How I Got My Shrunken Head
“There is less flogging in our great schools than formerly—but then less is learned there; so what the boys get at one end they lose at the other.”-Samuel Johnson
“Art is my milk of magnesia / Society is my ipecac.”-Richard Lewis
With an emphasis on rigid Leftist orthodoxy, much of our educational system has become what Peter Boghossian aptly describes as “an intellectual cesspool.” Everything is about Diversity and Inclusion and Institutional Racism. It doesn’t matter, evidently, that diversity makes every place look the same—this notion is just one prong of the ideology of cultural abolition. Even Halloween is coming under fire for “not being inclusive enough.” It is very clear that “diversity” is simply code for “non-white,” and the lessons to be learned are inherently anti-Western. Do you really think people that hate your guts now are suddenly going to become much more accommodating once you’re a minority, or at least part of a plurality? Your inheritance is being stripped away from you, your history re-written; for God’s sake, Hollywood cast a black man as Heimdall! The smash hit Hamilton was a hip-hop bee-bop romp that cast various personnes de couleur engaged in some kind of revisionist minstrelsy. Do you remember the Chappelle’s Show episode where Paul Mooney talked about Hollywood making a movie called The Last Nigger on Earth starring Tom Hanks? Now reverse that. I’m reminded of Scott Adams’s idea of Americans watching two movies on the same screen. Per Adams:
I have been saying since Trump’s election that the world has split into two realities—or as I prefer to say, two movies on one screen—and most of us don’t realize it. We’re all looking at the same events and interpreting them wildly differently. That’s how cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias work. They work together to create a spontaneous hallucination that gets reinforced over time. That hallucination becomes your reality until something changes. This phenomenon has nothing to do with natural intelligence…We’re actually experiencing different realities. I mean that literally… This is well-understood cognitive science.
I think Adams is bang-on in describing the majority of Americans, indeed the world, but there is a particularly virulent strain of Leftism whose ring-leaders are not simply perceiving events differently, but are actively causing those events and working to manipulate the perception of those events to further a particular agenda. Even some of the world’s leaders actively facilitating globalism might be dupes themselves (Justin Trudeau?), or motivated by malice (Barack Obama), but to quote Lenin: “Among one hundred so-called Bolsheviki there is one real Bolshevik, with thirty-nine criminals and sixty fools.” So there you have it, straight from the horse’s mouth. As I wrote in “First World Caliphate,” the Left is composed of “a lethal combination of ignorance, cowardice, and malevolent disregard.”
The particulars of science have never stopped the social constructivists from continuing to propagate their distortions and denials about objective, quantifiable truths. According to Pilar Ossorio, Professor of Law and Bioethics at the University of Wisconsin, there is no biological basis for what we conceive of as “race” and that it is purely a social construct. This is a demonstrably ludicrous claim, and yet this pseudoscience (and that’s being kind) is impressed on young people on college campuses (and earlier) across the country. As the long march through the institutions wears on, the deleterious effects on our young people are becoming more pronounced. We are witnessing the institutionalization of the weird paradox that is Chromosome Denialism and Original Racial Sin, not to mention all types of other pathologies.
The insistence that biology has little to nothing to do with human development, behavior, et cetera, is hotly contested by real scientists. Per Nicholas Wade: “There is indeed a biological basis for race. And it is now beyond doubt that human evolution is a continuous process that has proceeded vigorously within the last 30,000 years and almost certainly—though very recent evolution is hard to measure—throughout the historical period and up until the present day.” For the constructivists, a genetic explanation simply will not do when there’s a perfectly good (and often willing) scapegoat lying around in the form of Whitey (who, paraphrasing Jim Goad here and using the Leftist logic, by rights should not exist). Leftists always seem to fall back on the Noble Savage trope—the indigene Other, unspoiled exemplars of divine righteousness morally superior to their European oppressors in every way. But for colonialism, the various non-white societies of the world would be flourishing today.
We do know that when Europeans first arrived in Australia, they were appalled to find the Aborigines still using the rudiments of Stone Age technology. The sub-Saharan Africans made a similar impression on European observers. The New World, where the wheel had still not been invented, was not some idyllic paradise that Europeans corrupted. At its high point, one account puts the number of individuals sacrificed by the Aztecs at 80,000 in four days (fourteen people a minute). Michael Harner posits the Aztecs sacrificed around a quarter of a million people per year, although Victor Davis Hanson states that 20,000 people sacrificed per annum is a much more plausible figure. That said, human sacrifices in the territory comprising modern-day Mexico are documented as far back as the Olmec civilization from 1200 BC.
Slavery was practiced in the Americas before Columbus arrived. Many tribes would cut off a slave’s foot so they could not escape. Slavery, indeed, has been a fixture of human life since humans began to organize into sedentary societies (and probably before). It was really only the moral agonizing of European Christians over its existence that slavery was finally abolished in most parts of the globe. Slave-owning as it was practiced in the United States was not limited to only whites, either. As Barbara Krauthamer helpfully points out:
From the late eighteenth century through the end of the Civil War, Choctaw and Chickasaw Indians bought, sold, and owned Africans and African Americans as slaves, a fact that persisted after the tribes’ removal from the Deep South to Indian Territory. The tribes formulated racial and gender ideologies that justified this practice and marginalized free black people in the Indian nations well after the Civil War and slavery had ended.
More real talk, this time from Henry Louis Gates, Jr.:
In a fascinating essay reviewing this controversy, R. Halliburton shows that free black people have owned slaves “in each of the thirteen original states and later in every state that countenanced slavery,” at least since Anthony Johnson and his wife Mary went to court in Virginia in 1654 to obtain the services of their indentured servant, a black man, John Castor, for life. And for a time, free black people could even “own” the services of white indentured servants in Virginia as well. Free blacks owned slaves in Boston by 1724 and in Connecticut by 1783; by 1790, 48 black people in Maryland owned 143 slaves. One particularly notorious black Maryland farmer named Nat Butler “regularly purchased and sold Negroes for the Southern trade,” Halliburton wrote.
Alan Gallay also provides some very useful context:
In the wake of the deaths of indigenous Americans from European-conveyed microbes from which they had no immunity (my note: the extent of which is hotly-contested), the Spanish colonists turned to importing Africans…Anyone could be enslaved. Over a million Europeans were held as slaves from the 1530s through the 1780s in Africa, and hundreds of thousands were kept as slaves by the Ottomans in Eastern Europe and Asia. (John Smith, for instance, had been a slave of the Ottomans before he obtained freedom and helped colonize Virginia.) In 1650, more English were enslaved in Africa than Africans enslaved in English colonies. Even as late as the early nineteenth century, United States citizens were enslaved in North Africa. As the pro-slavery ideologue George Fitzhugh noted in his book, Cannibals All (1857), in the history of world slavery, Europeans were commonly the ones held as slaves, and the enslavement of Africans was a relatively new historical development. Not until the eighteenth century did the words “slave” and “African” become nearly synonymous in the minds of Europeans and Euro-Americans.
This is called “recency bias” and it, if you’ll pardon the pun, colors the modern “discussion” of slavery in such a way that is skews the historical reality. Much as most enslavement of Africans was done by other Africans in order to satisfy the European and, much more so, Arab slave traders, most Indian enslavement in the Americas was done by other Indians. The Chinese were importing slaves from Africa over one thousand years ago. Exempt from the recency bias by dint of the fact that they’re not white and that does not align with the present ideology, Saudi Arabia and Yemen only outlawed slavery in 1962, to say nothing of the subservient position women are still “afforded” in the breadbasket of Wahhabi extremism. Slavery remains a fixture in many parts of the non-Western world, and even right under our noses here in the West with the Islamic sex trafficking we seem unwilling to address.
Adams’s two simultaneously-playing “films” reveal markedly different narratives about not just the US election, but the development of the modern world, and even about the very essence of humanity. On one screen, there are brown Vikings and black astrophysicists; on the other, there is a light-skinned mass of bilked taxpayers, financing black and Hispanic criminality and under-achievement, and a ruling class hostile to its very existence. Their reasoning: these are the children of the intrepid souls who came over to a new, savage continent and forged a society the likes of which the world has never seen. While on the one side this is a net positive, on the other it was a harbinger of racism, slavery, exploitation, et cetera, and it is not difficult to pinpoint where the “elites” stand (or in some cases what kind of rhetoric they employ to advance their agenda). Gun control isn’t about controlling guns, it’s about controlling (white) people. The EPA doesn’t protect the environment with the same vigor they use to straight-jacket commerce, impinge on property rights, and kill financial independence. Anything that can sublimate the individual to the collective is preferable for the West’s estranged ruling classes. They are the aristocracy we fought a revolution, in part, to ensure would never become a feature of American life, yet here they are, dispossessing Americans of their culture and country, their nation.
Now even if we were to take the Leftist position that we brutally destroyed the native societies that were here before us and that we stole the land as colonists, steadily moving west as our population swelled, take a look at what became of the tribes that were here before the Europeans arrived, and take a look at current demographic trends. It’s pretty plain to see what the future holds for the Historic American Nation if we continue down this path. Throwing all other arguments to the side, it makes sense to protect our prosperity and freedom adjusting for the destiny of demography. It’s rational self-interest. If we decide to consider the moral component, is it not better to protect the global PoC by not bringing them under the terrible, crushing weight of American white supremacy? Best they stay in their homelands and improve their lot there than suffer under the yoke of white oppression in America. Why don’t liberals and the Left protest the IMF and the global banking syndicates and multi-nationals anymore?
The Left should be vehemently anti-immigration to protect the teeming wretched refuse from even worse subordination and slavery-like conditions here in the New World. Even in their own party blacks have difficulty advancing! Almost all “black” Democrats are mixed race and very light-skinned, obviously reflecting the colonial bias toward lighter pigmentation found throughout the West Indies and beyond. This is possibly just a stray observation/coincidence, but there are certainly quite a few coincidences regarding blacks and Democrats, then. The last public school system to integrate was liberal bastion Boston in 1972. Retired Exalted Cyclops and KKK member Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia (“We cannot allow America to be degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds”) served at the pleasure of his constituents and the Democratic Party for over fifty years, until 2010 when, upon his passing, Hillary Rodham Clinton had this to say: “Today our country has lost a true American original, my friend and mentor Robert C. Byrd.” That’s right, the KKK had a former representative in the Democratic Party until seven years ago. Curious. David Duke was a Democrat until 1989. Oh, and it also appears Mr. Great Society himself, Lyndon Baines Johnson, might have been a registered KKK member in Texas. The Left’s Literal Hitler figure, Donald J. Trump, was a registered Democrat until 2009.
All of this is to say the plot thickens in both movies on the same screen—not a double feature as such, but a simulcasting of Birth of a Nation (1915) and Birth of a Nation (2016)—the Historic American Nation and the Neo-Globalist American Nation. Red or blue—as Olmec used to say on Legends of the Hidden Temple, “The choice is yours and yours alone.”
 Barbara Krauthamer. Black Slaves, Indian Masters: Slavery, Emancipation, and Citizenship in the Native American South. Univ. of North Carolina Press, 2013.
 https://www.amren.com/news/2013/03/did-black-people-own-slaves/ + R. Halliburton, Jr. The South Carolina Historical Magazine, Vol. 76, No. 3 (Jul., 1975), pp. 129-142