In Defense of Western Man
Stephen Webster, American Renaissance, April 2002
Undeterred by post-9/11 concerns about air travel, nearly 250 people from all over the country and as far away as South Africa gathered in northern Virginia over the weekend of February 22-24 for the fifth biennial American Renaissance conference, “In Defense of Western Man.” Both newcomers and veterans of past conferences agreed that this year’s event was a great success. A threatened protest failed to materialize, depriving the audience of extra entertainment, but allowing it to concentrate fully on the program.
The meeting, held in Herndon, Virginia, began on Friday evening with a tribute to Glayde Whitney by Jared Taylor, editor of American Renaissance. Dr. Whitney, a professor of psychology at Florida State University and a distinguished geneticist, was a contributing editor to AR, and wrote the popular “Galton Report.”He was scheduled to address the conference, but died unexpectedly on January 9. Mr. Taylor emphasized the importance of Prof. Whitney’s research on the biological differences between races, and expressed admiration for Prof. Whitney’s bravery in speaking his mind on subjects he knew would destroy his reputation and damage his career. Following Mr. Taylor’s remarks, guests mingled at a cocktail reception, where they caught up with old friends, made new ones, and enjoyed the liberating atmosphere of the company of colleagues.
The general session began on Saturday morning, Feb. 23, with remarks on immigration and national security by syndicated columnist Samuel Francis. Dr. Francis began by describing the threat Muslim immigration poses to the continued existence of the West. It is a threat that has racial, religious and cultural elements, and one we have faced for a thousand years. The current “war” on terrorism is only the latest battle in this struggle, and once again, the West has been slow to respond. Dr. Francis noted that when Islam last menaced Christendom, in 1683, the nations of Western Europe sat on the sidelines while a Muslim army drove toward the heart of Europe, only to be stopped at the gates of Vienna by an Eastern European — King Jan Sobieski of Poland. Like the European monarchs of the 17th century, today’s political elites refuse to see the threat their immigration policies create. For them, Dr. Francis said, open borders have become “the essence of American national identity.”
Islam cannot now defeat the West by military invasion, but it can do so through unchecked immigration. Large numbers of unmarried immigrant men hate the West, refuse to assimilate, and make prime recruits for terrorism. Dr. Francis warned that non-Western immigration is creating an immigrant counter-culture that, if allowed to develop, will outnumber and destroy us. The solution, he said is to “round ‘em up and ship ‘em out.”
Glenn Spencer of AmericanPatrol.com expanded on this theme in remarks on “The Second Mexican-American War.” Mr. Spencer warned that Mexican immigration into the Southwest is nothing less than an unarmed invasion to reconquer land lost in the first Mexican-American War. By failing to halt illegal Mexican immigration, the United States is importing poverty, turning California into a Third-World nation, and inviting secession. Mexican irredentists, active in groups like MeCha and La Raza, have won elective office in California, and Mr. Spencer effectively demonstrated the threat by playing recordings of inflammatory speeches by Hispanic leaders.
Although immigration apologists say la Reconquista is a myth promoted by a few Hispanic activists and anti-Mexican bigots, Mr. Spencer argued that it is Mexican government policy. Mexico is encouraging migration into the United States and promoting dual nationality in order to have direct influence on American policy. In effect, Mexico is supporting the ethnic cleansing of the American Southwest. Whites are fleeing California at the rate of 100,000 per year, but the state’s population keeps growing. From 1990 to 2000, the number of Hispanics in California increased 80 percent, with no end in sight.
Mr. Spencer believes tension on the border will inevitably lead to bloodshed. He noted that Spanish language television encourages Hispanics to hate whites. Historical resentments, Mexican government propaganda, and anti-American Hispanic intellectuals have set the tinder, and all that is missing is the spark. Mr. Spencer thinks that could come in the form of a confrontation between US border agents and Mexican police or military forces, both of which have fired on the border patrol in the past. Mr. Spencer put the odds of such a violent confrontation — followed by large-scale anti-white rioting — at better than 50-50 by 2003.
Professor Michael Levin of the City University of New York followed with a brilliant dissection of the black campaign for reparations for slavery. Prof. Levin argued that not only do demands for reparations have no moral or legal basis, they are nothing more than a rationalization for black failure. Reparations advocates claim black poverty stems from centuries of slavery and racism, and refuse to recognize that failure is rooted in low IQ. Prof. Levin pointed out that whites usually counter black demands with “polite” arguments about the legal uncertainty of cross-generational guilt, but it is essential to lay the blame where it belongs: on differences in intelligence.
Extortion — blacks have proposed assessments of $2.1 to $7 trillion — will do nothing to boost black achievement. It also disregards the many forms of past reparations, such as racial preferences, quotas, and anti-poverty programs aimed primarily at blacks. These have already cost trillions of dollars, yet show little result. Black-on-white crime also serves as a form of free-lance reparations. The current campaign is nothing more than the latest in a series of endless grievances by blacks against whites that underscore the determination of blacks to avoid the truth about themselves.
IQ was the subject of a joint presentation by Richard Lynn of the Ulster Institute for Social Research and J. Philippe Rushton of the University of Western Ontario. Dr. Lynn discussed his new book, IQ and the Wealth of Nations, in which he examines the correlation between a country’s wealth and the average IQ of its citizens. While many factors determine national wealth, including climate and natural resources, Dr. Lynn found that the strongest indicator of per capita national income is IQ. Western nations are rich because whites have high IQs. East Asian nations have recently enjoyed economic success because political reforms have enabled their societies to reap the rewards of high innate intelligence. Sub-Saharan Africa is mired in poverty because blacks have, on average, the lowest IQs of any major group. Dr. Lynn warned that large numbers of low-IQ immigrants will undermine Western affluence.
Dr. Rushton explained the methodology of recent research on African intelligence that has led him to conclude that the average African IQ is 70. He conducted a major study at the University of Witwatersrand in South Africa, one of the best schools in Africa, with students — black and white — who are the brightest on the continent. He administered a state-of-the-art, culturally unbiased IQ test to students of both races. The blacks scored around 100 while the whites scored around 130. On the assumption that top university students are about two standards deviations (or 30 points) above the population average, this confirms a white average of 100 and suggests a black average of 70. Dr. Rushton has also found that black students at less demanding universities get average scores of 85. Working backward from the fact that white students in less demanding universities have IQ scores about one standard deviation (15 points) above the population average, this, too, suggests an average black IQ of about 70.
Dr. Rushton pointed out that it is hard for many people to accept the idea that an entire race could have an average IQ that is, by Western standards, at the borderline of retardation. He argued, however, that a 70 IQ is adequate for functioning in a simple society.
Jared Taylor spoke about ethnic conflict and its implications for whites. Although liberals say cultural or class differences cause ethnic tension, he reported that recent research confirms it has roots in biology. We have a natural affinity for members of our own families and extended families, and race is the most extended form of family to which people feel a natural loyalty. Preference for one’s own kind or “ethnic nepotism,” as the scholars call it, stems from the instinct to ensure the survival of our own genes and of those who are related to us.
In the United States, all other racial groups show high levels of solidarity but whites do not. Blacks and Hispanics advance their own racial interests without hesitation, whereas whites speak as whites only to apologize. The dynamics of ethnic solidarity are at work in America’s prisons. Mr. Taylor reported that black and Hispanic prisoners rape white inmates with impunity, because they know whites will not stand and fight as a group. At the same time, they defend their own races from rape by others. The loss of white solidarity has worked its way down to the most vulnerable people — convicted prisoners — with often horrifying consequences.
The purpose of American Renaissance, Mr. Taylor said, is to encourage whites to defend their own interests. “We in this room are the Paul Reveres of our time,” he concluded. “We are riding through the night, not just in a few New England hamlets but all through the world, crying, ‘White man, wake up.’”
Following Mr. Taylor’s remarks, Gordon Baum of the Council of Conservative Citizens gave a short presentation on the activities of the Council, and urged those at the conference to join in its important grass-roots activities. Lou Calabro of the European American Issues Forum spoke next, asking for support for his efforts to reopen the police investigation into the San Francisco “Zebra” killings, in which blacks killed scores of whites in the 1970s. He was followed by Kevin Lamb, editor of The Occidental Quarterly, who urged conferees to subscribe to this new, racially-oriented magazine.
The Saturday banquet speaker was Nick Griffin, chairman of the British National Party (BNP). He said the common belief that a nationalist party can succeed only at a time of economic crisis has been proven wrong by election results in Austria and Belgium. A crisis does exist, but it is a crisis for liberal elites, who have been eradicating national identities for two generations by importing Third-World immigrants. Nationalist parties are demanding a change. In Britain, where Muslim immigrants are creating strong ethnic communities and driving out whites, the BNP is gaining support, and is expected to win seats in local elections this May.
Mr. Griffin argued that the success of European nationalists is born of a dual betrayal by our rulers. The left has betrayed the white working class, while the right has betrayed the white middle class. Thanks to the efforts of the BNP and other European nationalists, whites are waking up to a new political landscape.
Except, that is, in the United States. Noting that events breed opportunities, he said the Sept. 11 attacks should be the catalyst for establishing a nationalist political party — but only if people act now. He encouraged American nationalists to learn from their more experienced international counterparts.
Author and elected New York school board member Frank Borzellieri began the Sunday program by recounting his experiences as a racially-aware weekly columnist for the Ledger-Observer chain of newspapers. Mr. Borzellieri writes openly about race, and his views often cause trouble for his publisher. Needless to say, Mr. Borzellieri, who speaks for the silent majority, is very popular with readers. When his publisher suspended him for a column criticizing a school official who is the publisher’s close friend, an avalanche of letters in his favor forced his reinstatement. Mr. Borzellieri is obviously a dauntless fighter, and the audience greatly enjoyed his accounts of battling the establishment.
The next event was a panel discussion of Patrick Buchanan’s new book, The Death of the West, featuring Samuel Francis; Jared Taylor; and Atlanta attorney Sam Dickson. The consensus among the panelists was that, while it contains an important message, the book suffers from Mr. Buchanan’s refusal to take a stand on race. Although his thesis is that whites are a vanishing breed, Mr. Buchanan never explicitly calls for white racial consciousness. Mr. Buchanan was chided for dismissing white racial solidarity, and suggested racially conscious whites should practice “cultural secession.” Mr. Dickson, calling himself the “bad cop” of the panel, openly criticized Mr. Buchanan, noting that he has “no sense of race,” and will never be committed to racial solidarity. Dr. Francis defended Mr. Buchanan, pointing out that The Death of the West was originally entitled The Death of Whitey, and that the publisher removed many explicitly racial passages. Dr. Francis did acknowledge The Death of the West suffers from Mr. Buchanan’s inability to distinguish between religion and race.
This confusion is apparent in Mr. Buchanan’s public appearances to promote the book. He says Europeans aren’t reproducing and their culture is in decline because they have fallen away from Christianity. His critics want to know why he then does not welcome Catholic Hispanic immigrants. Mr. Buchanan cannot answer this question because he refuses to take a squarely racial position.
Addressing his fifth AR Conference, Mr. Dickson closed the program by urging the audience to be “happy warriors” in the struggle. He concluded with a verse from Isaiah: “They shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not be faint.” All of us, he pointed out, have different abilities, and can all be inspired to do our best — some who fly like eagles, some who run, and others who walk. His was a message of good cheer that sent the audience home in high spirits.
A number of print reporters and Internet correspondents covered the conference. The Washington Times published an article on Glenn Spencer’s remarks, and Jonathan Tilove of Newhouse News wrote a lengthy, fair-minded piece that has appeared in many papers, including the San Francisco Chronicle, the Louisville Courier-Journal, and the Austin American-Statesman. Even Suara Pembaruan, an Indonesian newspaper, sent its US correspondent and has published an account — in a language we cannot read.
As always, the conference was as much an opportunity to meet and socialize with friends and committed colleagues as it was a chance to hear some of the boldest thinkers of our day. By all accounts, the 2002 conference was the best ever, with many participants looking forward to the next, probably to be held in early 2004.