution Grant considers is the establishment of a separate black nation within the territory of the United States. This he tends to reject because it would involve the abandonment of large sections of the South, but he admits that something similar had already occurred in some areas, both in America and, especially, in the West Indies:

“This has actually happened in some places along the lower Mississippi River, where the numbers of the Negroes have become so overwhelming that the few remaining Whites have simply moved out and abandoned the district to them. It has happened and is happening in the West Indies. Haiti and Santo Domingo have been entirely turned over to Negroes and other examples of West Indian Islands almost abandoned to Negroes can be found.”

In the final analysis, Grant has no easy answers to the problem. He urges states to adopt laws prohibiting intermarriage and he castigates Christian churches in the North for “trying to break down the social barriers between Negro and White.” Social separation is paramount, he says, and to that end public opinion “might well stop exalting the Mulatto and thereby putting its stamp of approval on miscegenation. Negroes should be encouraged to respect their own racial integrity.” And, finally, contraception should be made “universally available to them.”

Perhaps because Passing of the Great Race had been so influential, Conquest of a Continent provoked an immediate storm of opposition. On December 13, 1933, the director of the Anti-Defamation League, Richard E. Gutstadt, sent the following letter to the publishers of a number of Jewish periodicals:

“Gentlemen:

“Scribner & Sons have just published a book by Madison Grant entitled ‘The Conquest of a Continent.’ It is extremely antagonistic to Jewish interests. Emphasized throughout is the ‘Nordic superiority’ theory, and the utter negation of any ‘melting pot’ philosophy with regard to America.

“We are interested in stifling the sale of this book. We believe that this can be best accomplished by refusing to be stampeded into giving it publicity. Every review or public criticism of the book of this character brings it to the attention of many who would otherwise know nothing of it. This results in added sales. The less discussion there is concerning it, the more sales resistance will be created.

“We therefore appeal to you to refrain from comment on this book, which will undoubtedly be brought to your attention sooner or later. It is our conviction that a general compliance with this request will sound the warning to other publishing houses against engaging in this type of venture.”

In fact, Grant wrote very little about Jews, noting only his view that they were of Central European, Khazar origin: “It is doubtful whether there is a single drop of the old Palestinian, Semitic-speaking Hebrew blood among these East European Jews.”

Nevertheless, by this time, Hitler had begun consolidating power in Germany and his excesses were undermining eugenics and scientific racial theory. The New York Times, in its review of Conquest, was quick to make the connection: “Substitute Aryan for Nordic and a good deal of Mr. Grant’s argument would lend itself without much difficulty to the support of some recent pronouncements in Germany.”

Grant actually had occasion to caution others about the National Socialist government. In 1934, he wrote to Laughlin warning that American eugenicists should be careful in their relations with Germany and should “proceed cautiously in endorsing” the actions being taken by the German government.

elk

Conservationism

Another aspect of Grant’s career that he considered intimately related to his work in racial science was conservationism, and his involvement with nature and wildlife was long and varied. Just as with the racialist movement, he was ever the leader. In 1895, along with Theodore Roosevelt and a handful of others, he co-founded the New York Zoological Society (now the Wildlife Conservation Society), and served as its secretary until 1924. He helped found the American Bison Society in 1905; was president of the Bronx Zoo for many years; was co-founder and president of the Bronx Parkway Commission (which built the road to the Zoo); co-founder of the Save the Redwoods League; and a founding member of the Boone and Crockett Club, which helped establish Yellowstone National Park.

In an excellent essay in the April, 1995 issue of The Mankind Quarterly, Roger Pearson writes about the link between conservation and racial thinking:

“The success of the conservationist movement in the United States at this vital period in the nation’s history was facilitated by the sympathy of President Theodore Roosevelt, who was deeply concerned about the threat to the quality of both the natural and human stock of America. . . .

“With Madison Grant serving as secretary and later as president, the Boone and Crockett Club was largely comprised of eugenicists and eugenics sympathizers. Renowned as one of the more active members of the eugenics movement, and especially for his efforts to preserve the ‘Old American’ component of the American population, Grant worked just as ardently to preserve the natural heritage for future generations of Americans and should be remembered always with honor as one of the nation’s greatest benefactors.”

Despite disavowals by American eugenicists, Nazism had already begun to erode support for the eugenics movement by the 1930s. German policies played into the hands of people like the anti-eugenicist, Franz Boas of Columbia, a socialist who launched a one-man crusade to destroy eugenics and “undermine the belief in race as a primary factor in cultural behavior.” Through his many books and students (including Margaret Mead and Ashley Montagu), Boas’ views began to prevail.

Even so, Grant’s efforts never flagged. In 1932, he again served as treasurer of the third and final Eugenics Congress. This Congress was also held at the Museum of Natural History, and included as sponsors Mrs. E. H. Harriman, Mrs. H. B. Dupont, Dr. J. Harvey Kellogg (of Kellogg’s cereals), and Leonard Darwin.

Conquest was published in 1933, after which Grant served on the advisory board of Eugenical News. He continued to write, to plan, to lobby. But the old days were ending. A schism had developed among eugenicists between those who favored “negative eugenics” and those in the “mainstream” who promoted “positive eugenics.” Moreover, Nazism was rapidly discrediting the science. By mid-decade, Osborn had died, and Grant himself died on May 30, 1937. The man who had devoted so much of his life to preserving his race left no children.

Two years later, Hitler invaded Poland. From then on, eugenics would be equated with concentration camps, Nazi doctors, Holocaust, and war crimes. As a science it was dead. Ironically, Grant’s views on nature and wildlife have been largely adopted, and conservation is at the forefront of mainstream thought. Of course, Grant receives little credit for this. His dreams of racial preservation, which he saw as part and parcel of nature conservation, are reviled today by all but a few. They owe it to the memory of this early activist to carry on his work, to ensure that the ideals of Madison Grant do not perish.

Original article

(Posted on July 16, 2010)

     Previous story       Next Story       Post a Comment     Send This Page      Search

Comments

1 — John Engelman wrote at 7:24 PM on July 16:

Eugenics was never disproven. It was discredited in very different ways by the very different Nazi and civil rights movements. However, just because many people do not want to believe something does not mean that is not true.

Also, Madison Grant seems to have believed that anyone who is not a white Gentile of north western European descent is necessarily inferior to someone who is. The achievements of the Jews and Orientals, especially the Chinese, speak for themselves.

2 — john wrote at 7:32 PM on July 16:

Fascinating piece, and one which could only be found on AmRen.

So total has been the ban on application of genetic science as it applies to humans that we might as well have entered a new dark age on this topic.

This is no less bizarre than if it were mandated that we go back to believing that the earth is flat. Yet the total denial of racial and genetic differences is at least as damaging to human progress and understanding of our surroundings as this primitive belief.

3 — Mathias wrote at 8:05 PM on July 16:

“it was to the interest of every national and religious group of aliens now here to exaggerate the importance and size of its contribution to the population of the country, especially in Colonial times… . The purpose of this opposition was to warp public opinion in regard to the merits of various national groups and to exaggerate the non-Anglo-Saxon elements in the old Colonial population”.

Sounds like what’s going on today. Except that every non-white group has national and local organizations working (funded by public tax dollars) on this cause in official capacity while whites are designated as official ‘oppressors’ who need not speak unless also properly exaggerating the same claims. Warping-reality is now considered part of a good cause and anyone challenging this state of affairs, called a ‘revisionist’.

The left are so far over-board now they hurt their own cause. All they have left is the public’s fear of their tactics, and so most of what they say ends up being an embarrassment to themselves. We’re not the only ones who are noticing. We do have to be careful not go too far in the other direction, or at least not be embarrssing ourselves.

4 — Roger wrote at 9:45 PM on July 16:

The claim that German National Socialism discredited the science of eugenics is a canard, a smokescreen. Science is science, political perspective does not change facts.

It is telling that Nazism did not similarly “discredit” rocket science.

As for the natural sciences, the importance of protecting particular populations of unique living beings and the importance of preservation of habitat needed for particular populations to survive is not only unquestioned, but championed EXCEPT in the case of European human beings.

In that case, and in that case alone, the drive is to flood the areas where European human beings live with diverse alien types, not merely despite the threat to the native population, but rather because of it! Though an invasion of non-native fish, mammals or plants destructive to native populations is considered a disaster, the very same sort of destruction of populations of European peoples is pursued with all the dedication and fervor of a religious crusade.

5 — AvgDude wrote at 11:59 PM on July 16:

Today, yet another black congressperson showed their complete ignorance of geography by announcing that there was still a North and South Vietnam. I guess this makes her marginally smarter than the other black congressman who thought that building an airfield on one end of Guam would cause that island to “tip over.” While not to say that there are no intelligent blacks out there, I have observed that many blacks are frightfully stupid, even ones in high ranking positions and professional jobs.

6 — PassingThrough wrote at 1:25 AM on July 17:

I have to say I don’t agree with most of this site’s content. But shoudln’t all supporters of this site denounce rather than support Madison Grant? He was after all a Nordicist, the worst type of WN. A quick skim over his work gives you the impression he thought blacks were more preferred in America than Mediterranean people or Jews.

7 — Flamethrower wrote at 1:39 AM on July 17:

Whites have a right to exist as a distinct culture and race, now and into the future, and to take steps, within reason, to make that so. The “superiority or inferiority” of the invading hoard is not the issue. The invasion is.

8 — highduke wrote at 6:29 AM on July 17:

He may have been DEAD WRONG about NW Europeans’ superiority and their Aryan descent and he also exaggerated Nordicism as well as the relationship between phenotype & personality but Grant loved his people, his country and nature. He was the first true environmental conservationist. Strange that he never married or had kids either.

9 — on the lam from the Thought Police wrote at 8:10 AM on July 17:

When blacks were discriminated against, liberals blamed that discrimination for high rates of black crime and illegitimacy and inferior black academic performance.

Racial discrimination was outlawed nearly two generations ago. Black crime and illegitimacy have gotten worse. There has been little improvement in black academic performance despite expensive efforts bring blacks up to white standards.

This gives greater credence to what Madison Grant was talking about. So does the advancing science of genetics.

Because blacks and their white supporters suspect the truth about blacks, they try to suppress it. They are losing the ability to do so.

10 — olewhitelady wrote at 8:14 AM on July 17:

As Roger #4 states, the Nazis didn’t discredit eugenics anymore than they did rocket science. The left simply yells “Nazi!” at anyone who talks about racial differences.
Before the internet, leftists were able to keep the truth from a lot of people who didn’t learn, first-hand, the disparities between ethnicities. Liberals were able to equate race-realism with the race-based hatred seen in groups such as the K, which subscribes to a blanket dislike of Jews, Catholics, and all non-Anglos. It was difficult to find books that delineated the facts and socially dangerous to discuss the issues. Now, such books are available online if one knows the title or author, and there are plenty of sites that will tell one what they are. The means of discussion are wide open, so that the old truths can once again be spoken.

11 — TomSwift wrote at 9:18 AM on July 17:

I don’t know.

My libertarian instincts are telling me that if your goal is to fill America with fools, you should put the government in charge of a eugenics program.

Think about it. In today’s world, liberals would argue that Blacks are superior because they have never been observed putting synthetic chemicals into the air/water/ground. “How much nuclear waste has Africa ever made?” They would say.

However even if conservatives ran the program we would still have problems. If people who earn lots of money are judged the ‘most fit’, would we not become greedier? After all, some people dedicate their lives to helping others but don’t get much.

We are lucky that the science is ‘discredited’.

12 — Anonymous wrote at 11:30 AM on July 17:

One thing we should all keep in mind is that our European forebears believed in individual freedom and not collectivization of any sort.

Individual salvation, not collective salvation.

Individual punishment, not collective punishment.

Self-determination, not an overwhelming, all-powerful State.

Also note that many of the folks who keep pushing eugenics are the worst of the lot. Do you really think they want to cut off their own offspring or will these collectivists, in reality, seek to destroy the most productive, most inventive, most creative, and most desirous of freedom?

Our current government has eugenicists in it. They do not like white people, freedom, critical thinking, aesthetic beauty, etc.

What do you think they will do if they are granted power over human reproduction in this country?

13 — Anonymous wrote at 1:55 PM on July 17:

6 — PassingThrough wrote at 1:25 AM on July 17:

I have to say I don’t agree with most of this site’s content. But shoudln’t all supporters of this site denounce rather than support Madison Grant? He was after all a Nordicist, the worst type of WN. A quick skim over his work gives you the impression he thought blacks were more preferred in America than Mediterranean people or Jews.

————————————————————————————————-

HUH?

14 — Anonymous wrote at 8:31 PM on July 17:

“even if conservatives ran the program we would still have problems. If people who earn lots of money are judged the ‘most fit’, would we not become greedier? After all, some people dedicate their lives to helping others but don’t get much. We are lucky that the science is ‘discredited’”.

It is a dangerous road to take (not necessarily for the reasons you point out), however, arguing there is no criteria on which to judge a better or worse person, or that there no direction in which improvements could be made, is hokum.

15 — Madison Grant wrote at 9:59 PM on July 17:

While their ideas sometimes missed the mark I still consider Madison Grant and Lothrop Stoddard to be unsung American heroes because they helped pass the Johnson Act which restricted massive Third World immigration for 41 wonderful years.

16 — Soprano Fan wrote at 7:19 AM on July 18:

This article was good, but there is a glaring factual error in it:

It says,…” Madison Grant was a founding member of the Boone and Crockett Club, which helped establish Yellowstone National Park”.

Yellowstone National Park was established in 1872, by the Department of the Interior. It is the oldest National Park.

Madison Grant was born in 1865. That means, he helped found the B & C Club was he was seven. Not likely.

To AvgDude (re post # 5):

Do you know who the congressperson was, who still thinks there’s a North and South Vietnam? Maybe they got Vietnam confused with North and South Korea.

Here’s another gem of wisdom, courtesy of a “frightfully stupid black”:

Philadelphia’s mayor Michael Nutter, recently said that “I have a First Amendment right to not get shot”.

He, of course, is anti-gun. Apparently, he doesn’t know the First Amendment deals with freedom of speech, religion, press and peaceable assembly.

Then there’s Obama, who said there are 57 states.

17 — olewhitelady wrote at 9:34 AM on July 18:

Soprano #16, the Congressperson who spoke of two Vietnams was Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas. I also believe she got Vietnam mixed up with Korea. It’s always been amazing to me how many people, both white and black, I’ve known who have little knowledge of history or geography. I once worked with a man who’d fought in the Korean War who thought the U.S. dropped a nuclear bomb on the North!

18 — Paul Jones wrote at 6:20 PM on July 18:

It’s interesting to see how the early and mid-1930’s marked the beginning of the end for any clear thinking about race in the United States and the entire West for that matter.

Everything got mixed up with the rise of National Socialism in Germany from 1933 on, and then matters just went from bad to worse after World War II with the Holocaust issue, which meant that even racial consciousness among those of European descent could be labeled as “neo-nazi.”

For example, in arguments over Separate but Equal before the Supreme Court which led to the Brown v. Board of Education decision, if it weren’t for fear of being lableled some kind of Nazi all kind of evidence for differences in inherited intellectual abilities between blacks and whites could have shored up the arguments of Southern attorneys who were trying to defend legal segregation in the South. But they had to avoid that for fear of being tainted by the “Nazi sympathizer brush.”

In the arguments to maintain the restrictive immigration laws that were overturned by the new Immigration law of 1965 any arguments about maintaining a higher I.Q. level population had to also be avoided for the same reasons.

At present, the whole “No Child Left Behind” program is kept alive because no one can talk about average I.Q. differences among different ethnic groups.

In short, Madison Grant and others of their era before 1933 could bring out facts that bring to bear truthfully on racial questions, but short of a few sites like American Renaissance, the iron curtain of intellectual censorship continues apace at present, and a big part of this is the role played by the same group which decided to give the silent treatment to “The Conquest of a Continent” back in 1933.

19 — Roger wrote at 6:38 PM on July 18:

TomSwift, I share your instinctive distrust of Government programs. All too often they are more like pogroms than programs. With white europeans as the target.

Eugenics, or any other area of science, is just that: scientific knowledge. The role of government is a different issue. Except that right now, our government does indeed enforce programs that a consideration of eugenic effects exposes as evil.

In today’s world, leftists DO say the blacks are superior (physically, artistically, and morally) and our government’s policies DO suppress the white population and subsidize the non-white.

Consider the number of black babies whose births are totally subsidized by white taxpayers who often feel too financially burdened to have more (or any!) babies of their own. That is only the beginning. Next, consider all the other costs associated with feeding, housing, and attempting to educate the least promising segments of society. Then add on the costs of crime - the direct impact of the crime itself, the cost of policing a crime ridden society, the costs of housing and caring for career criminals, the more hidden costs of the good things that never happen because those who would make them happen must avoid crime-ridden areas. If they can…

Of course, that becomes increasingly difficult, as our government forces you to
subsidize the lives of those who destroy your own, including the simultaneously injurious and insulting section-8 program which nullifies even your attempt to flee- at your expense, in every sense of the term!

On the other hand, imagine the announcement of even a fully private enterprise dedicated to assisting the birth of the most beautiful, healthy and intelligent white babies in as many numbers as possible. Imagine the general reaction. Would government give it a tax break? Or would they declare the whole thing altogether evil and shut it down?

It is true: the eugenically informed policies of a government hostile to white people ‘would’ be a horrible thing. Since it is, in fact, what we have: we need to understand
the significance of it. Just as science informs us of the nature of disease and can save our lives, so must we recognize that which afflicts us now, if we are to have any hope of surviving it. It is an even more pressing matter for our children. If you don’t have any, I hope the lights just went on for you.

20 — AvgDude wrote at 8:26 PM on July 18:

The Congresswoman was Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) made this speech on the floor of Congress. The best excuse anyone can make for her is that she doesn’t know the difference between the Vietnam and Korean wars nor knows the difference between the two regions involved. One can easily get the facts on the Vietnam War by doing a simple Google search.

I expect a member of Congress to be at least intelligent enough skim Wikipedia first. She’s a moron; not just a person who made a mistake but a moron.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XK3rTUgoQD4&feature=player_embedded

21 — Anonymous wrote at 8:42 PM on July 18:

A lot of white nats don’t like Madison Grant very much. Apparently it’s okay by them to want to preserve your race. However, they can’t abide someone who wants to preserve his ethnic group. To them Madison Grant was horrible for wanting to prevent founding-stock Americans from being overrun by alien European ethnic groups.

22 — Anonymous wrote at 11:17 PM on July 18:

While Madison Grant wrote some very provocative works advocating the importance of White survival, he did not always practice what he espoused. In fact, Grant was known to have sexual liasons with Asian women.

There was also many rumored stories of him having an illegitimate biracial Asain child and would engage in sex with mulatto Black women.

23 — Soprano Fan wrote at 2:35 AM on July 19:

Thanks, olewhitelady. It shows how “educated” some of our congressional reps are - these are the same people who vote on war resolutions and how to spend our tax dollars.

You’re spot-on on how ignorant many Americans are on matters of history and geography. A few years ago, a research firm conducted a questionnaire on American history, among college seniors. It found that some 30% of them thought the U.S. fought WITH North Vietnam, against the South.

24 — Cid Campeador wrote at 7:44 AM on July 19:

The body of another young White woman was found in a vacant lot Camden NJ. She was last seen at the PATCO station in Camden. An autopsy will be performed today. I’m sure that the results will indicate rape and God only knows what other atrocities.
White AND Black women need to understand that there are fewer and fewer “safe” places in today’s society and definitely none in any area populated by Afros.

Her death and that of all the other victims is on those who preached and indoctrinated our kids in the wonders of diversity and those who produced entertainment that depicted Blacks as being benevolent folks, Death Wish II being a notable exception.
The rule is that the beautiful young White girl is saved by a Black from being ravished by the thuggish White guy(s).

25 — John Engelman wrote at 12:41 PM on July 19:

At present, the whole “No Child Left Behind” program is kept alive because no one can talk about average I.Q. differences among different ethnic groups.

- Paul Jones



It will not be possible to forever cover up the failure of “No Child Left Behind.” That failure will provide fresh evidence for The Bell Curve.

26 — ghw wrote at 4:49 PM on July 19:

— 22 — Anonymous wrote:
While Madison Grant wrote some very provocative works advocating the importance of White survival, he did not always practice what he espoused. In fact, Grant was known to have sexual liasons with Asian women.
“There was also many rumored stories” of him having an illegitimate biracial Asain child and would engage in sex with mulatto Black women.
…………………………..

Do you have any information to back up these unsupported allegations, Mr. Anonymous? If so, where is it?
Otherwise, without any documentation whatsoever — in addition to your clumsy, ungrammatical writing — we shall have to assume that you are a disinformation-sowing troll. We have seen you here before!

27 — I, Bon, From the Land of Babble wrote at 9:32 AM on July 20:

John writes:

“…It will not be possible to forever cover up the failure of ‘No Child Left Behind.’ That failure will provide fresh evidence for The Bell Curve…”

John—

They can’t cover it up and the hostile elite well know IQ differences exist—as they believe they are so much smarter, more educated and more sophisticated than us Kulaks.

Therefore, they will attack in a different manner: Hate Speech laws will silence anyone deigning to go against the regime’s mantra of ‘We Are All The Same!’ and ‘Everyone Has Equal Potential!’ and ‘IQ is Meaningless!’

I hear this in every teachers’ meeting.

If Hate Speech laws are passed, and we are certainly heading in that direction as the obama regime packs the court with radical lefties, writing, commenting or even thinking about racial IQ differences will land one in prison along with a wealth-draining hefty fine and loss of job (that’ll teach you Kulaks to keep your mouths shut!).

The mandated mantra will be: ‘We Are All Equal!’ (OR) ‘Ignorance is Knowledge!’ Say it, Live it, Believe it or……die. It will be etched onto the front of the Supreme Court Building and every schoolhouse in the nation (as the hostile elite continue to send their precious children to Sidwell Friends).

And Cid:

“…White… women need to understand that there are fewer and fewer ‘safe’ places in today’s society and definitely none in any area populated by Afros…”

Teach your children well, especially your young females.

Also teach her how to handle a gun which is the only thing that stops a rape.

Richard Maybury reports:

“…The rate of violent crime on women is reported at 17 per 1,000 per year. Do the math. In 50 years of adulthood, a woman’s probability of being attacked is 85%.

These data are based only on crimes that have been reported to the Bureau of Justice. Any trauma counselor will tell you most sex crimes are kept secret. So — my key point — the true statistical probability of a woman being brutally attacked may be just an inch short of 100%.

There is a war on women, and…

…the criminals are winning it…

I have been searching for an equalizer we can recommend to women, one that is formidable, easy to learn and control, a good home-defense gun but small enough to be carried comfortably in a purse. It’s a tall order.

Loaded, the Glock 26 weighs 26 oz. and gives you 11 shots. It’s not a master-blaster like a shotgun, but in trained hands it’s a fine household appliance, your handy dandy varmint puncher.

It’s better to live as a lion than a rabbit…What would the world be like if a miracle happened and suddenly, overnight, all women were well trained and armed?

I think we’d see three months of carnage, then all the smart criminals would be reformed, the stupid ones would be dead, and for the rest of our lives violence against women would be almost unknown.

For the first time in history, women would be liberated!…”

Remember: there is no reasoning or logic with black murderers and rapists, the only thing they understand is immediate deadly force administered without prejudice.

Colonel Colt had a good reason for naming his revolver ‘The Equalizer.’

“…As a weapon of self-defense, it ended the age of brawn and put clerks and school-teachers on a par with bruisers for the first time since … well, ever…”

Harry Browne

Wise man, he.

And to Anon:

“…In fact, Grant was known to have sexual liasons with Asian women.

There was also many rumored stories of him having an illegitimate biracial Asian child and would engage in sex with mulatto Black women…”

Prove it. Put up or Shut Up.


Bon

28 — Anonymous wrote at 2:26 PM on July 20:

GHW:

In fact, you have not seen me here before! This is the first (now second)time I have posted on this website.

There is a book written by authors Estelle Freedman and John D’Emilio entitled Intimate Matters. The book is an exhaustive, comprehnensive study of the history of American sexual behavior from the 17th century to 1990s.

They discuss Mr. Grant’s very voracious sexual appetite for non-White women, especially Asian women and biracal Black women. Check it out for yourself.

If anyone or anything is “clumsy”, it is you assuming and posting remarks that you know nothing about.

29 — ghw wrote at 10:33 PM on July 20:

“There was [sic] also many rumored stories of him having an illegitimate biracial Asian child and would engage in sex with mulatto Black women…”
…………………….

This one non-sentence is replete with grammatical errors and double-talk. And what is a mulatto Black woman? This jabberwoky is clearly and typically the writing of a black person.

Furthermore, “rumors” and “stories” are not facts.
You have referred us only to an obscure book (whose authorship may also be biased), but you have still not furnished any FACTS.

Sorry, not convinced.

30 — Bon, From the Land of Babble wrote at 12:36 AM on July 21:

“…They discuss Mr. Grant’s very voracious sexual appetite for non-White women, especially Asian women and biracal Black women. Check it out for yourself…”

Nonsense.

In light of your post, I launched an Internet search of Madison Grant’s life. Included in the results were many scathing criticisms and personal attacks on Grant— from ‘literate’ racist black sites to ‘progressive’ university professors writing ‘scholarly’ articles that soundly denounce Grant—there is even a scathing article about Grant by none other than heidi bierich on the SPLC site.

I only read articles and information that reviled Grant. I even read through some of the comments on the black site (which was an unpleasant chore given the level of ignorance on racial matters).

Every article referred to Grant repeatedly as a Nazi, anti-semite, hater, bigot, racist and White supremacist but NOT ONE so much as hinted at Grant’s sexual proclivities, several mentioning only that he never married.

Any one of the authors of the articles I read, considering the level of the author’s vitriol and downright hatred of Grant, would have jumped at the chance to gleefully write about Grant’s sexual proclivity for non-White, bi-racial or Asian women—to expose him as not only a ‘racist’, ‘anti-semite’, ‘bigot’ but as an utter hypocrite as well to further discredit his work.

Do you think the likes of heidi bierich would refrain from blasting Madison Grant’s sexual preferences for non-White women all over the Internet?

“…If anyone or anything is ‘clumsy’, it is you assuming and posting remarks that you know nothing about…”

I have been reading ghw’s posts for several years and have never found them to be ‘clumsy’ or about subjects he ‘knows nothing about.’

He is one of the most intelligent, well-read, knowledgeable posters on this board.

It is YOU who needs to come up with some hard information about what you proclaim. Here that means citations from reliable sources.

Again: put up or shut up.

Bon

31 — Anonymous wrote at 10:56 AM on July 21:

I strongly doubt the unsubstantiated “rumors” about Madison Grant’s [quote] “very voracious sexual appetite for non-White women”.

However, even to grant those rumors the benefit of the doubt, they wouldn’t mean much. Life is strange. People develop unhealthy addictions that they know are bad for them, but they can’t quit. Alcoholics know they should stop drinking, but they can’t put down that drink. Smokers know that smoking will kill them, but they can’t put out that cigarette.

32 — voter wrote at 1:52 AM on July 22:

“However, even to grant those rumors the benefit of the doubt, they wouldn’t mean much.”
____

I agree with that. Even “if” the rumors were true, that still wouldn’t mean much. And that’s a big “IF”.

If indeed they were true, then he must know whereof he speaks. In that case, his advice would carry all the more weight.

We learn from experience. When a smoker cautions his child or a nephew not to get hooked on cigarettes, he’s not being a hypocrite! He’s speaking with the wisdom of experience. Who else but a smoker would know more about the perils of smoking?

33 — Anonymous wrote at 11:08 AM on July 22:

There is a book written by authors Estelle Freedman and John D’Emilio entitled Intimate Matters. The book is an exhaustive, comprehnensive study of the history of American sexual behavior from the 17th century to 1990s.

They discuss Mr. Grant’s very voracious sexual appetite for non-White women, especially Asian women and biracal Black women. Check it out for yourself.

The book Intimate Matters is available on Google Books. A search for “Madison Grant” returns no results.

Cite the page number(s) on which the allegations are supposedly made in the book. As Bon said, put up or shut up.

34 — Soprano Fan wrote at 8:45 PM on July 22:

If Madison Grant had a secret preference for Asian and biracial women; then he’s just like those 9-11 Muslim bombers who were known to drink alcohol and frequent strip joints (despite Islam’s teachings about alcohol and nude females), in the days leading up to 9-11-01.

Say one thing publicly, and do the polar opposite in private.

35 — Question Diversity wrote at 9:28 PM on July 22:

Soprano Fan:

I think those 9/11 hijackers who went to strip clubs, drank, patronized gyms with their group showers for men (also violating the laws of Islam), weren’t doing that b/c they were good timers, they were engaging in Taqqiya…IOW, pretending to blend in in order to carry out terrorist attacks. Islam lets you do that, lie and otherwise violate the tenets of Islam as long as it’s for the purpose of spreading Islam. They figure Allah would catch on.

36 — Langobard wrote at 3:23 AM on July 23:

If Madison Grant had a secret preference for Asian and biracial women; then he’s just like those 9-11 Muslim bombers who were known to drink alcohol and frequent strip joints (despite Islam’s teachings about alcohol and nude females), in the days leading up to 9-11-01.

Um, “Soprano” Fan,

Since this ridiculous allegation against Grant obviously has no teeth, just why then are you making (or at least reinforcing) such a slanderous comment against Mr. Grant?

And please - no sob stories about him supposedly being “anti Ey-talian”.

As an Italian-American myself (1/2 Neapolitan, in fact), I think that Madison was one of the greatest and most tenacious White activists that America was blessed to ever have.

37 — Gay Reader wrote at 11:26 AM on July 23:

As a gay reader with a different perspective (and pretty good “radar” in these things) I can see another possible explanation of why Madison Grant might have remained unmarried.

I’ll not go into it here, as it’s his own business (and properly so); but suffice to say that it would have been unmentionable in his day. And in THESE days, on the other hand, it would be VERY un-PC for Heidi Beirich et al to attack him on those grounds. (Twenty or thirty years ago they could, but that was then.) Hence, it remains unmentioned.

If my hunch is right, it makes rumors about his — “very voracious sexual appetite for non-White women” — and those allegations about his illegitimate bi-racial children all the more ridiculous.

Btw, I notice, with much interest, that the original proponent of that allegation has not shown up to defend it.

38 — Soprano Fan wrote at 7:00 PM on July 23:

To Langobard (re post # 36):

Paisan, I did not definitely state Madison Grant had a preference for Asian and biracial women. I said IF he had such a preference… I don’t know if he did or didn’t, for sure, so that’s why I said “If”…I qualified my statement by using “if”, because I don’t know for certain if he liked such women.

In any case, I came on this board to correct the errata that said Grant founded the Boone and Crockett Club, which was instrumental in founding Yellowstone National Park. I backed up my correction of said errata with facts.

Then, the allegations about Grant liking certain women brought to mind the 9-11-01 bombers frequenting strip clubs and drinking alcohol, given what we know of Islam’s teachings about such matters.

Why do you think I’m anti-Italian? Because Madison Grant favored Nordics? Well, I’m NOT anti-Italian - “Soprano Fan” is my Internet nom de plume.

As a matter of fact, I’m glad the Romans conquered the British Isles, bringing their Roman ways and ideas to the Isles, especially matters of Roman jurisprudence. This proved to be important for the development of the Western world.

Have a great one!

39 — Langobard wrote at 2:03 PM on July 24:

Why do you think I’m anti-Italian? Because Madison Grant favored Nordics? Well, I’m NOT anti-Italian - “Soprano Fan” is my Internet nom de plume.

As a matter of fact, I’m glad the Romans conquered the British Isles, bringing their Roman ways and ideas to the Isles, especially matters of Roman jurisprudence. This proved to be important for the development of the Western world.

Have a great one!

Fratello,

No, I never thought that *you* personally were anti-Italian. I thought you *might* of had, however, somewhat of a dislike or skepticism toward Grant because he favored Nordics or Northern Europeans (I assumed you were Italian because of your nom de plume).

For the record, I don’t completely agree with everything Mr. Grant had to say regarding Nordics (although I do agree with a good deal of it) and the other European sub-races, but I still think the man was one of the greatest White men that was to ever bless our People, our country and our Western Civilization.

Also for the record let me say as an Italian (1/2 Neapolitan, 1/2 Venetian) that I absolutely love and respect Northern European culture. Grant was so right that these (as some refer to them now) ‘Nordish’ folks (Northern Europeans) are overall the some of the most kind and altruistic peoples in the history of the world.

*Let’s as well never forget as Italians the tenacious bravery of the Northmen (Normans) in helping to liberate and completely oust from Southern Italy and Sicily the scourge of the Saracens. Viva Roger Guiscard!!

Buona Fortuna e Domino Gloria to you, mio caro compagno!

40 — Langobard wrote at 12:24 AM on July 25:

Another excellent article on the greatness and magnanimity of Madison Grant (by the equally great and magnanimous author F. Roger Devlin):

In 1893, he was admitted to the Boone and Crockett Club, an exclusive society of big game hunters founded by Theodore Roosevelt. The club quickly turned much of its attention to the increasing scarcity of big game. This was due, among other things, to widespread commercial hunting and such unsportsmanlike practices as “crusting” (killing game rendered helpless by deep snow) and “jacking” (shining lanterns into the darkness to hypnotize animals).

Madison Grant declared that “the game and the forest belong to the nation and not to the individual”, and with the support of the Boone and Crockett Club, he first pushed an “Adirondack Deer Law” through the New York State legislature in 1897.

Next, Grant and his friends founded the Bronx Zoo. Over four times the size of the largest European zoo, it was also the first anywhere to attempt to display its animals in something approaching their natural environment. Not to be missed is Prof. Spiro’s account of the Bronx Zoo’s brief exhibition of a Congolese pygmy (“The Wild Man of Africa”) in a cage with an Orangutan, and all the fun which ensued.

Over time, Grant’s concerns widened from the mere preservation of game for hunters to natural preservation for its own sake. He wrote:

“It is our duty as Americans to hand down to our posterity some portion of the heritage of wildlife and of wild nature that was ours. In other words, to leave to them a country worth living in, with trees on the hillsides; with beasts in the forests; with fish in the streams; and with birds in the air.”

With his friend and ally Teddy Roosevelt in the White House, Grant went from triumph to triumph: creating reserves for the American Bison, establishing Glacier National Park, and saving California’s Giant Redwoods from extinction. Only Prof. Spiro’s concern for the average reader’s attention span prevents him from describing Grant’s involvement in saving the Pronghorn Antelope, the Bald Eagle, the Alaskan Bear and the Fur Seal. As one director of the National Park Service declared, “no greater conservationist than Madison Grant ever lived.”

http://www.vdare.com/devlin/090122_grant.htm


Home      Top      Previous story       Next Story      Send This Page      Search