For Whites, Bottom Rail On Top?


Forget such trivial
distractions as how Iraq`s supposed stockpiles of
weapons of mass destruction could vanish into thin air;
the really challenging problem for the American ruling
class these days is how to explain and justify why it`s
OK for

blacks
, Asians,

Hispanics
and every other ethnic group in the
country to have its own separate organization and
identity, but

not OK
for whites.

Usually this little
dilemma is hushed up and simply ignored, but recently
Fox News had the guts to bring it up for discussion. (“Critics
Slam Single-Race School Events
,” by Liza Porteus,
June 4, 2003)

The answers were not
particularly encouraging or enlightening.

A recent controversy
over white high school students in Georgia who held
their own, whites-only prom did not sit well with
various commentators who labeled it “racism,”
“segregation,”
a “return to Jim Crow,” and
various other species of wickedness.

The same commentators
were mostly silent about the myriad

blacks-only graduation ceremonies
and celebrations
held around the same time at a number of elite
universities.

Moreover, the same
schools often sport what the Fox story called
“race-based living quarters”
– that is, racially
exclusive dormitories – on their own campuses.

Needless to say, such
dormitories for whites aren`t allowed, and if any white
kids even peeped about setting one up, the government
would send in the Marines.

But it has occurred to
some to point out the “double standard” involved in
these matters.

Carol M. Swain
, the black author of a recent book on
what she claims is

The New White Nationalism In America
,
says there
is a double standard and that allowing blacks to exclude
whites only encourages – and tends to justify – whites
excluding blacks.

“As long as
universities and colleges and high schools support black
activities,”
Miss Swain says, “there will be
increasing pressure for them to allow white students the
same latitude, because it`s a double standard and I
think more and more people can see that.”

Criticizing only one
side of the double standard, she told Fox, carries
“identity politics too far.”

But not everyone agrees.

Gary Orfield
, a Harvard sociologist,
[email
him
] says racially
exclusionary events are “good sometimes, it depends
on whether it`s done in any exclusionary way or an
enriching way.”

Well, how do you tell
whether an exclusionary event is “exclusionary”
or just “enriching”?

It basically comes down
to whether it`s whites who get excluded (in which case
it`s “enriching”) or non-whites (in which it`s
“exclusionary”
).

How simple.

One gentleman described
as a “civil rights attorney,”

Leo James Terrell
, goes a bit further. “Someone
is trying to assume that Asians and blacks are on the
same level, historically, in this country, as whites,”

he mutters.

“But what if a group
of white students wanted to form their own campus
group?”
Fox asked Mr. Terrell.

“That`s `racist`”
he responded.  “If a college that has an integrated
campus has an all-white college activity, that is
insulting. For what? To promote what?  White pride?”

Well, among other
things, maybe so.

What Mr. Terrell says is
about as plain and simple as you can get. Blacks and
other non-whites have a perfect right to exclude whites
from their organizations and events, but whites have no
such right to exclude blacks.

The reason, apparently,
is that whites in the past have oppressed non-whites,
and now it`s their turn to get

oppressed
themselves.

A tip of the hat [by

email
] to Mr. Terrell for his brutal frankness.

What the “civil
rights attorney”
discloses is that the “civil
rights”
he peddles aren`t about “equality” at all
but about power – the power of one race to

dominate
another, namely whites.  The civil rights
revolution and all the rest of the eyewash was just
about one thing: what white Southern slaveholders used
to call “bottom rail on top” – the

dispossession
of whites of their power and

position
and their replacement by blacks and other
non-whites.

Does anyone, like Miss
Swain, believe that carries “identity politics too
far”
?

Well, no.  And in fact,
most are perfectly right.

The truth is that all
politics is

identity politics
. In every political conflict,
there is a dispute about power – who has it and who
should get it.  And every such dispute involves groups –
parties, classes, clans, religious sects, regions,
civilizations, nations, or races – that possess a
particular “identity.”

The truth, exclusionary
or enriching as the case may be, about what has happened
in this country and throughout much of the world in
recent decades is that most non-white racial and ethnic
groups have acquired their own consciousness and
identity and are pursuing power for themselves and in
their own interests.

Yet another truth is
that, for the most part, whites

have not
and

are not
.

Whether Miss Swain is
right about the rise of

white nationalism
or not may tell us how true these
truths will remain in the future.

COPYRIGHT

CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

[Sam Francis [email
him] is a nationally syndicated columnist. A selection
of his columns,

America Extinguished: Mass Immigration And The
Disintegration Of American Culture, is now available
from


Americans For Immigration Control
.]