Steve Sailer
When it comes to immigration
and race, the Wall Street Journal Editorial
Page floats far above the grimy reality of our
world. Like Gulliver`s hovering island of Laputa,
inhabited by an overclass of unworldly but
dogmatic intellectuals, it stays aloft upon
gusts of libertarian theory, neocon emotion and
hot air.

The July 19 2000 editorial “Goodbye to
Fiji,” about the overthrow of the South
Pacific island`s Indian immigrant-dominated
government by armed natives, is just another
example of the WSJ Edit Page`s willful

“Say goodbye to Fiji, and say it
soon. The country is going rapidly down
the tubes. Two months ago, Fiji wasn`t
such a bad place. It ambled along at a
South Pacific pace. … All that changed
on May 19 when a man called George
Speight … took Mahendra Chaudry, the
Prime Minister, hostage.”

Bunk. The conflict between the two peoples
isn`t two months old. It`s been on-going for
decades. The new coup is simply a replay of
1987, when the Fijian military overthrew an
Indian-backed government. The indolent but
warlike Fiji natives are black, surprisingly
African-looking, Melanesians. They are proud of
their unique Fijian culture, which is largely
based on the concept of taking it easy. Fiji is
their only homeland and they naturally resent it
coming under the control of more enterprising
outsiders. The British Empire brought the
Indians to Fiji as indentured servants, since
Indians tend to be more diligent, shrewd, and
nonviolent than the natives. Thus racial trouble
has been chronic. Why? Because the immigrants
have the money and the natives have the guns.

The WSJ Edit Page is particularly
incensed that the native Fijians are imposing
affirmative action on the wealthier Indians. The
WSJ dislikes quotas and loves
immigration. But quotas (and worse) inevitably
ensue from immigration policies that bring
together dissimilar peoples.

In some countries, the majority imposes
quotas on a more economically-dynamic minority.
For example, in Malaysia Prime Minister Mahathir
Mohamad imposed affirmative action favoring
native Malays on the refreshingly frank grounds
that his people are lazier and dimmer than the
Chinese minority. In increasing numbers of
Western countries, by contrast, the economically
dynamic majority group offers quotas to appease
less productive but more crime-prone minorities.

“Mr. Speight and his cohorts will learn
swiftly that running an economy is a lot harder
than storming a parliament,” huffed the WSJ
in conclusion. “Theirs is no more than a
blueprint for economic suicide.”

Economic suicide – but for the Fijian nation,
the price of resurrection?

[Steve Sailer [email
him] is founder of the Human Biodiversity Institute and

movie critic

The American Conservative
His website
features his daily