Northerners made fortunes out of the slave trade, relatively few owned
slaves at the time of the Civil War and consequently they could, with
some justification, demand that the South be equally virtuous. But very
few Northerners are in a position where they need put their children
in schools with large percentages of Negroes. In forcing integration
upon the South, the North is demanding that the South do what the North
itself in similar circumstances would not do. It is an established
fact that white people favor integration throughout the United States
exactly in proportion as they do not need to practice it.
* * * * *
_Are there any good reasons why Southern white children shouldn’t be
made to go to school with Negroes?_
There are several, among them the fact that their parents don’t want
them to, but I will suggest the fundamental reason.
There is no basis in sound science for the assumption, promoted
by various minority groups in recent decades, that all races are
biologically equal in their capacity to advance, or even to sustain,
what is commonly called Western civilization. They most emphatically
are not.
The Negro race has various and valuable qualities. In those great
attributes of the heart--sympathy and kindness--and in a sense of
humor--the average[2] Negro, taken as an individual, is fully on a par
with the average white. In certain skills the Negro ranks above the
white. If I were lost in an African jungle my life might depend on the
talents of a Negro. In other qualities of mind and character, qualities
specially involved in our Western civilization, the full-blooded Negro
is congenitally only partially adaptable. Hereafter, when I use such
words as “inferior”, “backward”, and “unequal”, I use them in this
limited sense only.
Such being our understanding, let me state the situation in its
simplest terms, quoting a letter to me from a Professor of Physiology
in one of our leading medical schools: “School integration is social
integration, and social integration means an ever increasing rate
of interbreeding. [This is true regardless of whether the sexes are
separated in schools. Little brother would still bring his new Negro
friend home after school.] As a biologist I see the process as a mixing
of Negro genes in our white germ plasm, a process from which there can
be no unmixing.”
Some disagreement may exist as to the extent to which the admixture of
Negro genes has affected white civilizations in the past. I have never
anywhere seen the claim that it did the white race any good. Consider
the history of the West Indies and other Latin American countries. But
in any case, we are left with the query, what great civilization of
the kind we are seeking to develop in the West ever arose _after_ an
admixture of Negro genes?
Since the question answers itself, I must ask the Northern
integrationist by what authority he claims the right to gamble with the
white civilization of the South, against the will of its people, while
he personally sits secure with his children in all white schools, or in
schools with negligible percentages of Negroes.
To me this appears as one of the worst examples of hypocrisy and
brutality in all history. However, it differs only in degree from a
related trend of our times. It is always easy and sometimes justifiable
to spend the money that someone else has earned--a principle which
the equalitarians understand thoroughly. It is equally easy and never
justifiable to spend someone else’s children.
* * * * *
_Are there enough Negroes in the United States to make any real
difference if we absorb them?_
The ratio of non-whites to whites in the United States as a whole in
the 1950 census was around 10%. If completely absorbed, this would be
a substantial admixture, with noticeable effects. More serious is the
fact that a large part of the Negro population is concentrated in the
South. In 1950, Mississippi had 46%, South Carolina 39%, Louisiana 33%,
Alabama 32%, and Georgia 31% non-whites. Absorption in any of these
states would be disastrous. It would be almost as bad in any other
southern state. There are 131 counties in nine southern states in
which the Negro population exceeds the white.
* * * * *
_Is there any evidence that the Negro really cares about intermarriage
with the white race?_
Scan the Negro press. Here, as an example, is a quotation from the
Pittsburgh _Courier_, a leading Negro weekly, for August 15, 1959:
“The Negro phobes and crackerologists are ever shouting warnings
that this or that lowering of racial barriers will lead inevitably
to inter-marriage and intermixture. Well, I say that’s just fine and
exactly what this nation needs to maintain its world supremacy.... We
live in an unwholesome clandestine atmosphere in which we whisper of
healthy love and desires across the color line but fear to speak out
boldly....
“Every community worth its salt should have a frankly inter-racial
club or association where the boys and gals, colored and white, could
associate, drink and dance.... Of course we favor racial mixing,
including marriage, and are working openly to kill all racially
restrictive legislation and social segregation and discrimination.”
I have before me a copy of the Negro magazine _Ebony_ for February,
1960. On page 66 there is a picture of a Negro next to a picture of a
white girl. Under the picture of the Negro is the following caption:
“Hebrew Holy charm around Sammy’s neck is gift from Eddie Cantor.
Planning to marry Canadian blonde, Sammy says: ‘The Bible says “Take
unto yourself a wife.” And it don’t say nothing about her color.’”
May I also quote an interview with Congressman Adam Clayton Powell
appearing in _United States News and World Report_ on September 5, 1952:
“Q. What is the attitude of the Negro in the United States on the
subject of intermarriage? Is it discussed frequently in the press?
“A. Yes, but on an objective basis. In fact, an increasingly large
number of Negro leaders are marrying whites of extremely stable and
respected families.
“Q. Is there much more fraternizing in the Northern cities between
Negroes and whites, especially in the large Negro centers like Harlem,
than there used to be?
“A. Yes, much more.
“Q. Is there any tendency among the Negroes to reject that, or are they
welcoming it?
“A. They are very definitely welcoming it. An increasing number of fine
leaders on both sides are marrying.
“Q. What is the argument that is used by Negro leaders in answer to the
point that is sometimes made that, if intermarriages continue in the
next 25 to 30 years, then the races will be adulterated somewhat as
they are in Cuba and Brazil?
“A. I have heard that argument, but it doesn’t amount to any argument
at all from my standpoint, because if we are fighting for integration,
well then there it is. I mean, you can’t fight against segregation and
want separation. We must be consistent.
“Q. I’m not sure that that is clear.
“A. The Negro leaders are fighting against segregation. Therefore, they
can’t have a position on the one hand against segregation and on the
other hand against inter-racial marriage.”
* * * * *
_My Harvard professor claims that miscegenation increases when one
race is kept inferior to another and that anything that increases
the equality of the two races minimizes the opportunities for
miscegenation. Is not this true?_
It depends in what sense one uses the word “miscegenation”. Your
professor is using it in the sense of illicit intercourse. It is
manifestly not true that keeping a race inferior increases the rate
of legalized marriage with the intent to bear and rear children which
is the basic question at issue in the integration fight. In illicit
connections every effort is made to avoid breeding. When social
integration occurs, this sort of “equality” invites legalized unions in
which breeding is a major object.
Even if illegal unions resulted in offspring as numerous as do
marriages, the social consequences would still be quite different.
When white men marry Negro women in any numbers the trend is toward
a gradual change in social attitudes of acceptance, and a slow
infiltration of the dominant white society by the offspring, with the
consequent changing of the standards of that society, as evidenced in
various Latin American countries.
On the other hand when white men have illicit intercourse with Negro
women, not only are offspring avoided if possible but, if offspring do
result, the latter are isolated from the dominant white society and
consequently do not have any comparable chance to change its standards,
as heretofore evidenced in the United States.
* * * * *
_While there is no positive scientific proof that the Negro is the
equal of the white man, neither is there any positive scientific
proof that he is not. Under these circumstances, how can the Negro’s
inferiority be assumed?_
It is true that anthropology is not an exact science in the sense that
mathematics is, and that its propositions cannot be proved or disproved
like mathematical formulae. Nevertheless, the evidence is as clear as
the nature of the science permits, and it is all that reasonable men
can ask.
In the management of human affairs, all law and all practical judgments
are based on a balance of probabilities. In our civil courts, decisions
are reached on probabilities alone. In the criminal law, the balance
of probabilities must reach the extent of being “beyond a reasonable
doubt”, but can seldom amount to a certainty.
In applying the findings of a science like anthropology to our daily
lives, the same principles must govern, and I will go so far as to
say that not only does the evidence on the incomplete adaptability
of the Negro meet the requirements of the civil law, it meets those
of the criminal law. Observation and experience confirm it “beyond a
reasonable doubt”.
A northern psychologist, commenting upon the above answer, remarks
that in his opinion a thorough study of Negro-white intelligence tests
_does_ reveal conclusive mathematical proof of the Negro’s limitations.
To my mind, the point is academic. But to those interested, I not only
recommend a reading of Dr. Shuey’s[3] and Dr. Tanser’s books cited in
my letter to the Attorney General, but also “A Scientist’s Report on
Race Differences”, by Dr. Frank C. J. McGurk appearing in the September
21, 1956 edition of _U. S. News and World Report_, as well as “‘Negro
vs White Intelligence’--An Answer”, by the same author, in the winter,
1959, issue of the _Harvard Educational Review_.
While, as I have suggested elsewhere, skull criteria as applied to
racial differences are in a state of flux owing to research presently
in progress by such men as Wilder Pennfield of McGill University, there
is no question that the frontal lobes of the typical Negro are smaller
and the cerebral cortex less wrinkled than the typical white’s. For
an excellent study in this regard, see Cornelius J. Connolly, _The
External Morphology of the Primate Brain_, 1950. Connolly has pointed
out very significant differences between Caucasoid and American Negro
brains, particularly in the sulci of the cortical frontal lobes, an
area decisive to higher intelligence. Ward C. Halstead’s _Brain and
Intelligence_, 1947, considers the relation of these lobes to control
over the emotions and to judgment. I deal further with questions of
documentation in footnote 7, and specifically with the frontal lobes on
pages 53-54.
* * * * *
_You have spoken of white civilizations being pulled down by the
admixture of Negro genes. How can you prove this?_
I will answer the question by asking another. Can anyone name one
stable republic in all history that was predominantly, or even
substantially, Negro? The capacity for a free civilization involves
many attributes, self-control (which, among other things, includes
resistance to emotionalism), self-reliance, self-responsibility,
willingness to bear the burdens of others without casting upon others
the burdens one should bear one’s self, willingness both to accept
the verdict of majorities and to concede the rights of minorities,
willingness to obey the law even when it hurts, willingness to support
rather than to raid a treasury, emphasis upon the importance of the
individual. Our American Republic, with all its faults, is, together
with England, the fine flower of centuries of self-discipline and
experience in free government by the English speaking branch of the
white race. I will not say no other branch, but I will say few other
races, have ever approached this achievement, least of all the Negro.
My answer covers the sphere of government alone. I have dealt elsewhere
with the Negro in relation to other aspects of our culture.
* * * * *
_Are not many individual Negroes superior to many individual whites?_
Here again we have the point that I made in my letter to the Attorney
General: In dealing with matters of race, we must either compare
average with average or best with best; we cannot logically compare
best with worst.
When the chart of the Caucasoid race as a whole is laid beside the
chart of the Negro race as a whole, in those attributes involved in
our type of civilization, the Caucasoid will be found superior at each
level except perhaps the lowest where the question arises, can one be
better at being bad?
I am reminded here of one man who wrote me ridiculing the reference in
my letter to the President to a Negro settlement in Africa and asking,
“why not point to the whites in Hog Wallow, Arkansas?” The answer, of
course, must be that the settlement in Africa is typical of the best
that the Negro, _left on his own resources_, can produce while Hog
Wallow, Arkansas, is not typical of the best, or even of the average,
for the white race.
* * * * *
_If some Negroes contribute more to our civilization than some whites,
why then should we not sort people by worth rather than by race?_
In all the ordinary judgments of life, in dealings between individuals,
we should. But in those matters which involve social association, and
hence the possibility of intermarrying, the element of race inevitably
enters because each individual carries in his genes the heritage of
his race and this will be passed on in the breeding process. As one
Southerner put the point: “However weak the individual white man,
his ancestors produced the greatness of Europe; however strong the
individual black, his ancestors never lifted themselves from the
darkness of Africa.”
* * * * *
_Were there not magnificent Negro civilizations in Africa when white
men were drinking blood out of skulls? What about Timbuktu?_
To begin with, I know of no period when white men drank blood out of
skulls. Secondly, if one searched through all history for the time when
the best pure Negro culture, uninfluenced by white help, was at its
peak, and then sought the time when the worst pure white culture was
at its bottom, I suppose one might decide that, as a white man, one
would have preferred to have lived among the Negroes, although I doubt
it. I have not heard of any tribal poetry among Negroes comparable
to Beowulf or the Nibelungenlied. In any case the same point about
comparing best with worst applies here as applied in my answer to the
question on page 42.
Of greater importance, it would be well to examine more closely these
so-called “magnificent Negro civilizations” in Africa. At one time, and
a very brief one, there were west Sudan kingdoms with more brilliance
than the contemporary ones in, say, Scandinavia, but they could not be
compared with the contemporary Byzantine Empire or even the troubadour
civilization of Provence.
As for the city of Timbuktu, can you mention the Arab-inspired Mosque
school of that city in the same breath with the University of Paris,
also founded in the twelfth century? Which of their medieval professors
has the modern influence of St. Thomas Aquinas? Remember also that
Timbuktu was ruled by an Arab nobility and a slightly colored Tuareg
upper class. Full-blooded Negroes were at the bottom of the social
scale.
* * * * *
_Was there not once a great Negro Pharaoh on the throne of Egypt?_
There was no black dynasty on the throne of Egypt as long as Egypt was
Egypt in any real sense. The Nubian dynasty between 742-633 B.C. was a
period of retrogression.
Although Nubia has always bounded Egypt on the south, and began
absorbing some Caucasoid racial elements before the dawn of history, it
has never contributed significantly to the culture of Egypt.
* * * * *
_Does not Basil Davidson’s “Lost Cities of Africa” prove the existence
of ancient Negro civilizations?_
Mr. Davidson is a romantic propagandist for the equalitarian ideology.
His book breathes his passion to prove Negro equality into every line,
the passion being more apparent than the proof.
Moreover, it is impossible to give credence to an author who can
write a sentence such as the following: “That the chiefs and some of
the tribes of the coasts were easily corrupted into wholesale slave
trading is obvious enough: the step from domestic slavery, which they
had always practiced, to the sale of slaves was all too easily made.”
This passage suggesting white corruption of African chiefs should be
laid beside the known facts regarding the Yam Festival of the Ashanti
Negroes. In this rite at the end of the first rainy season of each
year, native slaves were herded into a compound and trussed up to
stakes. The compound was surrounded by thorny plants. At a signal the
black debutantes of the season were turned loose with knives to hack
and bleed their way into the compound where they proceeded to cut the
slaves to pieces. Indeed, students are of the opinion that, with the
possible exception of the Aztec, the earth has never known a bloodier
race than the African Negro.[4]
I may add that in 1960, as reported by international police circles,
girl children are being captured in northwestern Nigeria, in the
“democratic” modern state of Ghana, and sold into domestic slavery
to westernized Negroes in Dahomey. It is reported by the same police
organization that some of these children become the victims of human
sacrifice cults, including cannibalism, and that the current, 1960,
price is $825.
Mr. Davidson overlooks these matters when he speaks of black chiefs
and tribes corrupted by whites. White hands were far from clean, but
they were several shades cleaner than the black.[5] The pattern repeats
itself. Invariably the equalitarian, or Marxist, will try to blame the
better for the conduct of the worse.
* * * * *
_Recorded history is only a small fragment on the total scale of time.
Civilizations rise and fall. The British were primitives once, then
rose. Why may not the Negroes do the same?_
It is now generally believed that civilization, as distinguished from
native culture, had its beginnings in one zone, in what is sometimes
called the Fertile Crescent, and spread from there, as a fire spreads,
to other areas of the earth, the only uncertain exception to this
theory being the civilizations of Central America and Peru. Different
races caught up the spark, so to speak, according to the quality of the
tinder they themselves constituted, the Chinese developing in one way,
Europe in another, with variations among the sub-groups.
But the Negro race has done comparatively little with it, although
they have had repeated exposure to the flame, in Africa, in Europe and
in the Western Hemisphere. The moment the support of other races is
withdrawn, they retrogress, as in Haiti.
If it be argued that some day, a thousand years from now, some change
may occur in the Negro which will change the quality of the tinder, I
would not discount the possibility but it is plainly irrelevant to the
present controversy. We cannot force integration upon the South today
on the strength of something that may occur a thousand years hence.
* * * * *
_Did not the British retrogress after the Roman legions were withdrawn?_
The British Gallo-Romans maintained an excellent northern brand of
Celtic-Latin civilization until they were overwhelmed by Teutons
still in the Hallstattian Iron Age. The records of the ecclesiastical
councils before the Anglo-Saxon-Jute invasion show as much cultivation
as the contemporary ones in Italy.
One may also compare the legends of King Arthur in England with those
of the Emperor Christophe in Haiti.
* * * * *
_Is it not true that climate accounts for the Negro’s deficiencies in
Africa and that a better climate will correct these eventually?_
There are two schools of thought on the relation of climate and the
Negro, neither of which gives any support to the equalitarian. One
school points out that Africa has the highest average altitude of
any of the five continents. While some of it is tropical jungle and
burning desert, much of it is temperate plateau. The Negro tribes of
the plateau are no more advanced that those of the jungle. In fact,
the hinterland of the Gulf of Guinea, from which most of our American
Negroes came, has a healthier climate than many areas where white
civilizations have thrived--and far healthier than the steaming rain
jungles of Yucatan and Guatemala where the great Mayan civilization
developed. Conversely, while the Mayans developed their astronomy and
mathematics in Central America, the Algonquins achieved nothing in New
England.
The second school maintains that climate operating on the Negro
over thousands of years has produced many hereditary physical
characteristics, such as sickle-cell anemia which gives the Negro his
relative immunity to malaria, and that these characteristics have
their parallel in the Negro psyche. In other words the tropics have
conditioned the Negro in both mind and body to tropical life.
It will be clear at once that if nature has taken perhaps 30,000 years
to adapt the Negro to the tropics, the qualities involved have become
innate and cannot now be changed by taking this, or any foreseeable,
generation of Negroes out of the tropics. As one writer has put it,
“the fundamental barrier is less the action of climate on the living
generation than its cumulative action, over an immense time-span, in
forming the race.”
* * * * *
_If it be fallacious, why has the doctrine of racial equality become so
popular, even among many whites?_
A brief glance at history answers this question. The United States was
founded primarily by racial stocks which may be loosely defined by the
adjective “English-speaking”. As Theodore Roosevelt wrote in 1881:
“On the New England Coast the English blood was as pure as in any
part of Britain; in New York and New Jersey it was mixed with that of
the Dutch settlers--and the Dutch are by race nearer to the true old
English of Alfred and Harold than are, for example, the thoroughly
Anglicized Welsh of Cornwall. Otherwise, the infusion of new blood into
the English race [more accurately, English amalgam] on this side of
the Atlantic has been chiefly from three sources--German, Irish, and
Norse; and these three sources represent the elemental parts of the
composite English stock in about the same proportions in which they
were originally combined--mainly Teutonic, largely Celtic, and with a
Scandinavian admixture. The descendant of the German becomes as much an
Anglo-American as the descendant of the Strathclyde Celt has already
become an Anglo-Briton.... It must always be kept in mind that the
Americans and the British are two substantially similar branches of the
great English race, which both before and after their separation have
assimilated, and made Englishmen of many other peoples....”
This, as I say, was written in 1881. In the later 1880’s, conditions
began to change. Immigration to the United States shifted from northern
to southern and eastern Europe and other branches of the white race,
with different temperaments and traditions, arrived in great numbers.
The previous record of these stocks for maintaining stable, free
societies in their own homelands had not been notably good, although
many of them had in other respects backgrounds of the highest culture.