RACEand

POLITICS

The Myth of Racial Equality

by

H. B. Isherwood

The Racial Preservation Society

RACE and POLITICS

The Myth of Racial Equality

by

H. B. Isherwood

By the same author:

Racial Contours: The Factor of Race in Human SurvivalTimes Press Limited (1965)

Racial Integration: The Rising Tide of ColourBritons Publishing Company (1965)

Man's Racial Nature: An Exposure of the False Propaganda of theUnited NationsThe Racial Preservation Society (1969)

Religion and the Racial Controversy: The False Propaganda of theChurchThe Racial Preservation Society (1970)

Race and Nationhood: The Menace of MultiracialismThe Racial Preservation Society (1972)

Racial Kinship: The Dominant Factor in NationhoodThe Racial Preservation Society (1974)

Man's Racial Nature, Racial Kinship. Religion & Racial Controversyand Race & Politics are available from R.P.S.. Send S.A.E. for fulllist of publications on race and allied topics - to:R.P.S., Chapel Ascote, Ladbroke, Southam, Warwickshire, England

RACE and POLITICS

The Myth of Racial Equality

by

H. B. Isherwood

CONTENTS

Chapter

1.2.

3.4.5.6.7.8.

9.

Page

Natural Inequalities 5

Racial Origins 7Biological Basis of Races 8Racial Psychological Differences 11

The Great Lamarckian Fallacy 13Multiracial Democracy (Great Britain) 15

Multiracial Democracy (United States) 22

Multiracial Democracy (Other Nations) 23Racial Religious Bias 26Bibliography 29

First Impression 1978

Printed and Published by The Racial Preservation Society,Chapel Ascote, Ladbroke, Southam, Warwickshire

RACE and POLITICS

The Myth of Racial Equality

"The practical question before mankind is how to devise fairmethods of co-operation and work out a mixed and various worldsociety ... This is not to be done by ignoring race and racialdifferences; the natural thought forms, and dispositions andinstinctive reactions of northern Europeans and Jews, Negroes andWhites, Indians and Chinese, vary subtly and profoundly; you canno more ignore differences of race than differences of sex. Theyare things greatly intensified and supplemented by differences oftradition, training and conditions, but when all such modificationsare eliminated, essential differences remain. Intermarriage providesno remedy but rather a multiplication of types. If races are to bebrought together, and not merely jumbled together ... aneducational effort has to be made on an altogether unprecedentedscale. "

Is Race Conflict Unavoidable? H. G. Wells (19th July 1924)

"Constitutions are easily copied, temperaments are not, and if itshould happen that the borrowed constitution and the nativetemperament fail to correspond, the misfit may have seriousresults. "

The British Constitution Walter Bagehot. Preface by LordBalfour (1920)

"I will say, then, that I am not, never have been, in favour ofbringing about in any way the social and political equality of thewhite and black races - that I am not, nor ever have been, infavour of making voters or jurors of Negroes - nor of qualifyingthem to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and Iwill say in addition to this that there is a physical differencebetween the white and black races which will forever forbid thetwo races living together on terms of social and political equality.And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remaintogether, there must be the position of superior and inferior, andI, as much as any other man, am in favour of having the superiorposition assigned to the white race."

Speech at Springfield, Illinois. by Abraham Lincoln (17th July1858)

"A man should, whatever happens, keep to his own caste, race,and breed. Let the White go to the White and the Black to theBlack - unless he wants a disaster. "

Beyond the Pale, Rudyard Kipling (1890)

RACE and POLITICS

The Myth of Racial Equality

1. NATURAL INEQUALITIES

Probably the greatest single cause of the political turmoildisfiguring the world today is the Marxist or Socialist pretencethat human beings are distinguishable only by their class in societyor their religion or by the property they own, and that otherwise,irrespective of the race or nation to which they belong, arefundamentally equal to each other in nature, all endowed at birthwith identical abilities, talents or potentialities, all instinctivelyseeking the same ends throughout life, and that if all had thesame education or upbringing under similar conditions, with equalopportunities, could all reach the highest levels of the mind.Offending commonsense and contrary to all human experience,such a socially and nationally disruptive doctrine, both fallaciousand absurd, has nevertheless been accepted in principle by theUnited Nations and has now been written into the laws of certainmultiracial nations, including England and America, where thepolitical pursuit of fictitious equality is having demoralisingconsequences.

The source of such aberrated political thinking can withoutdifficulty be traced to the egalitarian revolutionaries of 18thcentury France. Typical of their ideas is Babeuf's Manifesto ofEquals (1796) in which we read: "Let there be no other differencebetween men than that of age and sex. Since all have the sameneeds and the same faculties, let there be only one education, onekind of food ... and the same portion and the same quality offood suffice for each of them." Fanatically obsessed with notionsof abstract equality, Babeuf could not see the paradox that in ademocracy of equals unequals rise to the top, and he was dulyguillotined by the Terror he did so much to create.

After bringing his mind to bear on egalitarianism, Dr. SamuelJohnson, scholar and humanitarian, than whom there was nogreater down-to-earth realist, shrewdly observed: " ... mankind arehappier in a state of inequality and subordination. Were they tobe in this pretty state of equality, they would degenerate intobrutes - their tails would grow."

The disciples and heirs of the French egalitarians are theMarxists, Communists, Socialists, Liberals and political Churchmen

5

of today, who, believing themselves to be missionaries andtheorising themselves out of reality, are not prepared to concedethat equal opportunities inevitably reveal unequal capabilities.

As with individuals, so with races. Clearly it is not reasonable tosqueeze people of contrasting natures into a common mould, norcould they be permanently regimented to think alike by doctrinalmethods. The evolutionary gap dividing the races is deep and wideand cannot be bridged by arbitrary Procrustean laws. To treatpeople before the law as though they were racially all alike innature evokes a sense of injustice. The natural and healthytendency for "birds of a feather to flock together" is disregardedby Marxists who imagine that it is possible to iron out by law thevariations between racial groups with different instincts living in amultiracial society. Marxist attempts by universal race-mixing todowngrade everyone to a common level give rise to falseexpectations, as we see in England and America, the predictableoucome of which is envy, discontent, social instability anddiscord, with a decline in traditional standards and nationaldisciplines. The key to civilised progress is racial preservation, afact not yet fully realised by political theorists who are inclined toignore the basic biological factor, the compelling force that liesbehind cultural and historical change.

Assertions made, usually by Jewish talmudic publicists whobelieve in the preservation of their own race, that each race has asocial or cultural origin only and has only emerged as a humanconglomerate during comparatively recent historical times is nothistory but Marxist propaganda. It may be true that certain sub­races, of which the Jews provide an outstanding example, havebeen kept relatively intact by the development of exclusivecultural or cohering religious forms, but these were subsequentdevelopments. Most peoples growing up in isolation and becomingtribally or communally self-conscious have invented gods andmyths to account for their origins and this has tended to keepthem homogeneous and united as nations.

In the final analysis it cannot properly be said that tribes andnations, together with their contrasting civilisations andbarbarisms, are the product of "cultural change and challenge"alone - as Toynbee, the world historian, following Marx seems tosuggest along Hegelian lines. Cultural forms are superficial andtransient. Below and preceding them, and indeed giving rise tothem, are the impulses and compulsions, the complex instinctsof biological qualities associated with variations in the brain andneural structures implanted by natural evolution. In short, naturegoverns nurture.

To the more devout who believe that God created the separateraces for His purpose it may seem that much of what is now

6

confirmed by science about the origin of man and his races onearth conflicts with Holy Writ and religious dogma, but this neednot be the case if due regard be had to the symbolic or allegoricalnature ofthe Babylonian or Semitic folklore of the Old Testament.As part of this folklore the picturesque story in Genesis 10 of howthe races were originally created should not be accepted ashistorically true. The races were in fact in the pipeline of terrestrialevolution long ages before the Flood.

Nevertheless, by distilling fact from fable it could quitereasonably be concluded that the separation of the races one fromthe other as recorded in the Bible had divine sanction, providentiallypurposive in the universal scheme of things, not to be revoked byman. In pursuance of this belief in the purposive creation of thehuman races, some theologians admonish: "What God has done,let no man undo." Others, however, with leanings towardsMarxism, prefer the misleading slogan "only one race, the humanrace," the war-cry of those who are sensitively aware of theirinferiority.

2. RACIAL ORIGINS

Because of the radical nature of racial biological differences(and also for strict taxonomic reasons) not all scientists are readyto classify mankind as a single zoological species. Be that as itmay, there is ample evidence to show that the primary existingraces, though now possibly interfertile, are the descendants ofvariants of more than one archaic species of ape-like creatures whowere inhabiting the earth over a million years ago. But all the racesdid not reach the level of homo sapiens at the same time, theCaucasoid, for example, preceding the Negroid by over 200,000years. This fact alone may be sufficient to account for thecomparative historical backwardness and cultural failure of theNegroid people and their negligible contribution to civilisation.And some races have already become extinct, while others, forexample the Australian Aborigines (described by anthropologistsas Stone Age fixtures), the Veddahs of Sri Lanka (formerlyCeylon) and southern India, and the non-Mongoloid Ainu of Japanhave plainly reached the paracme of their evolutionary lines withno hope of recovery. Nor is there much hope of survival in intactracial form of the Amerinds, the Mongoloid American Indians,the indigenes of the Western Hemisphere.

Taking a realistic view of mankind anthropologists and otherserious students of natural history now generally agree that themain factor underlying the cosmic process that has lifted man upfrom a more primitive or brutish condition has been racial

7

variability. not uniformity, each ethnic entity having been evolvedwith constitutional or biological characteristics peculiarly its ownand which gave it an advantage for survival in a special environ­ment. Indeliby implanted by God-given natural laws such organicvariations can now be seen reflected in the history of each nation,in its general character, the personality of its people, their customsand culture. These qualities are measurable, thus making nationaland racial comparisons possible and discrimination rationalwithout prejudice.

3. BIOLOGICAL BASIS OF RACES

A thorough understanding, free from preconceptions andprejudices, of the way mankind has been diversified by nature intodisparate races may perhaps best be reached if some reference,however brief, be made to the complex structure of organic life asseen through the eyes of specialist authorities on the subject. Firstrevealed by the experiments of J. G. Mendel and later successfullyshown by Sir Francis Galton to apply to human beings, thefundamental factors determining inheritable or intrinsic qualitiesare now called genes. Sir Ronald Fisher, Sir Julian Huxley, RugglesGates, J. B. S. Haldane, C. D. Darlington, Carleton S. Coon, JohnR. Baker and indeed all other scientists of repute in the relevantfields agree that the human races as constituted today differfundamentally from each other according to the genes which theypossess. Scientists whose subject is molecular biology have probeddeeply into the chemical or elemental structure of genes, even tothe extent of suggesting that "it is in our DNA (deoxyribonucleicacid, the bridge between the inanimate and the animate) that setsthe basic physical limits of what we can or cannot do." Physicallimits, including cerebral development, set the seal on mentalgrowth, the frontier beyond which man on earth cannot go.

Evolutionary transformation upwards along divergent linesdepends primarily on chemical changes (mutations) in the genes,caused by spontaneous subatomic stimuli, or in new genecombinations which have value for survival in a specific environ­ment and which in the course of procreation, uncontaminated bymigratory intrusion, establish pools of inheritable qualities ofvarying racial excellence. It is out of such genetic pools that racesor variations of the human species, involving gregarious instincts(and ultimately nations), are formed as an integral part of theorganic structure of nature. Any interbreeding between suchpools, especially if entailing miscegenation, would inevitably tendto eliminate the finer or more highly developed genetic qualitiesand thus impede further evolutionary progress. In less technical

8

terms, it may be stated in short that when two races mix andinterbreed the more advanced race suffers. It is not unreasonableto suggest that genetic drift or migration across the racialevolutionary lines has irrevocably saddled mankind with many ofthe congenital malaises and apparently ineradicable imperfections(morphological anomalies) from which it suffers today.

It is important to keep in mind that although genes may beintermingled in one animal (a human being for instance) in theway vinegar may be mixed with water, they cannot be fused orblended as some Marxist scientists suppose. As indivisible andinviolable entities genes retain their character intact fromgeneration to generation - unless, of course, subject to subatomicaction as stated above. From this it will be appreciated thatselective breeding along eugenic lines over a number of generationsthe descendants of racial mixtures could in some cases atavisticallyassume the form and nature of either of their first crossbreedingforebears. Darwin, who inferred the existence of gemmules (nowcalled genes) in his theory of pangenesis, proved that by allowingdomestic pigeons to interbreed, even though they were vastlydissimilar in appearance, it was possible to reproduce pigeonsindistinguishable from the wild Himalayan rock dove from whichall varieties of pedigree pigeons had been bred by artificialselection. And both the extinct tarpan (horse) and the extinctaurochs (ox) have been reproduced by selective crossbreeding ofmodern domestic pedigree animals. These cases prove geneticpersistence, as all stockbreeders know. Thus it may be explained,though perhaps not in every detail, how it comes about thatmany Negroes in the Western Hemisphere, atavistic throwbacks,inherit coal-black skins, lanate hair and other specific Negroidcharacteristics of body (and mind) despite their having part non­Negroid ancestry. However, the Frankenstein suggestion madein all seriousness by some scientists that it would be possible totransform a black man into a white man, with a correspondingchange in mind and personality, by a synthetic process calledgenetic engineering (eugenic selection or alternatively the surgicaltransplant of genes) is not likely to get beyond the realm ofimaginative speculation.

For reasons too complex for elaboration here, certaininheritable modifications are irreversible, and being more oftenthan not dysgenic or retrogressive constitute an ever-presentthreat to mankind's future development. Taking a long view, itmay not be stretching imagination too far to suggest that asnations degenerate through race-mixing and hybridisation (cross­breeding) as advocated by Marxists (but significantly not for theJewish race) so could the whole human species become static orrevert to a more primitive condition, the prelude to decay and

9

extinction. Though at present seeming to be inevitable such adecline could be avoided if the eugenic theories first enunciatedby Sir Francis Galton be nationally applied to preserve the betterracial qualities by appropriate selective mating.

It has been argued by some scientists - even by Sir JulianHuxley - that because of man's increasing technical ability tocon trol his natural environment he shields himself from thediscriminatory pressures of evolution and thus has remainedorganically static or unaltered genetically for some 10,000 years.This appears to be yet another of the illusions or fallacies beingperpetuated by philosophers who seek to confuse the racial issueby assuming that society alone is changing, not man himself. It isof course true that a modern European Nordic man may resemblean ancient European Cromagnon man of 12,000 years ago in manyanatomical respects, but we are not considering individual man,but nations and mankind as a whole, Le. the human species, whichis built up of racial elements originating at different times indifferent territories, and of fluctuating degrees of evolutionaryadvancement. In short our concern is with "the preservation offavoured races in the struggle for life" - to quote the subtitleDarwin gave to his Origin of Species. We know from the demo­graphic statistics of the United Nations that the growth of thespecies is not the same for all races, birthrates and deathrates bothdiffering between races in substantial percentages. The creativepeople of Europe whose more complex or more subtle qualitieshave contributed so much to modern civilisation are not keepingpace in numbers with races not so cerebrally favoured by nature,thus changing, perhaps irredeemably and to its evolutionarydisadvantage, the genetic balance and character of the entirehuman species.

An important internal biological classification of racialsignificance relates to blood group differences. Serological analysishas revealed that specific cellular blood groups or their combinationsbelong to particular races, even though comparisons furnish someevidence of archaic racial mixing - or perhaps a commoninheritance from an earlier anthropoid species. The inheritedblood condition known as 'sickle cell anaemia' found in Negroesoriginated in Africa as a genetic mutation that afforded someprophylactic protection against certain kinds of malaria. Outsidethe malarial belt it is injurious to the race. It is still present inNegroes living in the Western Hemisphere. It has also been foundin Negroid halfbreeds, which means that it may be dangerouslytransmissible to non-Negroid races, a powerful argument againstindiscriminately mixing certain racial breeds in multiracialsocieties. A noteworthy example of an inherited cellular defect isfound in Jews of Semitic breed and in no other race, and which

10

actually tends to curtail their birthrate. Medical records show thatthe incidence of illness is not the same for all races. the congenitalsusceptibility to disease varying between them. Lacking a certainenzyme indispensable for digestion, Negroids in adulthood shouldavoid the lactic diets more suitable for the Caucasoid races. Suchimponderables as racial allergies have been reported and these alsono doubt have a physiological basis.

It is often argued by egalitarians, concerned more with quantitythan quality, that the observable racial differences, far too manyto list here, pale into insignificance when set against the number ofsimilarities, an argument without much substance or relevance,since what is being discussed relates to the anatomical and physio­logical factors not inherited equally by all races or subraces - nor.for that matter, by any of the anthropoid primates.

Of the outward characteristics by which races can be identifiedcolour of skin is the most conspicuous, but not the most important.except as a badge of identification. The skin colour referred to isgenotypic, that is, inherently implanted by evolutionary siftingover thousands of years, unlike the phenotypic sun tanningtemporarily acquired by people with light-coloured skins. Ingeneral dark skins (and dark eyes) vary according to the amount ofmelanin (granules of dark pigment) in the system, but the geneticformula is not the same for all coloured races. Resentment isroused in multiracial communities in England and America by thecrude official lumping together of all non-white people under thegeneralised head of colour. The yellow-tinted skins of mostMongoloids and the nearly black skins of Asiatic Indians (not tomention the sallow Red Indians of the Mongoloid Amerinds) havea genetic foundation that differs from that of the African Negroes,evidence of age-old racial divergence.

Even if they lived under natural conditions in tropical Africafor 10,000 years Nordic families with white skins, blue eyes andfair hair would not acquire Negroid characteristics. In theevolutionary scheme of things light skins are advantageous intemperate or polar zones; dark skins are more advantageous inequatorial zones. From this it could be predicted that the Negroidmigration northward from the tropics to Europe and NorthAmerica will ultimately be limited by natural selection despiteartificial protection.

4. RACIAL PSYCHOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES

Of all the many characteristics that distinguish and irrevocablydivide the human races by far and away the most important in thescale of human values are those relating to the cerebral qualities

11

or mental faculties.School teachers know from class-room experience that some

pupils are mentally brighter than others and - what is moreimportant - percipient teachers know that in general such relativebrightness has an origin deeper than the home life of the pupilalthough this does have some influence on the pupil's attitudes.Studies in the educability of school children in multiracial schoolsin England decisively reveal that Negroid pupils invariably fallbehind the others in lessons despite being born and bred inEngland in domestic circumstances no different from Englishchildren. The explanation of this phenomenon - as conspicuous inAmerica as it is in England - is complex, suffice it to say here,what perhaps to the unprejudiced mind is already obvious, that itis directly associated with a congenital discrepancy in the Negroidbrain.

Notwithstanding the volume of factual information to thecontrary, the British Museum put out a statement in 1977 that"there is no scientific evidence to distinguish human races in termsof intelligence or their relationship to gorillas" - a preposterouspiece of Marxist mendacity officially sponsored by the SocialistGovernment.

In I.Q. tests over fifty years it has been convincingly established(as confirmed by Shuey, Jensen, Eysenck and others competent toassess the evidence) that on the scale of natural or inbornintelligence, uninfluenced by environment, the Negroids and theAustraloids fall considerably below the average of other races,including the Mongoloids (Chinese and Japanese) and most of thedark-skinned races of the Indian Sub-Continent. It has been notedin America that Amerinds, greatly underprivileged as they are,score higher I.Q. marks than Negroes from better-class homes.

An important element in basic mental differences, as in physicaldifferences, which must be taken into consideration, is the varyingrates of maturation between the races, the Negroids on averageexcelling in neural response in early growth, a precocity, needlessto say, not maintained into adulthood. Of evolutionary significanceis the exceptional simian clinging instinct of newly-born Negrobabies.

However, it is not merely in basic intelligence (cognitive ability,educability, adaptability, creativeness, etc.) that individuals andraces differ intrinsically, but in all subjective aspects, intemperaments, tastes, natural inclinations and aptitudes, as wasexplained years ago by Sir Francis Galton and later by Sir CyrilBurt, the renowned educationalist, who sensibly taught thatchildren should be encouraged to develop their inborn bents andtalents.

Despite the evidence of science and history to the contrary,

12

Marxists persistently claim that because of grades of abilitybetween individuals within each race, coupled with fringe racialinterbreeding, it is not feasible to isolate each race or to measureand compare racial or other human group averages and thereforeone race or subrace cannot properly for political action be deemedto be superior to another by any criterion or objective frame ofreference. Proceeding logically from the totally false premise ofracial equality, this can only be regarded as specious propagandaconceived to confuse the issue. The supposition that only thecharacteristics of individuals, not social or group averages, aresusceptible to rational evaluation or comparison is carried to thelengths of dishonesty and absurdity when it goes so far as toinclude nationalities and even the sexes. Behind such spuriousindoctrination to dissuade the citizen from identifying himselfwith his own people and land may be detected an ulterior motive,a sinister intention with the object of weakening all sense ofnational loyalty and with it any warm feelings of patriotism.

Whatever conclusions may be acceptable to politicians for theirpurposes the irrefutable fact remains that there are profoundvariations in inherited brain-power between the races, on averagethe Caucasoids and Mongoloids being on balance demonstrablysuperior to the Negroids in cognitive, rational and creativecapacities, a conclusion on which all anthropologists competentto assess the evidence agree. Where in a few instances individualNegroids have scored higher marks than average in I.Q. tests, thisoverlap may be attributed to some Caucasoid or Mongoloidadmixture, the isolated product of genetic drift between racialpools. Also to be brought into consideration are inborntemperamental variations, particularly those found amongst theCaucasoids, the most variable of the primary races. Furthermore,there are well marked racial patterns of sensuousness.

It is becoming increasingly obvious to minds not obsessed withthe malignant myth of racial uniformity that if mankind is toprogress into the future in any worthwhile form it must berationally organised on some principle of racial exclusiveness orsocial segregation.

5. THE GREAT LAMARCKIAN FALLACY

As fundamentally fallacious as the concept of inborn humanequality is the still widely-held belief that qualities acquired in mindand body by parents during their lifetime could be passed on inthe flesh to their children. This erroneous belief was first givenscientific currency by the French naturalist and evolutionist,Lamarck, as an integral factor in his hypothesis of the dynamics

13

of evolutionary change. Knowing nothing of genetics Lamarckthought that efficiency in adaptation promoted by environmentalstimulus in one generation became inherent and could thus betransmitted to the next generation. From his theory it came to beimagined that giraffes (to quote the classical example) developedtheir exceptionally long necks by habitually stretching up toreach the more succulent shoots on the tops of acacia trees onwhich they fed in their natural habitat and that any increase inthe length of their necks thus acquired by stretching wasreproduced in their offspring. Darwin's alternative explanation ismore simple - and indeed self-evident. It is that the animals of thespecies (possibly somewhat like the okapi, now almost extinct)out of which giraffes have been evolved were not uniform instature or identical in nature (any more than men are today) andthat those amongst them genetically endowed with slightly longernecks, which enabled them more readily to obtain the food bestsuited to them, became stronger and better fitted (with correlatedfactors) to reproduce their kind than others not so well-adapted, aprocess recurring with accumulative effect in succeedinggenerations with almost imperceptible slowness, but with the"inevitability of gradualness, " each single step being infinitesimallysmall.

Instincts are inborn; habits are acquired later. Heredity andenvironment may work inseparably together, but in principle thetwo categories are not logically susceptible to comparison in termsof priority and value in the universal framework of things.

Under the general head of "the inheritance of acquiredcharacteristics" the theory propounded by Lamarck was mostplausible and up to Darwin's time seemed convincing. Even today,when it is completely discredited, some thinkers are reluctant todiscard the theory entirely since it does seem to fit in with theirpolitical or religious preconceptions and prejudices. Up to a fewyears ago the Lamarckian concept was considered to be anindispensable tenet of Marxist ideology and was ruthlessly appliedby Stalin in the U.S.S.R. in the belief that by ceaseless indoc­trination later generations of Soviet citizens would be born withan enhanced inclination towards materialistic Communism. Thetheory was also applied to animals and vegetation (in particularwheat) with such abortive results, however, that it has now beendiscarded by the Soviet commissars. Further, absurd as it mayseem, the idea is still being harboured by certain Churchmen thattraining in Christian ethics, if continuously given, would in the endresult in children being born with an inherent Christian outlook ­a totally unwarranted hope. The Marxist supposition thatchildren of different races in a multiracial nation would eventuallybe born with like minds if their parents grew up together under a

14

common culture can be dismissed as meretricious wishful thinking.Characteristics culturally acquired are not inheritable. Eachgeneration has to be taught anew.

It is now accepted by science as axiomatically true thatbiological modifications, including psychological and personalitytraits, acquired in one generation by education, training, exercise,dietetics, drugs or any other form of environmental influence orconditioning cannot possibly be transmitted in the blood (orgenes) to the succeeding generation, a fundamental truth not yetacknowledged by politicians with Marxist propensities who forpersonal purposes persist in claiming that social changes underman-made laws alone will permanently ensure racial harmony in aracially mixed community.

6. MULTIRACIAL DEMOCRACY (GREAT BRITAIN)

Experience is now beginning to prove that democracy as appliedin the Marxian manner is not necessarily the best form ofgovernment if the end desired be universal happiness with socialharmony or the fulfilment of Utopian dreams. To be of real valueto civilised society public representation demands more than theapplication of the crude formula of 'one man, one vote', which isbased on a concept of equality and which inevitably leads toochlocracy (organised mob law) or autocracy. Also it is clearly notdesirable for candidates for electoral or governmental power to bechosen on gounds of wealth alone, as is now advocated by theBoard of Deputies of British Jews and by some Socialists, e.g. SirHarold Wilson, who themselves, with little dignity or compunction,have as professional agitators in the Labour Party climbed toaffluence, social status and privilege on the backs of theunsuspecting labouring classes. To be ameliorative democracyrequires something more civilised than mercenary attitudes. Itmust stand on intelligence, education, understanding, provenability and honesty, conjoined with the disciplined sense offraternal purpose that is only to be found in a gregarious instinctwith racial pride within the bond of natural affinity andnationhood.

Equal suffrage may confer equal privilege, but it cannot conferequal nature. Freedom comes from a sense of independence, self­reliance and security. Collective responsibility of equals is littlemore than a political device for evading personal blame if thingsgo wrong. To demand by law that which does not exist in realityoffers little hope of better administration or an improved societyin which more personal freedom can be enjoyed without anarchy.

Putting volume before value and ignoring discrepancies in

15

natural ability and merit, Marxism cannot therefore be regarded asa true or commendable form of democracy. It does explain,however, why Marxism in its guise of Socialism, with its assertionof drab utilitarian values, makes some appeal to the failures insociety, to the less gifted and more gullible elements - and toracial minority groups striving as immigrants to gain privileges or astatus to which the national indigenous host community alone isentitled by prior right of heritage.

It may not be irrelevant to observe here that in Great BritainSocialist trade unionism, "the dictatorship of the proletariat,"with its Communist closed shop exclusiveness, its class warfareinciting envy, its rejection of private endeavour and enterprise, andits negation of freedom of choice, together with its lack ofconsideration for the public weal, forbids under ruthless Marxistrules any discussion of racial or patriotic urges and motives.Subversively using trade union power in 1978, Marxists orCommunists attempted to deprive Englishmen who belonged to orsupported patriotic bodies of the right to work. Seeing in thedynastic succession of the Crown a racial phenomenon whichrepublicans and egalitarians abhor, trade union militants seizeevery opportunity to disparage the British Monarchy. Blindlybelieving in Marx and enjoining equal treatment for all, tradeunionism, with unconscious inconsistency, nevertheless presses forpreferential treatment (differentials) for its more powerful andprivileged members.

Up to 1939 the Concise Oxford Dictionary defined a nation as a"distinct race or people having common descent, language,history, etc." In later editions, however, this has been amended toread a "congeries of people, either of diverse races or of commondescent, language, etc." This change in the meaning was officiallymade to accommodate unassimiliable racial immigrant elementsproliferating in the United Kingdom. The revised definition ispeculiarly appropriate in the Western Hemisphere, particularly inthe U.S.A. and Brazil, two nations in which it is predicted ill­assorted multiracialism will eventually inhibit social and nationalcohesion and thus impose a severe handicap on real progresstowards a stable and better society.

It is further interesting to note that in the dictionary "tonaturalise" is defined as "to admit (alien) to citizenship." "Tonationalise" would have been a more appropriate and realisticterm since "to naturalise" implies a change in nature, and "naturalintegration" within a nation is neither possible nor desirable.Negroes or Asiatics or Jews born in England do not becomeEnglish by that fact, any more than kittens born in a kipper boxbecome kippers.

Multiracialism may be defined as a political system whereby

16

different races, whether interbreeding or not, live together underone national government, in contrast to racialism, which means anation of people of one race, common descent and heritage, a farmore enlightened political concept.

As the hostility of the English people to the discordantintrusion into their midst by alien races, particularly those withdark skins, became more stridently articulate, the House ofCommons, as a gesture of appeasement, were moved to set up aSelect Committee on Race Relations and Immigration - thecustomary Parliamentary procedure for avoiding taking urgentlyany constructive or positive action. The Committee were severelyhandicapped at the outset by misleading official statistics,apparently deliberately falsified, but as the years rolled by theywere nevertheless presented with substantial evidence of the socialdislocation, disruption and crime caused by promiscuousimmigration, yet they were not sufficiently unanimous or willinguntil March 1978 to make any specific recommendation as to whoshould (or should not) be adopted or regarded as a British subject.They did recommend, however, that English people with Englishforbears or blood relatives (patrials, except from Rhodesia) shouldhave some prior right to live in England on a par with other Britishsubjects. On other counts, however, the Committee completelyignored the all-important racial factor (all races being inherentlyalike to them), except to discriminate against immigrant familiesfrom the Indian sub-continent - but on an unrealistic basis, moregeographic or national than ethnic. Nor did the Committeeadvance any proposals under which unassimilable and unwantedimmigrants could be returned to their own families and relativesin their homelands of origin, a humane procedure necessary ifperpetual racial acrimony and social strife are to be avoided.

By bringing the Empire to an end and with it all imperialresponsibilities the United Kingdom has been absolved from anymoral or legal obligations to accept as British subjects in Englandmembers of the overspill populations of nations which haveirrevocably renounced their allegiance to the British Crown.Despite this, British politicians of all persuasions, cynicallyindifferent to the well-being and future of their own kinsfolk,have over the years taken no practical steps to stop the disruptiveand needless influx: into England of massive numbers of people ofnon-British breeds from countries no longer under Britishsuzerainty.

Round about the turn of the century, abnormal immigrationinto England, mostly of Jews from eastern Europe, gave rise toserious misgivings, and in Parliament anti-immigration bills tocontrol the situation were drafted, but were not passed into law.The question as to whether there was any danger, social or

17

national, in adulterating the English community with people ofalien stock was apparently not discussed again (except withregard to the citizenship of Chinese discharged from the Army)until 1920, when it was found expedient to include an ethnicfactor in the National Census of that year to determine thenumber of Jewish immigrants, which had reached alarmingproportions. Another twenty years were to go by when towardsthe end of 1947 the problem arose in an acute form as to thedesirability or otherwise of recruiting aliens of uncertain loyalties(Negroids, Mongoloids, Asiatic Indians and Pakistanis) into thearmed forces of the Crown at a time when the Empire was beingbroken up. The Socialist Government, true to the Marxist dogmaof racial equality, saw no reason why men of any race should beexcluded from serving in the British Army. Navy and Air Force,or in the civil police, a decision fully supported by Conservativepoliticians, who, during the Macmillan regime, even sent a militaryteam to the Fiji Islands in the Pacific to recruit Polynesians whowere being turned out of their islands by Indian immigrants.

An event of national and racial significance occurred in 1958when a number of young Englishmen in London were chargedwith "making an affray" with Negro immigrants they thought hadbeen molesting their girl friends. These English youths weresavagely sentenced to four years' imprisonment by a race-consciousJewish judge, which not unnaturally had the effect of alerting theEnglish community to the danger threatening them. Predictablyracial tensions continued to grow, with social disturbance andlawlessness increasing, yet nothing was done to ease the situation.

As time went on with diminishing hope (Parliament beingcynically unresponsive to the declared wishes of the electorate) ofany abatement in the mounting multiracial chaos, the racialminority enclaves became more aggressive and better organised aspart of the Marxist technique of national subversion from within,and under international Jewish sponsorship there came to beplaced on the Statute Book the controversial Race Relations Act(1965), in an attempt to proscribe all public exhibitions ofpatriotic or nationalist zeal. Under this Act Englishmen, worthyof more honour than the Tolpuddle Martyrs, were treated ascommon criminals for openly expressing their dislike of theerosion of their ethos and hard-won liberties. Discrimination infavour of one's own family or people, if British, has been madeillegal, such commendable discrimination being condemned asracial prejudice or "racial hatred". It has even been made unlawfulfor an Englishman to sell his own home to an Englishman if hewants to. Nor is a Briton any longer allowed to identify himselfwith his own nation, such patriotic conduct being consideredprovocative. Pursuing their erosive policy of Marxist racial

18

integration and provocation the Government appointed in April1978 an Indian judge to preside over English Courts of Law, evenallowing him to wear in court a turban as his emblem of racial ortribal pride, his religion, Sikhism, not requiring more than that heshould not trim his beard or cut his hair.

Keeping the pot of racial discord boiling, the SocialistGovernment, apparently at the instigation of the Board ofDeputies of British Jews, had the Race Relations Act strengthenedin 1977 in an unrealistic scheme to outlaw "racial thinking" inpursuance of the Marxist belief that the academic teaching of thefacts of comparative ethnology could be deployed politically toawaken English students and other patriots to the dangersimmanent in multiracialism.

The Race Relations Act is now administered by the somewhatmisnamed Commission for Racial Equality, whose main publicfunction appears to be inciting immigrants to complain if they feelthey were not being accorded the hospitality in England theyconsidered due to them. Formed out of the earlier abortivebureaucracies, one for a time unbelievably under the chairmanshipof the Primate of All England, the Commission is now manned byNegroes and Asiatic Indians under an English chairman, a renegadeConservative politician. The mischievously named RunnymedeTrust, subsidised from abroad and run by Asiatic Indians, isanother body set up to promote the interests of minority groupsagainst the English people.

As a comment on how a multiracial democracy works inpractice, it may be fitting to mention here that when the Socialistswere in Office in 1969, the leader of the Conservatives, Mr.Edward Heath, promised (January 1969) that if the ConservativeParty were again elected to Office (1) Commonwealth citizens willnot have the right to settle permanently in Great Britain, (2) noimmigrant will be able to stay in Great Britain for an unlimitedperiod, (3) any immigrant admitted will no longer enjoy anabsolute right to bring in relatives, and (4) the decision as towhether any immigrant from any part of the world is eligible tobe admitted will be made by British authorities in his country oforigin. Mr. Edward Heath added: "These are the proposals that thenext Conservative Government will carry out. But the matter isurgent." When later the Conservatives were elected to Office,largely on this assurance, they expediently did nothing to honourtheir pledge, thus highlighting an inherent weakness in multiracialdemocracies (in both England and America) where politiciansunscrupulously pander to racial minority fraternities to solicitvotes for election to power.

Although successive British Governments have neglected torecord vital racial statistics, it was authoritatively estimated in

19

1961 that immigrants, without allowing for illegal entries, mostlyof the coloured races, were flooding into Britain at the rate ofabout 136,000 a year, a figure accepted by the United Nations.Today, seventeen years later, they are still coming in with theirfamilies at the rate of about 50,000 a year. In 1962, as thesituation became more desperate, the Government were moved topass the Commonwealth Immigration Act in a belated attempt tostem the flood. Further Acts were passed in 1968 and 1971. Theseunrealistic and half-hearted measures, with loopholes throughwhich an elephant could skip, reluctantly and expediently taken,were largely thrust on the Government by the racial policy ofAfricanisation (Africa for the Africans) introduced by the Negrodespotisms in Africa to expel from their lands the colouredAsiatic Indians as well as the white Europeans, mostly Britons,who had built up their nations for them. In a few years' timeGreat Britain will be required to hand over Hong Kong to Chinaand then millions of Chinese will no doubt claim Commonwealth"right" to settle in England.

Dwelling in Great Britain and enjoying all the privileges gainedover the centuries by the indigenous Britons are now severalmillion people of assorted alien races (total for each race notknown) with antipathetic cultures and creeds, most of whom,under cover of the ill-conceived British Nationality Act (1948),were unwisely allowed to enter and reside in the realm at a periodwhen the British Empire under the Crown was being finallybroken up. This monstrous invasion of their homeland byincompatible alien migrants, uninvited and unwanted, manywith diseases, consisting largely, but not entirely, of AfricanNegroids (mostly from the Western Hemisphere) and AsiaticIndians, has saddled the once relatively united and homogeneousBritons with a social problem of unparallelled magnitude, possiblynow insoluble without some form of racial segregation within thenation or alternatively an enlightened programme of repatriationon a vast scale. As regards repatriation, the Republics of India andGuyana have already signified their willingness to allow their ownexpatriates to rejoin their families amongst their own kind ofpeople, a procedure of commonsense to which humanitarianscould have no justifiable objection. Illegal immigrants and aliencriminals, though legion in number, are rarely deported, largelybecause their own countries disown them.

The Socialist Home Secretary, subconsciously swayed, perhaps,by his atavistic Cymric race-memory, jubilantly declared inParliament in April 1978 on behalf of his international associates,Marxists and racial minority groups that as the United Kingdomcould no longer properly be regarded as a purely British nationworth preserving, but an inchoate multiracial congeries in the

20

welter of mankind, further national action to ease the worseningsocial conditions, including crime, caused by immigration was notnecessary, particularly as there had been some falling off in thenumbers of incompatible races coming in.

Concurrently with the influx of immigrants into England therehas been an outflow of an equal number of Britons, scientists,doctors, technicians and others of calibre superior to the incomers,a migratory exchange greatly to the disadvantage of the Britishcommunity and nation.

Notwithstanding their agreement in principle with the Marxistphilosophy of the Socialists on the concept of a non-Britishmultiracial democracy for the United Kingdom, the Conservativesagain promised (April 1978) that they would, if elected to power,tighten up the existing immigration regulations and that actionwould be undertaken to prevent families migrating from India,Bangladesh and Pakistan, but not against Negroids and othersarriving from elsewhere, including certain European nations, e.g,France and the Netherlands, who seek to get rid of their non­European inhabitants.

Although such a sensible and humane approach may not appealto professional politicians in a multiracial democracy, it wouldclearly be to the advantage of the nation, now and in the future, ifimmigration be discouraged or, preferably, stopped altogether,except for familiars, and that some procedure be introduced toinduce and assist unsuitable immigrants to return to theirhomelands where they would be free from the racial rancour theycomplain about in England. In the meantime a degree of racialtoleration may be achieved if some form of social segregation,forbidding miscegenation, be authorised, however complicated toadminister, which openly recognises the irreconcilable nature ofthe ethnic differences, both biological and cultural which dividethe races and which will for ever make congenial integration inone community impossible.

The unrealistic proposal put forward by Marxists and not a fewChurchmen that the unintegrated immigrants should becompulsorily dispersed over the whole country, but not to theirown countries, and not allowed to congregate seems both crueland devoid of sense. Repudiating integration the immigrants showevery determination to live in the congenial atmosphere of theirown enclaves.

The Socialists in Office in 1978, with Liberals and not a fewConservatives, continued with their efforts to enforce on theEnglish people by legal pressures uncongenial integration, includinghybridisation or the procreation of half-breeds and misfits, allapparently part - or so it seems - of some internationalconspiracy. In an attempt to glorify the Negro race - and demean

21

the European races - a text book of African history, with an anti­Christian bias bespeaking its Jewish source, and confusingbarbarism with civilisation, has been authorised for compulsorystudy in "comprehensive" schools in Great Britain, a ratherblatant scheme to corrupt the minds of English youth and destroyany pride they may have in their own history, race and nation.Under the same authorship a similar history has been adopted withthe same objective in state-run public schools in America.

The next national census of the population of the UnitedKingdom will be held in 1981, when it is proposed that details beincluded to show the racial or ethnic composition of theinhabitants. However, it can already be envisaged that the scheme,as approved by the Commission for Racial Equality, will fail in itsavowed purpose, since it is not strictly devised on a rational orscientific or comprehensive basis, but only covers colour of skinand nation of origin of new immigrants.

Historians of the future may no doubt wonder what was thecompelling force behind the great migratory wave of races fromtropical lands into the British Isles when Great Britain was alreadyoverpopulated and had to import half her food requirements, allthe while carrying a chronic burden of between one and twomillion workpeople unable to find work to sustain themselves.

It may be worth recalling that ethnic self-determination was aprinciple adopted for the settlement of indepenent nations afterthe First World War. But it was not strictly observed.

7. MULTIRACIAL DEMOCRACY (UNITED STATES)

The United States of America have been described as the"crucible of mankind", meaning a place where all races can mixfreely and breed together to produce a synthetic race with acommon national identity. Over the years Federal laws have beenpassed to regulate by a quota system the inflow of new citizens,but this has been done more on a geographic than on an ethnicbasis, with the result that there now exists, as in England, a gravesocial imbalance, exacerbated in America by the rapid proliferationof Negroes of African slave descent, more than half fecklesslyborn out of wedlock, the largest minority element. On top of thismillions of mixed breeds are flooding in from Mexico, manyillegally, all with basic outlooks vastly different from the peoplesto the north of them.

The second largest racial minority group in America, stillindomitably preserving its racial uniqueness, is the well-organisedJewish fraternity, who exercise an influence in publicity, finance,trade and politics far greater than their numbers or their intrinsic

22

merits would justify.Under the Civil Righ ts legislation to abolish racial distinctions,

American schoolchildren of White parents are being forced againstthe wishes of their parents to attend schools far from their homeswhere they would be compulsorily mixed with children not oftheir race, a demoralising process naturally resented by the parents.America is now faced with the dilemma as to whether in principlepreference for posts should be given to unqualified and unsuitableNegroes just because they are Black or to others who are betterqualified and more competent. On the judgement of the FederalSupreme Court in the Allan Bakke case the future tempo ofcivilised progress in America will depend.

In the Armageddon that one day will inevitably be fought to aconclusion between the great powers for national and racialsurvival, the vulnerable Achilles Heel in America's defence ofWestern Civilisation will assuredly be the corroding canker ofmultiracialism.

8. MULTIRACIAL DEMOCRACY (OTHER NATIONS)

Next to the U.S.A. (and Canada) in the Western Hemisphere,Brazil furnishes the most interesting example of multiracialismin practice. Despite the official pretence of racial equality inBrazil, the races tend to keep apart, the Negroes, manumitted onlyninety years ago still rather conspicuously occupying the lowerstrata in society, but not so low as the native Amerinds who aresteadily being exterminated as their lands are being taken awayfrom them by immigrants.

In the multiracial Republic of Guyana the Negro ruling factionopenly discriminates against the Asiatic Indian citizens.

The Republic of Haiti in the West Indies was the first nation tobe ruled by Negroes outside Africa. Today it furnishes anoutstanding example of the failure of Negroids to create aprogressive civilised state despite massive support from othernations. The nation has, of course, suffered from the malaiseof multiracialism, which still keeps the community divided.

In the Eastern Hemisphere people of racially different descentin the Indian sub-continent have been intermingling for two orthree thousand years, but they are still not integrated - andperhaps they never will be. In Sri Lanka, once joined to India, thehome of the almost extinct Australoid Veddahs, the AryanSingalese are deporting Tamil speaking immigrants, Dravidianpeople they regard as inferior.

The millions of people in China (and in Korea), althoughracially differentiated in certain minor respects, are relatively

23

homogeneous, the invading immigrants over the centuries beingall related to the same primary Mongoloid stock. In the lands oncecalled Indo-China, however, successive waves of migratinginvaders, though Mongoloid in descent, have kept the land dividedand civil strife has been taking a frightful toll of the people.

Despite their apparent homogeneity, the Japanese people are infact somewhat racially mixed (quite apart from the indigenousnon-Mongoloid Ainu), their society implicitly tolerating a castesystem not unlike Hinduism in India.

Africa, the Dark Continent, where experts think the first humanbeing appeared on earth, seems to have known nothing but racialand tribal conflicts, which still prevails today. However, somethousands of years ago families of non-Negroid people had enteredAfrica and settled in the delta of the Nile, where their supremeracial qualities enabled them to establish one of the world's firstcivilisations, which as a disciplined nation under a succession ofdynastic pharaohs retained for centuries its distinctive ethnicidentity. Modern Egyptians, however, now under Arab rule, seemto have lost the exceptional qualities of the first settlers, theconsequence of multiracialism and massive miscegenation. Thevarious peoples living today in northern Africa, Hamites, Semitesand Negroids, are precariously kept together by their commonreligion, Islam, forced on them from the 8th century A.D. by theirArab overlords. In Ethiopia and Somalia racial strife is endemic.Over the lands of equatorial Africa the Negroes evolved into tribalgroups, each competing with the other for survival but never ableto create from scratch a civilised nation without European helpdespite propitious conditions.

In Southern Africa white Caucasoid people have created greatnations out of the wilderness, South Africa and Rhodesia, butthese civilised nations with their Christian traditions are now beingthreatened by the rising racial power of the Bantu and otherNegroid peoples, a process of dissolution and degeneracy fosteredby the United Nations and by the Marxist politicians of Britainand America - and the Soviet Union.

In Europe, Sweden, with its predominantly Nordic population,with a government nevertheless strongly biased towards Marxistmultiracialism, there is now apprehension at the growing non­Nordic elements in the nation, which it is estimated (April 1978)will constitute over a third of the total inhabitants by the end ofthe century.

Similar misgivings are arising in Norway, mainly on account ofthe unsolicited influx of unassimilable Pakistanis.

In the Iberian Peninsula the Basque people of northern Spain,perhaps the oldest European race still race-eonscious, continuewith their campaign for racial recognition and independence on

24

terms of self-detennination.As a consequence of the dismantling of their great empire, the

Dutch people of the Netherlands are confronted with theimpossible problem of absorbing into their national life countlessNegroes and Mongoloids, the latter coming from what was oncethe Dutch East Indies.

The attempts by alien intruders into Germany after the firstWorld War to bring Germany under Bolshevik or Marxisthegemony had fearful consequences, from which there is nowlittle prospect of Europe recovering until the German people areracially united again as one nation.

Although for nearly two centuries openly avowing egalitarianismand multiracialism, France is now trying to get rid of citizens ofnon-European races, mainly of Arab extraction from northernAfrica, who are Moslems and therefore cannot easily be broughtwithin the Catholic community.

For centuries the Balkan Peninsula has been the Europeancockpit of racial conflict, an endemic condition apparentlybeyond redemption.

In the Middle East the Jews are engaged on an aggressive waragainst Palestinian Arabs, a conflict which involves both religionand race. Though professing Judaism, most of the Jewish invadersseem to be Mongoloid Khazars, not Hebraic Semites as theirrabbis claim.

Across the vast territories of the U.S.S.R. racial troubles simmerbelow the surface, despite the merciless methods of the Socialistcommissars to control matters by enforced multiracialism or by"liquidation" or by compulsory re-settlement of wholecommunities. Within the Marxist Empire of the U.S.S.R. theMongoloids are rapidly outbreeding the Caucasoid Slav/Nordics,a pointer to the future.

In the islands of New Zealand the inhabitants of MongoloidPolynesian Maori provenance are now holding their own asregards numbers, but the racial cleavage remains, as theyinstinctively cling to their evolved style of life, despite the effortsmade by the dominating and more enterprising Caucasoids, mostlyof British descent, to divert their course. In Australia theautochthonic Australoids (the Blackfellows or Aborigines), thefirst race to enter this great island continent, are now, after almost20,000 years as a racial entity, on the verge of extinction, notbeing capable of adapting themselves to the more complexcultures encroaching on their aboriginal preserves - an objectlesson for those who still like to believe in the fiction, theprejudice exploited by Marxists as part of their technique ofsubversion, that the human races are equal to one another innature.

25

As the human species continues to expand beyond the limitedresources of the globe to sustain it, so will tensions grow as theraces, consciously or unconsciously, compete for survival, yetpoliticians and clerics of the Caucasoid Western World, not fullyunderstanding the root causes of nationally disruptive migration(or invasion), take little heed of this crisis in the destiny of man onearth.

9. RACIAL RELIGIOUS BIAS

Outwardly reflecting the social (and moral) bias characterisingdifferent breeds of people and their nations, religion has played aspecial part in human development and evolutionary progress,involving, though rarely admitted, racial politics.

Beneath the coating of cultural or religious colours, the tribalstrife described in such graphic detail in the Old Testament wasin fact (that is when analysed anthropologically) conflict betweengroups of families of racially different origins, all striving to settlein the same territory, warfare continuing in the same region todaywith the religious undertones of Mohammedanism and Judaism.

Under their enlightened cult of Mithraism (Persian and Greekin origin) the Roman Empire tolerated most religious sects, evenracialist Judaism and at times Christianity, the great exceptionbeing Druidism, the cohering cult of the Celts or Gauls, which wasessentially a nationalist religion not amenable to the kind ofmultiracialism the Romans, like the Marxists of today, sought tothrust upon them, the more easily to govern them. It was, ofcourse, the degenerating trend of multiracialism that in the endbrought down the disciplined civilisation of the Roman Empire,helped, according to Gibbon, by the disintegrating influence ofChristianity based on the make-belief of human equality, andwhich in the end ushered in the Dark Ages.

This precedent was followed in 1945 by the American Army ofOccupation in Japan when it banned Shintoism, the religion of theindigenous people, because such a nationalist cult tended to keepthe Japanese people strong and united as a separate race andnation. In the end, however, the racial quality of the peopleprevailed.

It can be said that each religious cult has had its origin in aspontaneous urge to keep each family, clan, tribe, race or nationunited as a self-conscious combination in fulfilment of a gregariousinstinct, an evolutionary form of protection. Religion is associatedwith kingship, as Frazer pointed out in his Golden Bough, but thepolitical aspect of this is forgotten today as mankind turns tomaterialist Marxism, now regarded as an international religion by

26

the United Nations. Even when sharing the same religion racesinterpret the common doctrine in their own way according totheir racial predilections, an explanation perhaps of the schismswhich from the beginning have dogged the great religious systems.

Though now twisted by Marxist and Maoist teaching, theChinese have their Confucianism and their Taoism and theirBuddhism, the last named being introduced by missionaries fromIndia; the Asiatic Indians, both Aryans and Dravidians, have theirHinduism and also their Buddhism; the Semitic Arabs have theirMohammedanism, now spreading over Asia and most of Africa;and the Jews have their Judaism; religions all essentially of racialsignificance - and all antipathetical to Christianity, the religion,though originating outside Europe, which came to be developedby the supposedly pagan European Nordic and Alpine subraces.

In the United Kingdom Britons, whether of Celtic or Saxonorigin, after centuries of travail, adopted the revolutionary creedof Christianity, albeit retaining many of their own religious rituals.Christianity is a catholic and proselytising religion and itsmissionaries, seeking converts from all quarters of the globe, areaccordingly inclined to minimise the supreme value to humanity ofthe disciplines behind racial and national associations. Manycelibate clerics, misinterpreting perhaps the example of the Master,deprecate and renounce the ties of family life based on the normalsexual union, in the belief that Eternal Life can only be achievedby such individual abnegation and sacrifice. It may be significantthat the tenn "family" does not appear in the New Testament.

Once England was a racially united nation, prospering as a resultof historical continuity under a dynastic monarchy, the Crownbeing sanctified by the Coronation, a Christian ceremonial, but itis now not only multiracial but irredeemably multicredal as well.In the realm are dwelling over 1,000,000 Moslems, mostlyPakistanis, and about double that number of Hindus and Judaistsand others of non-Christian creeds, for whom the hallowed Crossof St. George has no meaning. The Established Church of England,no longer sensitive to the conscience of the nation, has palpablyfallen under the blight of soulless Marxism. Through the WorldCouncil of Churches it has even aligned itself with the BlackTerror in Africa, thus losing both secular and spiritual credibility.

Seeing little merit in the morale that derives its strength fromnational pride and prestige with an inner sense of belonging, theEstablished Church of England decries the value of time-honouredtraditions and in line with the amoral cult of Marxism activelycultivates a form of ecumenism or internationalism in which thefamily loyalties of patriotism have no place. Parish churches arefalling into decay, while mosques are flourishing in the land onceChristian.

27

In welcoming the entry into England of people of incompatiblebreeds and irreconcilable creeds the hierarchy of the nationalChurch, seeing no value in kinship loyalties, the basis of anydisciplined society, takes no heed of the injunction given by theAlmighty to immigrants in an alien land: "Return unto thycountry, and to thy kindred, and I will deal well with thee."(Genesis 32:9)

28

BIBLIOGRAPHY

RaceJohn R. Baker, Oxford University Press (1974)

Races of MankindCalvin Kephart, Peter Owen Ltd. (1961)

The Origin of RacesCarleton S. Coon, Jonathan Cape Ltd. (1963)

The Living Races of ManCarleton S. Coon, Jonathan Cape Ltd. (1966)

Racial Variations in ManArthur R. Jensen, E. Sutherland and others, The Institute ofBiology (1974)

Race and Modern ScienceEdited by Robert E. Kuttner, Social Science Press (1967)

Race, Intelligence and GeneticsArthur R. Jensen and others, Psychology Today, Vol. No. 7 (1973)

Race, Intelligence and EducationJ. H. Eysenck, Temple Smith Ltd. (1971)

Race et Intelligence (in French)Jean-Pierre Hebert, Editions Copernie, Paris (1977)

The Inequality of ManH. J. Eysenck, Temple Smith Ltd. (1973)

InequalityChristopher Jencks and others, AlIen Lane (1973)

Genetics and ManC. D. Darlington, George Allen & Unwin Ltd. (1964)

Environment, Heredity and IntelligenceArthur R. Jensen and others, Harvard University Press (1969)

Human Ancestry from a Genetic Point of ViewR. Ruggles Gates, Harvard University Press (1948)

The Evolution of Man and SocietyC. D. Darlington, George AlIen & Unwin Ltd. (1969)

The Outline of HistoryH. G. Wells, Cassell & Co., Ltd. (Rev. Ed. 1972)

The Hutchinson History of the WorldJ. M. Roberts, Hutchinson (1976)

29

A Study of HistoryArnold J. Toynbee (AbridgementofVols. I-VI by D. C. Somerville)Oxford University Press (1948)

Nations and StatesHugh Seton-Watson, Methuen (1977)

Inheritance and National HistoryR. J. Berry, Collins (1978)

The Next Million YearsCharles Galton Darwin, Rupert Hart-Davis (1952)

Also essential reading:

The Mankind Quarterly. I Darnaway Street, Edinburgh, Scotland.

Monographs of The International Association for the Advancementof Ethnology and Eugenics. New York, US.A.

Nouvelle Ecole, B.P. 19, Paris, (Cedex) France.

Instauration, Howard Allen Enterprises, Inc., p.a. Box 76, CapeCanaveral, Florida, U.S.A.

Ethnic and Racial StudiesRoutledge & Kegan Paul, Ltd. (Vol. I No. I January 1978)

30