The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 PodcastsGregory Hood Archive
Will the Supreme Court Extend the O’Connor Deadline?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks
Credit Image: © Bryan Olin Dozier / NurPhoto via ZUMA Press
Credit Image: © Bryan Olin Dozier / NurPhoto via ZUMA Press

Justice Stephen Breyer of the Supreme Court’s liberal wing is retiring. This gives President Joe Biden a chance to nominate a “progressive” justice. He has promised to choose a black woman — affirmative action at the highest levels. New York Times columnist Charles Blow said there should be a nominee like Thurgood Marshall, whose “entire life was spent in the service of, and for the liberation of, Black people.”

Such a judge might defend anti-white racial preferences, or what’s delicately called “affirmative action.” The Supreme Court will soon decide whether “race-conscious admissions policies” at Harvard and the University of North Carolina are constitutional. It could mean the end of affirmative action.

The case that could end it is a consolidation of two suits filed by Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA), which has a big picture of an Asian student on its homepage. The cases were filed against Harvard and the University of North Carolina and arguments will be held this fall.

There is reason for optimism. Even after Justice Breyer is replaced, the Supreme Court will still have a 6-3 “conservative” majority. However, that’s no guarantee; “conservative” justices sometimes flinch at ending leftist policies.

Associate Justice of the Supreme Court Stephen G. Breyer announces his retirement in the Roosevelt Room at the White House in Washington on January 27, 2022 (Credit Image: © Yuri Gripas / CNP via ZUMA Press Wire)
Associate Justice of the Supreme Court Stephen G. Breyer announces his retirement in the Roosevelt Room at the White House in Washington on January 27, 2022 (Credit Image: © Yuri Gripas / CNP via ZUMA Press Wire)

Conservatives might also be forced to defend race realist positions if affirmative action goes. Professor Amy Wax of Penn Law School wrote earlier this month:

Without racial preferences, equal outcomes by race and the progressive ideal of racial “equity” in American society is not an achievable goal and will not be any time soon. More specifically, abandoning racial preferences and returning to colorblind, meritocratic standards will lead to significantly fewer low-performing minorities earning places in demanding professions and positions of authority.

Are affirmative action opponents ready, willing, and able to defend this situation without apology? Can they stomach the formidable task of justifying the group inequalities that will inevitably arise from applying colorblind, impartial principles?

Race realists can but conservatives probably can’t. They may simply conserve the existing order. In 2012, Republican nominee Chief Justice John Roberts changed his vote and saved “Obamacare,” reportedly to appear above politics and avoid a social and political battle.

The last time affirmative action came before the Supreme Court, it was a Republican appointee who saved it then, too. In Grutter v. Bollinger, the 2003 case that SFFA is challenging, Ronald Reagan’s nominee Sandra Day O’Connor was part of the 5-4 majority. She was also the first woman justice. She wrote the majority opinion, in which she argued that a “race-neutral” admissions process is the goal, but America isn’t ready: “We expect that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest that we approve today.”

Sandra Day O’Connor is sworn-in as Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court by Chief Justice Warren Burger in Washington, D.C. on September 25, 1981. Her husband John O’Connor, center, looks on. (Credit Image: © Michael Evans / White House / CNP via ZUMA Wire)
Sandra Day O’Connor is sworn-in as Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court by Chief Justice Warren Burger in Washington, D.C. on September 25, 1981. Her husband John O’Connor, center, looks on. (Credit Image: © Michael Evans / White House / CNP via ZUMA Wire)

Justice O’Connor also wrote in the Grutter decision that the question of “whether diversity is a compelling interest that can justify the narrowly tailored use of race in selecting applicants for admission to public universities” was of “national importance.” Writing for the majority, she concluded that it was a compelling interest.

If diversity is good, there should be as much of it as possible. Promoting diversity and inclusion is now a \$7.5 billion business, and that figure could double between 2020 and 2026. Ending affirmative action would cripple the industry.

However, Grutter also set up limits to how a race-conscious admissions system can be used. It cannot be a quota. Race must serve “only as a ‘plus’ in a particular applicant’s file.”

This muddled language sets up a nightmare of subjective decision-making. College admissions are a zero-sum game. There is no system in which race is only a plus that doesn’t hurt anyone.

Harvard and UNC cannot say that race is central to their admissions process without endangering their case. They must uphold the Grutter standard of claiming race is a “plus,” while also claiming that black and Hispanic numbers would fall so much without affirmative action that campuses would be starved of diversity’s benefits.

Similarly, SFFA must argue on the narrow ground that Harvard and UNC are exceeding the strict limits Grutter imposed on race’s role in college admissions. At the same time, SFFA is appealing to “colorblind” justice, arguing that race-based preferences violate the Civil Rights Act of 1964. If “colorblind” rules prevail, that is the end of the diversity industry.

People demonstrate at the Copley Square in Boston, on Oct. 14, 2018. Hundreds of Asian Americans held demonstrations in central Boston to show support for a lawsuit accusing Harvard University of discriminating against Asian American applicants by using ”de facto racial quotas, racial stereotypes and higher standards.” Harvard has denied the charges. (Credit Image: © Liu Jie / Xinhua via ZUMA Wire)
People demonstrate at the Copley Square in Boston, on Oct. 14, 2018. Hundreds of Asian Americans held demonstrations in central Boston to show support for a lawsuit accusing Harvard University of discriminating against Asian American applicants by using ”de facto racial quotas, racial stereotypes and higher standards.” Harvard has denied the charges. (Credit Image: © Liu Jie / Xinhua via ZUMA Wire)

Affirmative action’s defenders in this case are rapturous about diversity’s benefits. “The University has embraced diversity, in all its forms, as a core feature of its educational mission” reads the third sentence in the University of North Carolina’s brief. Citing a 2017 report from the university’s provost, the filing tells us these benefits include “promoting the robust exchange of ideas, fostering innovation, and preparing effective leaders.” Others claim that diversity prevents “groupthink,” prepares students for a multicultural world, and helps them understand people with different life experiences.

UNC “closely measures its progress toward achieving diversity’s educational benefits.” Though it has made “significant progress, its efforts to achieve the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body are not finished.” Not having enough minorities “limits learning opportunities for all students.” UNC must therefore boost enrollment of “underrepresented minorities, who are admitted at lower overall rates than their white and Asian counterparts.”

A group called “Respondent Students” filed a brief defending UNC. It calls itself “a multiracial, multiethnic group of talented, ambitious students and now alumni.” Respondent Students says that “their educational experiences have been enriched by the racial and ethnic diversity at UNC.” Someone named Andrew Brennan wrote that “he became aware of islamophobia [sic] on UNC’s campus after attending a campus vigil held for the murder of three Muslim students.” Another testified that “exposure to diversity is necessary to prepare future leaders.” “SFFA [Students for Fair Admission] did not submit evidence contesting these benefits,” says the filing.

Harvard’s filing also claims benefits “flow” from diversity, and that it can’t be achieved without race preferences. It commissioned a study that “concluded that there currently are no workable alternatives that would allow Harvard to achieve the educational benefits of diversity while also maintaining its demanding standards of excellence.” Harvard says the district court ruled in its favor partially because “a heterogenous student body promotes a more robust academic environment with a greater depth and breath of learning, encourages learning outside the classroom, and creates a richer sense of community.” Diversity’s supposed benefits include promoting cross-racial understanding, preparing students “for an increasingly diverse workforce and society,” and providing “substantial social benefits” such as elites who are considered legitimate because “the path to leadership [is] open to talented and qualified individuals of every race and ethnicity.”

Harvard University (Credit: Album / quintlox)
Harvard University (Credit: Album / quintlox)

“SFFA offered no rebuttal” to claims about diversity’s “profound educational benefits,” says Harvard’s brief. Later, it said that SFFA had “defaulted on this point” because “it declined to put on any evidence contesting the benefits of diversity.” This is true. In its December 21 filing in the USC case, SFFA does not deny diversity’s benefits. It mentions it only twice, and assures the Court that a race-neutral admissions process wouldn’t rob students of diversity’s benefits.

However, in its initial petition to the Supreme Court in the Harvard case, SFFA said that Grutter’s diversity rationale is based on “racial stereotyping” because it assumes members of a race all have the same experience. “It [a university] cannot simply use ‘race as a proxy’ for certain experiences or views.”

SFFA’s filings also say that the current situation benefits whites because of admissions preferences for alumni, staff, and donors. In the Harvard case, SFFA said that under a simulated race-neutral system without such preferences, “white admissions would decrease, combined African-American and Hispanic admissions would increase, Asian-American admissions would increase, and socioeconomic diversity would dramatically improve.” The implication is that a fairer admissions system will mean fewer white students.

In its initial filing in the UNC case, SFFA writes that “Grutter . . . [unfairly] treats underrepresented minorities not as the beneficiaries of racial preferences, but as instruments to provide educational benefits for other, mostly white students.” Later, SFFA decries racial discrimination because it hurts Asians. “The disparities that Asian-Americans face compared to their white peers are so stark that, when SFFA showed the data to a high-school counselor in Harvard, she started crying in her deposition.”

Credit Image: © Liu Jie/Xinhua via ZUMA Wire
Credit Image: © Liu Jie/Xinhua via ZUMA Wire

Would stark differences in admissions standards for blacks and whites induce tears? Probably not. Asian-Americans are hurt by affirmative action too, but their pain matters more. Asians must be our proxies in this battle. In fact, the case seems like one giant proxy battle. The justification for affirmative action is that diversity adds value, and that goal isn’t even being challenged.

The examples of its benefits given by UNC and Harvard are unconvincing. Diversity, far from challenging groupthink, is part of a repressive, intolerant environment. Race-based activists composed of every group besides whites dominate campus politics. Rather than liberating them, diversity has turned students into commissars.

The court will not be considering that. Instead, it will decide whether the benefits of diversity — which no one challenges — can be had without considering race. It will also be considering whether the Constitution allows those benefits to be achieved by considering race.

That may be enough. The current subjective college admissions system is unstable. It’s time for honesty, and an open quota system would be preferable to what we have now. If the Court can’t stomach quotas, perhaps it will finally abolish affirmative action.

Some may think social peace requires affirmative action, and the diversity industry is powerful. Chief Justice Roberts’s salvation of “Obamacare” hints that he’ll look for a reason to save the industry. He might explicitly extend the 25-year O’Connor Deadline, which will be reached in just six years.

President Bush announces Supreme Court nominee John Roberts to be Chief Justice of the Supreme Court during a statement in the Oval Office Monday September 5, 2005. (Credit Image: © Chuck Kennedy / TNS / ZUMAPRESS.com)
President Bush announces Supreme Court nominee John Roberts to be Chief Justice of the Supreme Court during a statement in the Oval Office Monday September 5, 2005. (Credit Image: © Chuck Kennedy / TNS / ZUMAPRESS.com)

Despite Justice O’Connor’s clearly expressed preference, affirmative action gets more blatant all the time. Being “colorblind,” is, according to white privilege theorists, itself proof of racism. Conservatives often bemoan “wokeness,” but they are doing little to abolish preferences.

He failed to end them, but President Ronald Reagan at least spoke against race preferences. Some Republicans oppose affirmative action because it hurts Asians. Asians supported President Biden by 63 percent to 31 percent in the last election but there are signs their loyalty is weakening. If Republicans help end affirmative action it could attract Asians.

Race realists know that the O’Connor Deadline has no end. Blacks and Hispanics will want more concessions from a white minority, not fewer. Race relations are becoming worse with more contact, not better. Even the alleged benefits from diversity, such as being able to communicate with others, ring false in a world of “microaggressions” and “problematic” speech.

For diversity to justify anti-white and anti-Asian discrimination, it would have to have huge benefits. SFFA fails to deny those illusory benefits and has therefore lost half the battle without a fight. This case will therefore be about whether colleges can meet a murky legal standard and whether race preferences hurt Asians. Will the justices be swayed by legal arguments? Will they think boosting blacks and Hispanics isn’t worth it if it means hurting Asians? Will they decide that racial discrimination of any kind in admissions is unconstitutional? Or will they decide that in an era of Black Lives Matter, they better leave affirmative action alone? Whatever happens, diversity-worship and the interests of whites aren’t even under discussion.

(Republished from American Renaissance by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 99 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. I’d much rather see the Supreme Court, or any other branch of Gov’t, pass Jim Crow “in reserve” (i.e. Whites as have-nots) into law than overturning Affirmative Action.

    Call me ‘extreme’, ‘radical’, ‘fringe’… but time’s running out! And that might FINALLY wake up White Americans – (National) Conservatism, Inc., Libertarianism, Inc., Classical Liberalism, Inc. would just slow down Western Civilisation’s decline, not reverse it!

  2. SafeNow says:

    SFFA fails to deny those illusory benefits and has therefore lost half the battle without a fight

    Merely denying the existence of benefits would leave you in the position of saying that diversity’s impact is neutral. The pro-diversity side would then reply, fine, if it’s neutral, then denying Asian seats, sorry about that, is worth it to uplift the minority students. Thus, it would be necessary to argue that diversity’s impact upon other admitted students is actually negative. In other words, detail how it’s harmful to the white/Asian university experience to have these darn black and Hispanic affirmatives around. Can you imagine arguing that? To ask the question is to answer it.

    • Agree: Charon
  3. Whites would theoretically do better under a strict quota system than they do under the present affirmative action set of lies. This of course assumes the regime in Sodom-on-Potomac actually functions under some sort of rule of law, an utterly ridiculous assumption to be sure. The law means whatever a blackrobe or overpaid (often affirmative-action) bureaucrat says it means on any given day. The only “law” followed by the rulers of Murika was stated in its most succinct form by Aleister Crowley long ago: Do what thou wilt.

    Have to hand it to Crowley in an odd sort of way. He boiled down the entire teaching of the Talmud into four short words, the phrase itself being ultimately a deception to those who live by it.

    • Thanks: omegabooks
    • Replies: @animalogic
  4. Chensley says:

    Ask people how they feel about people with Down syndrome being under-represented as neurosurgeons and that something needs to be done to correct this disparity.

    Then when they look agape at your obviously stupid suggestion and the implications of dedicating (wasting) resources that such a program would entail, the next question is why should such a program exist for other under-performing groups?

  5. JimDandy says:

    Whoopie Goldberg did nothing wrong. Or else Jews are officially not white. Which is it?

    • Replies: @HT
    , @Freedom Awaits
  6. anonymous[393] • Disclaimer says:

    Re US Chief Justice John Roberts ‘saving’ Obamacare –

    Maybe Roberts was thinking of how Federal Judge John Roll was shot dead in public in Arizona in 2011 shortly after ruling against Obama

    And maybe later Roberts got a ‘reminder’, when his Supreme Court colleague Justice Scalia, also shortly after a ruling against Obama, was found dead with a pillow over his face in 2016 … ‘no autopsy’ they quickly decided

    US Chief Justice John Roberts, is long understood to be double-blackmailed:

    – First for his 1990s ‘international child trafficking’, getting an Irish mother to illegally take her kids to South America so Roberts could adopt (buy?) them, and

    – Secondly with Roberts’ name prominently on the Jeffrey Epstein flight logs, presumably videos to match now also in the Deep State ‘Chief Justice Roberts control file’

  7. The California example proved that ending ‘affirmative action’ makes no difference. Schools will just find new ways to favor blacks and certain others, like ‘hardship’ excuse or some ‘inspirational’ essay.

    US is thoroughly ‘morrupt’, which is worse than corrupt. Classic corruption is just plain and simple cheating, and it can come in many forms. But what we have is moralized corruption where mendacity, hypocrisy, idolatry, and illogic are all incorporated to give moral justification to the corruption. So, it’s about ‘social justice’, ‘equity’, ‘diversity’, or some other excuse to cook the books and distort results.

    Corruption can be called out on and ended. When the corrupt are caught with their hands in the cookie jar, there is only shame.
    But when it comes to ‘morruption’, the liars, cheats, and thieves have a thousands excuses as to why they were taking the cookie.

    Participating in corruption is bad enough. But when corruption is moralized, it is ‘spiritually’ protected.

    But same goes with black criminality. There was a time when even ‘liberals’ admitted crime is ugly and bad.
    But in 2020 with BLM Floyd Riots, crime was suddenly justice based on retribution against ‘systemic racism’. Blacks were allowed to loot and steal all they wanted.

    And of course, it went from tolerance of homo/tranny decadence to sanctification of degeneracy as the highest form of ‘spirituality’. Imagine that. Homo/tranny decadence is bad enough but must be tolerated in a free society. But Jewish Power then elevated globo-homo as the new mass cult for the West. It’s like deification of defecation. ‘Gay rights’ to Gay Rites, and the blasphemers against globo-homo will not be tolerated and shall be purged.

    At any rate, ONLY TWO GROUPS should be granted AA. American Indians and blacks of slave ancestry in the South. NO ONE ELSE should get it.

    So, instead of AA or no AA, how about that compromise? The Tonto and Sambo or Tontambo Rule.

    Most sickening is white Hispanics getting AA. These people conquered South America, wiped out natives, and imported millions of black slaves. So, screw them.

    • Agree: CelestiaQuesta, Shel100
  8. @Exalted Cyclops

    Reminds me of the ultimate catch 22, the catch that fathers all the other catch 22’s —
    “we can do anything you can’t stop us doing”

  9. Sarah says:

    I think that all these debates and discussions are useless.
    It is time to address the fundamental issue.

    You can do whatever you want, but people of different races, species, cultures, ethnicities cannot live together in the same country.

    Multculturism, multiracialism, multiethnicism cannot work.

    In history, it has NEVER worked; why would it suddenly work today?

    History shows that it has always ended very badly, at best by expulsion, at worst by extermination.

  10. What people call “merit” is a social construction that evolved from those seeking to destroy family. It used to be that “merit” was measured by kinship. The business owners sons “merited” the top jobs in a company and second might go to son-in-laws. Merit advocates attacked such system as being nepotism. So grew the present fight. So called objective measures of “merit” always favor some group.

    The correct result would be for the Supreme Court to allow people to measure “merit” however they choose. Any choice of a standard for “merit” will always favor some group. Merit is ultimately a contentless term.

    If one looks at higher education today, in the liberal arts, white males are unemployable. Any time there is a tenure track job open in communication, English, sociology, history, anthropology, philosophy or like discipline that job goes to a person of color or a woman. Those institutions pretend they use objective measures, like number of journal publicans, but journal publication too are entirely controlled by journal editors who won’t publish articles by white men. See the problem?

    Merit does not exist except in the minds of some disgruntled outsider.

    If folks doubt me, they should Google “Communication Scholars For Transformation.” It is a Facebook Group. They are more open about their agenda than many other groups. As a group, they have redefined merit so that it means not white and male.

    The reality is in college admissions for the most selective colleges that the purpose of selecting someone for a college class is three fold: (1) they project to be a future donor; (2) they will be a “good classmate” and add value to other classmates in the years after graduation when personal connections matter; and (3) they are “attractive.”

    The last point is the most difficult. If one looks carefully at the last point one will notice that the best schools never really admit ugly people, fat people, Southern Baptists, evangelical Christians, or others who the college does not think look good in media. Compare photos of students at Ivy League schools with the entering classes of Southern Bible colleges. They look radically different.

    The last point is most crucial because propinquity is the best explanation for marriage. The students at elite colleges will marry other students from elite colleges. The pretty people will have pretty children.

    It is truly amazing that the discourse about elite college admissions never gets at the actual game being played.

  11. GMC says:

    Great article – showing how little we need a ” Supreme Court” today The Constitution is fairly direct and doesn’t need any bought off Lawyer to interpret it . We are all created equal should have made it pretty simple to show that affirmative action is illegal.
    You want the job, the position, the opportunity to go to a prestigious school, or whatever – it should be equal. No short cuts or preferential for anyone. It’s not like there aren’t other jobs, positions or schools, that are out reach for anybody in the USA – if you look hard enough they are there. Or at least it used to be that way.

    Now they want to allow another bought off affirmative action person to interpret the Constitution – lol America.

    Imagine how very well educated, the students would be today , had they had a professor teaching the total truth about History, Polysciences, Journalism, Medicine, and all the other fields that have been manipulated by NWO Bolsheviks. Few times in History has the truth come out as we are seeing today with this new Alt journalism and research. A good honest professor, having the opportunity to teach what we now know about history would blow the top off of the Deep States lies and manipulations. And the so called Supreme Court has stayed silent about all these wrong doings .

    • Agree: Alfred
    • Replies: @Alfred
  12. Gordo says:

    promoting the robust exchange of ideas

    LOL

    And is there no rich White guy to pay for our case to be put?

  13. Sarah says:

    ” A house divided against itself cannot stand ” (Matthew 12:22–32; Luke 11:14–23; Mark 3:22–29). In Mark 3, the scribes were accusing Jesus of being possessed by Beelzebul. They said ” by the prince of demons he casts out the demons ” (Mark 3:22). That is when Jesus responded by saying ” How can Satan cast out Satan? If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. And if a house is divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand ” (Mark 3:23–25).

  14. Anonymous[661] • Disclaimer says:

    Amy Wax: “More specifically, abandoning racial preferences and returning to colorblind, meritocratic standards will lead to significantly fewer low-performing minorities earning places in demanding professions and positions of authority.

    Are affirmative action opponents ready, willing, and able to defend this situation without apology?”

    Yes, mam, I’ll defend it without apology!

    In this bizarro clown world we live in we see yet another Jewish activist arguing that we need more “low-performing” doctors doing surgery and representing clients in the courts of law. Would you like to hire a “low-performing” engineer to design your next airplane? Maybe you need a “low-performing” dunce to manage your retirement investments?

  15. Ms. Wax displays that patronizing liberal attitude toward black people that many find so offensive. She essentially affirms that they cannot succeed on their own merits but need a helping hand from the more gifted, namely members of her exalted achiever class. Demeaning others to feel better about yourself is such an ugly emotional disorder, whether expressed as support for or hatred of the fearful “other” who are somehow just not quite as human as we are lucky enough to be.

  16. So, vote single-payer if you know it will be vetoed. That way, you get the credit but know it will fail.

    But when there is a real chance, sabotage it.

    • Replies: @Exalted Cyclops
  17. @Anonymous

    As I suggested here on TUR long ago, simply require all professional school graduates to have their GPA and class placement ranking prominently displayed on their professional degrees, and where they placed in their states’ professional licensing exams on their professional licenses, and that said degrees/licenses must be placed in the waiting room of their office, or if none, then in their office itself, again, where prospective clients/patients can easily see and read said results.

    Wouldn’t you want to know how well your doctor or lawyer did in medical or law school and on their professional licensing exams? Your architect or engineer?

    Make it a felony to falsify such information. Call it truth in professional advertising, or ‘knowing what you’re paying (dearly) for’………

    • Agree: Hibernian
    • Replies: @Bill
    , @anon
  18. It’s only matter of time before there are virtually no Whites (of any ethnic background) at prestige colleges and universities. Student bodies will be predominantly from Korea and China (Japanese, for various reasons, have almost no interest in US higher education), or Americans of Korean and Chinese background. Korea has military type year-round study camps with thousands of students enrolled for purpose of getting these students into top American schools. Once quotas are removed, they will be bulk of early admissions. But since I’m of view Whites (of all “races”) have caused enough carnage around the world over recent centuries, I’m not opposed to ending affirmative action or removing quotas.

  19. We’re getting more complaints after a half-century of affirmative action than we did under a century or so of Jim Crow, but at least everyone knew where they stood under Jim Crow. Maybe it is time to go back to it.

  20. @Vergissmeinnicht

    Actually it’s very simple and in conformity with former American conceptions of national identity. Just define whiteness of skin as something that is no longer a human race but a human disease that often stems from a genetic defect but can also be triggered by pathogens, a form of vitiligo that leaves out only a few birthmarks. Just state that any race of any colour can be afflicted by it, and that the disease which also translates into psychic defects like over-idealism and inconsiderate passion for abstract truth is a real danger that can strike any human race, and therefore outside the purview of anti-discrimination laws. Fortunately it can now be cured with mRNA therapy shots that bring back the rather russet colour of the original true European which was that of the Cheddar man as well as the original true colour of the Aryans of India. This could be done at a time when Blacks bleach their skin most inconsiderately resulting in many cancers and confirming that Whiteness together with taste for whiteness is both a physical illness and a psychosis.

  21. @Anonymous

    Would you like to hire a “low-performing” engineer to design your next airplane?

    It’s already happened with the Boeing 737 Max disaster.

    https://www.dw.com/en/boeing-ceo-admits-737-max-jet-warning-system-mistake/a-49229967

  22. Sorry to comment again without reaching even the midpoint, but if Harvard really means that “diversity” offers such wonderful benefits, then why is there any need for affirmative action in the first place? Here’s a suggestion: Eliminate all federal interference in universities’ admissions, and let every university select whomever it pleases based on whatever criteria it pleases. Then people will be able to decide where to study or where to send their children based on clear, explicit differences between universities. Let those who desire the benefits of diversity have them! And those who don’t, just leave them alone.

  23. As you write about the obvious decline of society, I was suddenly thinking about what the opposite could have been. For example instead of contemplating diversity, would contemplating Mars have brought more cohesion or unity? Or another alternative to “the stars and beyond” is surely Harmony, as Einstein suggested we go for “next”.

    • Replies: @CelestiaQuesta
  24. bomag says:
    @Vergissmeinnicht

    …pass Jim Crow “in reverse”

    We’re fighting a war here; really don’t need to abandon any ground prematurely just on the hope it will wake-up some people. If they don’t realize the gravity of the situation now, they are not going to notice that concession.

    • Agree: Craig Nelsen
  25. In one of your podcasts you mentioned in passing what would be true justice in this situation.

    The Harvard endowment must be seized.

    What you did not specify was what should be done with it–imho that would be to pay one million dollars per person to every white and asian applicant who was denied entrance as losers in the zero sum game of affirmative action.

    Two can play at the reparations game.

    • Replies: @Justvisiting
  26. sally says:

    This whole thing of this school or that school of education in the age of the digital platform is designed to bring about prejudice and corruption of whatever nature the corporations, Oligarchs, politicians, and think tanks think is desirable at the moment.

    Not one governed American has a vote in all of this, which of course is what the constitution was designed to do, remove the governed from any say in how and who should govern.

    To fix this problem the Supreme s are soon to rule on, is easy as pie..

    Just make all college education into one national examination for each level of attainment. Those who pass the nation examinations get the degrees and achieve the recognition those who don’t keep trying until they do. Besides that I can tell you hundreds of Eagle Scouts who never made it to first base, and millions of scouts who earned no merit badges, but made good of their lives.
    School differentiation is what has allowed race to become an issue. Fix it. Just take the ability to award degrees away from everyone but the central government. The government gives the examinations and grades them, not some privatized bull shit contractor.. presto. the problem of race discrimination in education disappears. can be true al all levels at once. k- through Phd.

    The universities will suddenly become tutor agencies, and their instructors will become famous instead of the schools.

    • Replies: @CelestiaQuesta
  27. Colleges are ditching SATs and other tests because they don’t want any objective way to prove they’re screwing over Whites and Asians in favor Blacks and Hispanics. And this is only one of the ways they’ll weasel their way around any “end” to affirmative action.

    So it doesn’t matter what SCOTUS does, and who care anyway? SCOTUS has been a joke for years. There’s no “diversity” waiver in the 14th amendment’s “equal protection under the laws” or in the civil rights acts of the 1960s which expressly forbid racial discrimination, but that’s never stopped SCOTUS from whoring itself out to AA for decades.

    • Agree: CelestiaQuesta
    • Replies: @anon
  28. @bomag

    I admit: that’s a good point.

  29. Agent76 says:

    February 16, 2016 The People vs. the Police State: The Struggle for Justice in the Supreme Court By John W. Whitehead

    “We are not to simply bandage the wounds of victims beneath the wheels of injustice, we are to drive a spoke into the wheel itself.”—Dietrich Bonhoeffer

    The untimely death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has predictably created a political firestorm.

    https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/john_whiteheads_commentary/the_people_vs._the_police_state_the_struggle_for_justice_in_the_suprem

    Nov 25, 2016 Nullification in 3 Minutes

    Tom Woods literally wrote the book on Nullification. This video is a short clip of the keynote speech he gave at the TAC’s 2011 nullification conference in Philadelphia.

    • Replies: @bomag
  30. turtle says:

    colorblind, meritocratic standards will lead to significantly fewer low-performing minorities earning places in demanding professions and positions of authority.

    Q; How exactly does low performance “earn” one a place in a demanding profession?
    A: I do not know, but it seems to have worked out rather well for Prof. Wax.

    Calling Dr. Lexus….

  31. gotmituns says:

    Interesting that we’ve got a black nfl coach suing about racial discrimination (rooney rule), whoopi goldberg being thrown off a show because she’s black and the president only wanting black females for the next supreme court justice

  32. @Chensley

    This is actually a pretty good argument.

    I think the way Mr unz suggested is the only correct way. A lottery for all the students capable of doing the school work. That is the fairest option out of all the options. It negates the asian test taking advantage. negates the jewish victim card. negates the black victim card. I don’t know how hispanics fits here, they lose the quota benefit but they might have a bigger pool of students in the lottery. Whites will finally not have reverse racism hampering their chances.

    Didn’t the “best” high school in the USA just did the lottery? Do the same for the best colleges.

    • Replies: @Macumazahn
  33. Mefobills says:

    Crush L. posted a link which pretty much sums up the control grid:

    https://thegoodcitizen.substack.com/p/nonocracy-and-the-montgomery-brewster

    The supreme court is part of the Kakistocracy. Rule by the worst people includes the Kritarchy (rule by judges). Maybe the Kritarchy is in the frothy middle layer? Either way, the Oligarchs call the shots, and the Oligarchs want die-versity. If there is blood in the streets, then finance can buy up everything cheap.

    _____________

    Let Them Have 3-Layer Cake: Oligarchy – Corporatocracy – Kakistocracy

    Today this is the government structure in power. This is the diagnosis the founding fathers would give the United States today if they didn’t have an immediate cardiac arrest from witnessing it’s torrid state, or from having to get the “vaccines” to get a digital passport on their Chinese made devices in order to drink wine at an Inn in nine of the thirteen original colonies. The condition of some states is sufficiently better than others, but do not celebrate the two tiered red-blue republic that has resulted with free and slave states in regards to civil liberties. A divided nation cannot stand. A completely fractured nation is doomed to collapse at any moment.

    The three layer cake of present ruling structures is toxic enough. At the bottom, the foundation is one of Oligarchy. The nation is ruled by a handful of oligarchs who own and control everything, all the private property, all the systems of banking, finance, agriculture, mass production and consumption are owned or belong to roughly a number of individuals you could fit into a single Cornelius Vanderbilt railroad car with enough room to spare for white glove dining service and crates of chilled Dom Perignon.

    The middle layer is mostly frothy whipping cream, high in caloric content, but low in nutrients or sustenance. It’s the gassy bloated bureaucratic machine that makes sure the Oligarchs are happy so they keep them in their bureaucratic positions. This group passes laws on their behalf and even lets them write the laws themselves. They are careerists who are happy to sell out their nation and constituents for a chance to be a part of this parasite class of managerial mediocre mid-wits. Corruption and double dealing is inherent to the job and these lifers excel at it. This includes the media, think tanks, NGOs and all state and federal bureaucracies that always do more harm than good because their only competency is appearing to do something while doing effectively little or little effectively in reality.

    The top layer has the appearance of delicious diversity and equity, but it’s the thinnest and most useless part of the cake. It includes all the plastic decorations made for looks only, to be disposed of when the candles are lit. This class lacks merit or intellect, ability or wisdom. They are there to protect the middle cream from being called racist or sexist or transphobic. There is nothing the bureaucratic bloated middle of both R’s and D’s won’t do to keep from being called these superficial labels that hardly mean anything anymore.

  34. @Justvisiting

    Whites and asians who qualify for Harvard reparations can be determined easily.

    Determine the average SAT score of non-whites/non-asians admitted to Harvard in a year.

    Any white or Asian applicant who exceeded that score and was denied entrance would be deemed to have been harmed by Harvard’s institutional racist admission policies and would be entitled to full compensation.

    Bonus: Since there would be more qualifying rejected applications than total available spots, Harvard will be paying a form of punitive damages. They earned it.

  35. Look at it on the bright side, if confused gender freaks can identify as 2SLGBBTQQIAPWXYZ+ (Two Spirit, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Beastiality, Transgender, Queer, Questioning, Intersex, Asexual people, and Pedophiles. + added to cover the overlooked), as normal and mentally healthy, whites should mock them by identifying as anything that gets extra points for college admission, welfare, crime and burn loot murder and rape offenses.
    You can order Afros and pimp outfits online, for blackface use black shoe wax, if comes off easy with isopropyl alcohol. How do you think I gets all the special points?

  36. Bill says:
    @Mustapha Mond

    This would immediately call into being an endless inquisition as to the discriminatory grading practices of college professors.

    • Replies: @Mustapha Mond
  37. @anonymous

    Mr. Hood repeats the lie that the SC has a 6-3 conservative majority, though he does put conservative in quotes. Roberts saved Obamacare by contorting it into a “tax.” If you qualify for Obamacare, it’s best not to work for the rest of the year, lest you be hit with a nasty tax penalty at filing time, as its premiums are adjusted based on annual income, not current monthly income. I guess that does make it a tax.

    The SC recently showed it is not really conservative when Roberts and Kavanaugh changed sides and kept the mandate for medical personnel to be vaxxed, even though the industry is facing a major labor shortage due to tens of thousands of highly skilled vax refusers, who know much more about the dangers of the jab than they do. How can a judge vote in favor of one group of workers while voting against the other? The arguments of the three judicial activist libs were nonsensical and had nothing to do with the interpreting the Constitution. It’s disgusting that the Chief Justice and Kavanaugh sided with them and the discredited “Dr.” Fauci.

    And I’m skeptical of Coney-Barrett. She left those Indiana U. vax resisting students out to dry when she turned down their appeal without explanation, instead of providing a stay and referring the matter to the full court. This set the stage for hundreds of colleges to force their students to be vaxxed against their will. Don’t forget that when Ginsberg finally died, Trump never even considered a male judge to take her place. How does that make Barrett’s appointment much different from the female black judge Biden will soon nominate?

  38. @sally

    The “Plandemic” has proven that physical indoctrination centers of useless education are not necessary anymore. The education indoctrination racket is becoming more aggressive when it comes to finding ways to make money by brainwashing your child easier, and if that means allowing for AA enrollment of Magik Negroz, illegals and refugees over whites and Asians, then that’s what they’ll do. It’s not about education, it’s about money and how far they can turn your offspring into self hating whites and Magik Negro followers while they promote and excuse burn loot murder and raping of your white daughters and sons with impunity.
    Today, it pays to be a criminal, and the illegitimate babbling buffoons in DC and in every state are proof.

  39. @Priss Factor

    D-jerseys and R-jerseys are two squads of the same team (Team Banksta). The Kabuki show is what goes on to cajole the zeks into voting for the uniparty every so often – because hope-n-change. Mark Twain even knew what it was about over a century ago: If voting changed anything, it wouldn’t be allowed.

    Ben Garrison ‘splains it for us here as well.

    Yet some fools still shout: VOTE MOAR HARDER!

    As the old Colt 45 Malt Liquor ads said: It works … every time. (Satan Klaus, Soros and Larry Fink cackling in background, while Cheetohead the Clown slaps your shoulder with a nice “chump” sound)

    Perhaps it’s time to think outside the little roach hotel they’ve constructed.

  40. @Johann Theron

    Unity and Harmony would collapse GlobalHomoZioBIGsRxMIC3BLM, they would cease to exist, trillions of dollars would be used instead towards benefiting humanity instead of allowing for its destruction.
    We could all use more unity and Harmony, but when they spend trillions to burn loot murder rape and endless war, unity and Harmony becomes harder to live by.

  41. KenH says:

    If SCOTUS truly ruled in accordance with the law then all affirmative action programs everywhere should get struck down since they are clearly a violation of the Civil Rights Act. SCOTUS cannot take it upon themselves to read a little AA into the law or allow it so long as it’s “narrowly tailored” or where there’s an alleged “compelling state interest”.

    Affirmative action and racial set asides have not led to widespread good will and racial amity among the different racial groups in the multiracial pigsty that is contemporary America. Now blacks are 80% of all those cast on commercials and yet they are still as attitudinal and anti-white as ever so it’s high time to strip them of all of their unearned privileges since they don’t deserve them.

  42. @Astuteobservor II

    “A lottery for all the students capable of doing the school work.”
    That’s circular reasoning – it beggars the question. There cannot be an equitable way to determine who may participate in the lottery, because there cannot be such a thing as an equitable-yet-objective standard. Unless the lottery participants are literally everyone, this approach just pushes the discrimination one step upstream, from admission-to-the-institution to admission-to-the-lottery-group.

    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
  43. Alfred says:
    @GMC

    Imagine how very well educated, the students would be today , had they had a professor teaching the total truth about History, Polysciences, Journalism, Medicine, and all the other fields that have been manipulated by NWO Bolsheviks.

    Agreed. I think home-schooling is going to come back in a big way. When governments are publicly acknowledged to be bankrupt – almost all of them are except in name – there will be a collapse of the present dysfunctional educational and health systems.

    Doctors should be able to deal direct with patients – without interference from governments and insurance companies.

    Here we have insurance companies raising rates for all young people – while pretending that the increase is due to the alleged “virus” instead of the alleged “vaccines”. This is pure sophistry. Everyone know that the “virus” rarely affects young uninjected people.

    Why should the uninjected pay more to cover those who fell for the lies of Fauci and the pharmaceutical companies?

    Life insurers adapt pandemic risk models after claims jump (Reuters)

  44. Ironically, only a Black man, Judge Thomas meets the standard of conduct and decisions of a real judge. Alito is a close second. The rest are fodder and Lilliputians.

    • Agree: Old and Grumpy
  45. @Sarah

    Of course you are correct. The only whites who disagree (or pretend to disagree for the purpose of moral posturing) are those who have never had to deal with blacks in large numbers and do everything they can to avoid doing so.

    Having been forced to be in that situation due to forced integration of the schools, I can tell you with great confidence that those who disagree would change their opinions very quickly if they were forced to go through what I did.

  46. MrE3001 says:

    Nobody can ever answer the question “What’s the correct percentage of White people in the school/company/neighborhood/country”. The reason for their reticence? The answer, of course, is zero.

    • Replies: @Mis(ter)Anthrope
  47. HT says:
    @JimDandy

    The Disney Corp that suspended her and which is controlled by Jews assumes most people are too stupid to figure out what you said and they are probably right unfortunately.

  48. @Macumazahn

    That is up to the people who is in charge of the lottery to sort it out.

    I got my own ideas but they are rudimentary and very superficial as I haven’t thought about it too much. You should direct that question to Ron as he obviously thought about it in depth.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  49. @MrE3001

    I do think they want us here. A parasite never wants its host to die. The parasite cannot survive without a host.

    They just want us here as second class citizens.

    • Replies: @Justvisiting
  50. @Mis(ter)Anthrope

    Leftists are best understood (imho) with the rule of opposites.

    When they say they are opposed to slavery, what they mean is that they love slavery as long as they are the masters.

  51. @Bill

    It certainly would not be a problem in the hard sciences, though.

    And likely no such problems with most professional licensure exams, either.

    But it will never happen. Too many mediocrities would whine and whine and whine……..

    Thanks for a good comment. Ultimately, you are probably 100% correct, sad to say.

  52. Ron Unz says:
    @Astuteobservor II

    I got my own ideas but they are rudimentary and very superficial as I haven’t thought about it too much. You should direct that question to Ron as he obviously thought about it in depth.

    Sure, I’d outlined it in my very long 2012 Meritocracy article, which was responsible for the current Harvard lawsuit now headed towards the Supreme Court. Here’s the link to that section, though the earlier paragraphs are quite relevant:

    https://www.unz.com/runz/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/#an-inner-ring-and-an-outer-ring

  53. @anonymous

    I am sure that what you have listed is purely co-incidental. Just as it is purely co-incidental that there are no Protestants on the Supreme Court. https://publicseminar.org/essays/why-are-there-no-protestants-on-the-supreme-court-amy-coney-barrett/

    • Replies: @Anon
  54. anonymous[325] • Disclaimer says:

    What about diversity of thought? The leftist intelligentsia want students who look different but all think alike, i.e. their definition of diversity is only skin deep. Any applicant who says he campaigned for Trump or any GOP senator, or is against abortion, mass/illegal immigration or LGBTQ is an immediate reject. SFFA sort of hinted at this by using the racial stereotyping claim, but they could be more explicit about it.

    As an Asian I would actually prefer fewer not more Asians attend elite colleges. I mean look at brainwashed leftist idiots like Pete Buttigieg or Ted Lieu? Or spineless neocon shills like Tom Cotton or Ted Cruz? Or the past 5 presidents from H.W. Bush to Clinton, W., Obama, Trump? All are Ivy League educated paid shills of globohomo, shamelessly lying to their constituents while carrying out their puppet masters’ Jew World Order through a combination of financial, technological, military predation and cultural degeneracy. True, Biden is up there too but at least his parents didn’t have to pay through the nose for the same indoctrination.

    Instead of continuing to reject official quotas while condoning unofficial ones, SCOTUS should do the opposite and allow these colleges to set strict racial quotas — but only if they reflect the general demographic of the country. So all colleges that want to consider race as part of admission must adhere to a strict racial quota that is 60% white, 2% Jew, 12% black, 16% Hispanic, 6% Asian, 2% Pacific Islander, 1.5% native American, 0.5% other. Each group then competes only with its own subgroup, so Asians compete against other Asians, blacks against other blacks, etc. which is basically what is going on now anyway. Then within each subgroup, make the selection strictly by merit, i.e. the highest combination of GPA and AP/SAT test scores. This is the fairest way in a multicultural society.

    To those who say it’s not fair because Asians who score in the 50th to 94th percentile would still out perform most top blacks and Hispanics, I say so what? Let these talented Asians go to the “lesser” schools, even community colleges, and make those schools better; or no college at all, just a 6 months online certificate like the new one Google just started which 200+ companies including Deloitte, Verizon etc. have pledged to treat as the equivalent of a 4 year degree:
    https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-learning/blogs/online-trending-now/google-enters-higher-ed-big-way

    Asians need to stop this blind worship of elitism. All they know how to do is working themselves to death to be the top rat in the rat race. They are the ones making these elite colleges even more elite and arrogant by swarming them with applications. It’s time to grow a brain and opt out of the rat race. Giving their kids their childhood back instead forcing them into the single-minded pursuit of elitism will make them more creative, more interesting to be around, and much nicer people without the arrogance and leftist indoctrination.

    • Thanks: bomag, Craig Nelsen
    • Replies: @Rich
  55. anon[325] • Disclaimer says:

    Slightly off topic:

    Now that 20 states have drafted bills prohibiting claims of systemic racism in college and K-12 curriculum, the left are suddenly arguing for “free speech”. LOL.

    https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/02/02/analysis-%E2%80%98divisive-concepts%E2%80%99-bills-target-higher-ed-2022

    For what it’s worth I actually think such explicit ban is a hindrance of free speech and will not hold up in court, two wrongs don’t make a right. I think a better bill would be one that enforces objectivity by requiring colleges and K-12 that teach all controversial topics (including anything pertaining to race, gender, religion, abortion, gun control, politics) to always present at least two contrasting viewpoints and allow students to openly debate and decide for themselves, i.e. teach our kids how to think, not what to think.

  56. bomag says:
    @Agent76

    Some traction there; problem is that the feds are now sloshing around so much money that so very many are afraid of the slush slowing down.

  57. anonymous[218] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    Amy Wax got in trouble for pointing out that the vast majority of blacks in her first year law class ended up in the bottom quartile and she believed it was all due to affirmative action. For her dissenting view, the dean of Penn Law banned her from teaching the first year law class she had been teaching for decades.

    I think you misunderstood what she’s saying here.

    I think what she’s saying is that she doesn’t believe the GOP/gutless establishment “conservatives” like those supposed “conservative” SCOTUS judges appointed by Trump have the courage to say they are prepared to accept a strictly meritocratic outcome given the current political climate. Just look at how she’s being ostracized for saying it.

  58. Thomasina says:
    @anonymous

    Great post. I don’t think you get into positions like this unless 1) you are already aligned with the ideology of the Ruling Elite or 2) they’re holding dirt on you that MAKES you align.

    If what you’ve presented is anywhere close to being the truth, then Justice Roberts was already morally and ethically bankrupt. This is what brings countries down.

    Imagine the mental machinations a blackmailed judge would have to go through when delivering rulings they don’t agree with. But it looks like Roberts is used to justifying his behavior, so it’s probably no biggie for him.

  59. Anon[140] • Disclaimer says:
    @anonymous

    Roberts married a female lawyer, who, like many professional women, didn’t marry until she running on 40 years old and probably failed to conceive. So they adopted two kids, big whop. Sorry if this bums out your white knighting crusade.

    For the Epstein thing, I suspect that the surety people have that merely being on Epstein’s flight logs proves the guys engaged in orgies is due to the fact that those making the accusations know that like 75% of men would partake if the opportunity were offered. Only by using these newly redefined or invented woke terminologies (“sex trafficking,” describing an attraction to 16-year-olds as “pedophilia”) does it sound like this great moral atrocity.

  60. anon[218] • Disclaimer says:

    The “America is not ready” or “We are not there yet” excuse was also used by the lower court to rule against SFFA. Sandra Day O’Connor had given America’s race hustlers the best weapon with that one phrase, and rest assured it will be used again by the current supreme court, to all eternity, because the 3 Trump appointees are actually fake, gutless conservatives, and John Roberts is highly compromised, the left has got major dirt on him. The only true conservative judges left are Clarence Thomas and Sam Alito.

    The real problem here is once you give away a certain privilege, you can never take it back. Those who benefit from it will always do everything they can to keep it, including resorting to violence. The judges are human, they want to be loved(esp. by the media), and they also live in fear of the angry black mob that will surely be riled up by the toxic Jew media if they rule against AA. We might see another Summer of George.

    So yes, I think the O’Connor excuse will again be used to extend the O’Connor deadline. If SCOTUS has any integrity left, they will at least define in objective terms when America will be “ready”, e.g. when median white and black income/wealth achieve parity? Which of course means never since income and wealth are a proxy of IQ and you can never equate IQ, or America will have become such a banana republic by then our elite colleges will be about the same quality as the HBCUs.

    Personally I pray that SCOTUS will go whole hog and require our top 10 elite colleges — the Ivies, Stanford and MIT to accept 100% black until “America is ready”. It’ll hasten the death of these pompous, hypocritical bastions of left wing elitism and lunacy, and America will be stronger for it. Education is not a competition. The word “elite” has nothing to do with education. For true education to survive, we need to get rid of all notions of elitism in education. True education begins and ends with integrity and humility, not elitism, pretension, hypocrisy and arrogance.

    • Agree: Craig Nelsen
  61. @JimDandy

    Gregory Hood is a statist. Our rights are not granted by courts.

    • Replies: @Justvisiting
  62. anon[107] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mustapha Mond

    You know the joke:

    Q: What do you call the guy who graduated last place from medical school?
    A:”Doctor”.

    Have you seen the USA series “SUITS”? It’s about a prestigious law firm that hires only “the best of the best of the best”, i.e. graduates of Harvard law. Pretty much every lawyer in that series is a Jew or a black. The only lone Christian white male lawyer on the show is a grifter who never attended Harvard and conned his way in. Anyone watching that show would think smart Harvard educated blacks are a dime a dozen and running all the law firms in Manhattan.

    It’s why there was such an outcry when Amy Wax came out and said that in her decades of teaching at Penn Law, she had not seen more than a handful of blacks in the top half of her first year law class. She was immediately accused of prejudice against blacks and had that class taken from her by the dean of Penn Law.

    Those running this country/world have been lying to us about everything for so long, they will do anything to keep the lies going. And they probably justify everything to themselves by believing that these are the “noble lies” postulated by Plato.

    • Replies: @Mustapha Mond
  63. Dr. Doom says:

    Let the Zion Pigs fill their looniversities with garbage people.
    The monies they get from overseas students will quickly dry up.

    Do rich arabs and asians want to be “enriched” by dievershitty?
    Nope. You can bet the cash cow will quickly go belly up.

    Anything the fake “Jews” touch goes down the drain.
    )))They((( are a cancer, that cannot maintain anything.

    The ghettoes are the full expression of )))their((( inferiority.
    The Zion Pigs will want to kill their hosts.
    That’s what cancer does doncha know?

    You are not dealing with RATIONAL enemies.
    )))They((( are Satanic puppets.

  64. anon[107] • Disclaimer says:
    @MarcusAurelius

    Colleges are ditching SATs and other tests because they don’t want any objective way to prove they’re screwing over Whites and Asians in favor Blacks and Hispanics.

    Whites will still be needed to pay for all the free riding blacks and Hispanics, and for alumni donations, and Jews will always be needed to protect the existing power structure, but Asians a.k.a. the new greasy grinds will no longer be needed to prop up the median SAT scores, esp. once these schools convince USNews to drop SAT scores as a criterion for rankings. So Asians will be most hurt by this.

    The biggest beneficiary of AA is Hispanics. They are a little smarter than blacks but are evaluated under the same generous criteria. This is especially true in all the elite CA schools – Stanford, UCB, UCLA, where they now make up 17% to 25% of undergrads.

  65. @Freedom Awaits

    Gregory Hood is a statist. Our rights are not granted by courts.

    Have you listened to his podcasts?

    He states very clearly that he is a statist.

    Old news. 😉

  66. I could care less who the next corruptible “judge” will be…As I’ve already stated elsewhere, the stuffed black robes of the supreme court of injustice has lit a fire in the heart of our American Republic- a fire that cannot be quenched. The court abused the law of “standing”, so persuasively outlined by Ralph Nader @ https://nader.org/2000/08/23/standing-law/. This right to bring a lawsuit forward in this case against voting fraud, thus refusing to expedite legal proceedings to decide the actual merits of a lawsuit(s) left me- dumbfounded. The general public has been alerted to the fact that many voting irregularities were uncovered during the last presidential election. This almost unbearable fraud was coupled with an absence of true campaign finance reform and lack of lock-box funding monies set aside for for the expansion of Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA.) The promulgation, funding and enforcing of H.R.2777 — 105th Congress!! has been dead in the water since 1997. Be it FARA or HR 2777, the whole issue of dark money, and its built-in secrecy is only strengthened by the dodgy appearance of crypto-currency donations (aka payoffs). For example; long into the future, kick backs given to retired legislators. These legal hurtles that address corruption must be spelled out in detail, again through proper legislation.

    The distribution of monies from major banks to the their individual customers “on demand” is drying up, so why has the logical alternative, the introduction of two Bills S 2755-Postal Banking Act and H.R. 5816-Postal Banking Act been put on the shelf collecting dust? Isn’t it common sense to move these two pieces of legislation forward since most of our homeless and indigent have no bank account what-so-ever to receive SSA or cash stimulus checks? What will happen and what alternative will citizens have, when the local ATM’s suddenly have no cash to give you? where will you go for some ready and or emergency cash? Daily cash withdrawal limits are already becoming bank policy..

    Pray tell, how can we have a living democracy without the Posse Comitatus Act? It is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) that was subverted, while America’s back was turned, by the NDA and “Patriot” Act(s). The Posse..Act prevented the dispatch of any military force against civilians. Lastly, our founding fathers encouraged overthrow when the government no longer represented the people, this is based on the wider concept (France, Russia, Iran) “Right of Revolution” or the right of rebellion. What alternate choice do we as citizenry at large have without promulgating and enforcing these tools of justice? Do you want armored vehicles and tanks in your town square when families show up to protest? This is exactly what will happen without the re-enactment of Posse Comitatus. When our so-called government representatives are for the most part, multimillionaires, own private jets, in the pocket of the MIC, share revolving doors with high positions in major corporate board rooms, sworn to take an oath to Israel before taking their congressional post? Then how in heavens name can politicians understand the retched among us? the needy among us? how can we call this scenario a true and living democracy?

  67. Rich says:
    @anonymous

    Tom Cotton served a combat tour in Iraq and another in Afghanistan. He earned a Bronze Star and a Combat Infantryman badge. You may not agree with his politics, but the man definitely has a spine. He’s stood up to the leftists continually in his time in Congress.

    • Replies: @Exile
  68. Dr. Doom says:

    I heard today the Democrats want to outlaw “legacy” students.
    Another anti-White program in action.

    Soon these looniversities will be nothing but Zionists and retards.
    But I repeat myself.

    Marxism doesn’t work. Only the stupid can believe the government will make them rich.
    The GDP equally divided would probably be below the poverty line.

    Have to get rid of Math and those that can do it.
    The racism of understanding numbers shits all over empty Zionist rhetoric.

    • Replies: @Rich
  69. Anon[253] • Disclaimer says:
    @Curmudgeon

    The real reason is the moronic obsession with abortion.

  70. Rich says:
    @Dr. Doom

    I’d be willing to wager the majority of legacies are ethnically Jewish.

  71. “More specifically, abandoning racial preferences and returning to colorblind, meritocratic standards will lead to significantly fewer low-performing minorities earning places in demanding professions and positions of authority.”

    That would be a desirable outcome for the most people.

  72. Mac_ says:

    me: It’s a ‘show’. all of it. govt. courtz. meeduh. when, when are people going to get it.

    god: I don’t know. I tried. I’ve been telling people look not to false idols for centuries, but, they don’t listen.

    me: well lord knows I tried.

    god: Yes, I can say you have.

    me: what’s with all the robes and junk by the way.

    god: Covering over a lack of substance.

    me: so costumes then.

    god: Yep.

    me: well, thanks for the convo.

    god: No problem.

    .

  73. @bomag

    I agree with our German non amnesiac Vergi. We would not be giving up much ground, because the ground we are currently standing on is quicksand. Better to be brazenly victimized in broad daylight so everyone can see, so that once people realize they are sinking, they will be more inclined to insist on being moved to a higher ground.

    • Replies: @bomag
  74. Testpost says: • Website

    Who did the future black female nominee to the Supreme Court rape?

    Will the victims, if they exist, be brave enough to come forward?

    This is a question on everyone’s mind right now.

    http://callin.com/link/AEvZperbkm

  75. Exile says:
    @Rich

    And yet the “Leftists” keep winning, every single time.

    I’ve known two soldiers who were approached by the GOP for state-level candidacies. They passed because they knew it would cost them their souls. And Congressional candidacies are even more “managed.”

    No one on the GOP side is going to be supported unless they’ve been Epstein’d or otherwise entirely bought off and locked down.

    There are still a handful of Democrats who aren’t controlled by the Jewish Lobby but that’s down to having to serve the woke/rainbow coalition at least superficially.

    Republicans don’t even get crumbs – empowering Whites is not on the table under any circumstances.

    But it’s not like Rashida Tlaib or Ilhan Omar are going to bring down Jewish control of Congress, any more than Tom Cotton or Lyin’ Ted are going to actually stand up for their constituents vs. their own Jewish donors.

    Look at how Tulsi Gabbard has been brought to heel. And how quickly AOC showed that she was another left-populist fake.

    • Replies: @Rich
  76. @Vergissmeinnicht

    Guten Tag, Vergissmeinnicht! I learned a great little poem by that title long ago, about the horror of war. Glad to be reminded of it.

  77. Rich says:
    @Exile

    Miss Gabard is a far leftist gun grabbing, tax raising liberal who fully supported Israel. I’m unaware of any elected politician who has come out against Israel. Even the crazy Palestinian chick and her crew have said they support Israel and therefore Zionism. I don’t see any of that changing, so we’re better off supporting candidates who at least are overtly anti-White and a guy like Tom Cotton who has spoken against affirmative action and other anti-White policies is not bad for Whitey and may actually be good.

    • Replies: @Exile
  78. bomag says:
    @Luus Kanin

    Maybe.

    I suggest we have reached and passed peak badness; any concession just further empowers the opponent. Every White I engage with acknowledges the issue: half see the target on their back, the other half are gleefully throwing their fellow ethnics under the bus for 30 pieces of silver. We are on a path for all willing victims to be harvested under the bus, leaving the tribalists fighting for survival, as it has been in all of history. This is the reality we need to embrace.

    • Replies: @Luus Kanin
  79. Exile says:
    @Rich

    Gabbard opposed the Forever Wars agenda until they roasted her for it in the primaries. That was the point, not her other positions.

    But you’re so trapped in Red-Blue sportsball politics that all you can say is “Democrat Bad.”

    Just keep voting GOP and getting the best of what crumbs Jews choose to throw you because we can’t beat them? No thanks.

    And why bother sticking up for Tom Cotton’s “spine” if you know that he’s just giving you crumbs?

    Are you that demoralized?

    • Replies: @Rich
  80. Rich says:
    @Exile

    Tulsi supports higher taxes, homosexual marriage, amnesty for illegal aliens, more gun control, putting women into combat, and a universal basic income,, as well as almost every other anti-White, leftist policy of the Democrat party. She’s also often voted in favor of America’s overseas military adventures. She’s a fraud.
    Tom Cotton is a combat vet who does support most of our overseas military adventures, too, but he also supports lower taxes, traditional families, deporting illegal aliens, less gun control, keeping women out of combat and less welfare as well as many policies that benefit the historic American people. I’m not looking for anybody’s “crumbs”. I’ll get my own meat, thanks.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  81. @bomag

    Your point is well taken.

  82. @anon

    Sorry for the late reply. That was a very astute comment. Let me explain….

    I attended a “Top Ten” law school on a full free ride for academic achievement in college, not based on need. It was a very good school with tons of exceptionally bright kids. But there were also what we called the ‘affirmative action babies’, the kids who clearly did not have the smarts to be there, and it showed in their comments and questions which belied a fundamental ignorance not just of the fine nuances of the reading materials assigned, but a general lack of reading comprehension skills. In many cases it was truly shocking (or amusing, to be honest.)

    My best friend in law school was and is a top rated estate planner who was picked to edit the state bar practice manual that is periodically published in the state he currently resides in. We would sit around after class and discuss the events of the day, as we were in the same section, and thus, at least for our first year, had all the same classes. He was from the South and had a devilishly humorous black southern accent he had acquired simply from living in that part of the US his whole life. He would put it to great comedic effect when imitating one of the obvious ‘special admissions’ students who had to ask, on average, at least two or three simply inane questions that our (mostly jewish) faculty would, to their credit, patiently deal with in a most humane and kid-glove manner.

    Of course, if one of us normal admission males even made the tiniest error in responding to a query from the instructor, we were utterly annihilated in the most humiliating way, using that wonderful “Socratic method” that law school faculty intellectual sadists (which there plenty of, let me tell you) used to bully you into redoubling your efforts to fully grasp the subject matter (or don’t come to class if you didn’t.) It only happened to me once (my girlfriend was in town, so I had no time for reading the night before class, of course), and as luck would have it, he called upon me to answer his question about the assigned reading. I never again came to class unprepared, so it had the desired effect on me, that’s for sure!

    But for the special admission kids, they were always handled with that kid glove treatment. Later it was leaked by a (conservative) faculty member that these kids also got special tutoring, free of course, so they could (hopefully) achieve a passing grade, and it was even rumored that some got preferential treatment, grade-wise, which I personally witnessed more than once.

    But none of that nonsense would help them come Bar Exam time, and they did not usually pass the exam. I knew that because I made it a little special project of mine to recall the names of these kids that showed a serious lack of intellectual fire power and to check it against the names of those who had passed the bar when we all took the summer exam. Because I passed the first go round (it was easy), I stopped checking the subsequent exams (one in summer and one in winter) to see who had failed to make the grade (again). But I can assure you that not a single one of the names I had committed to memory was in the list of those who passed on their first try, as I completely expected. They did not disappoint.

    Again, thanks for a fine reply comment!

    • Replies: @Justvisiting
  83. Anonymous[513] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rich

    Feminists want portrayals of women in combat on tv. If there was an actual war they’d eagerly collect their pussy pass. They’ve never believed in “equality” and aren’t gonna start in the event of a war. Deep down the conservative white knights know this, but they’re too cucked to speak up for men as men and can only say they oppose feminism if the argument is that it hurts women somehow.(Which it does, but not because they’re going to get drafted.)

    Gabbards only supported tax hikes for the wealthy, who are mostly a bunch of virtue signalers who deserve to get their taxes hiked. Gabbard over Cotton for sure.

    • Replies: @Rich
  84. “” Sandra Day O’Connor was part of the 5-4 majority. She was also the first woman justice. She wrote the majority opinion, in which she argued that a “race-neutral” admissions process is the goal, but America isn’t ready: “We expect that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest that we approve today.”””

    Judges are supposed to use legal arguments not moral ones.

  85. “Diversity” is linguistic bollocks. What they are actually saying is “Division.”

    Diversity harms blacks more than segregation did. Proof is the hyper-segregation of the liberals themselves today.

    Diversity is an old policy abandoned in favor of “equity” which actually means the opposite. Again, liberals have created an unassailable shit lib fortress of reaction that blacks, especially poor blacks dare not challenge.

  86. Rich says:
    @Anonymous

    Tulsi supports raising the minimum wage, which will increase prices, a tax. She supports free college, paid for with higher taxes. She supports Medicare for all which would have to increase taxes to be paid for. She supports amnesty for illegals which would increase the welfare rolls and increase taxes. She has also stated she favors “studying” reparations which means she supports it, paid for with White tax dollars. She’s a gun grabber and has stated that she is in favor of ending cash bail. The woman is a far leftist.

    • Thanks: Hibernian
    • Replies: @Anonymous
  87. @Mustapha Mond

    For years I worked at a lender that had a Loan Committee.

    They appointed a token black woman to be a member of that committee.

    The deals were highly complex, and she never asked one intelligent question during the hundreds of deals that I heard presented to the Committee.

    Not one.

    Hundreds of deals.

    She always refused to vote on a deal until a majority had already decided either way.

    That is what a true “empty suit” looks like.

    • Replies: @Mustapha Mond
  88. Anonymous[267] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rich

    Trump cut taxes for corporations and the wealthy, who responded by supporting the cultural left at every opportunity. If the pitch was “cut your taxes and raise them on Jeff Bezos,” the GOP would get my vote. But it isn’t, so they get no points from me for supporting low taxes. Tulsi’s economic policies are nothing to write home about but at least she opposes these foreign interventions.

    • Replies: @Rich
  89. Rich says:
    @Anonymous

    Trump, a moderate republican, cut taxes for everyone, including the working class. He also lowered costs by encouraging more domestic oil and gas production. Your girl Tulsi who wants to take your money and give it to black skinned individuals because over a hundred and fifty years ago some of their ancestors might have been slaves. In 2018 Tulsi voted in favor of using drone strikes in the Middle East. In 2016 she voted in favor of the AUMF that continues to fund our Middle East adventures. In 2015 she voted in favor of keeping troops in Iraq and Syria. She also voted in favor of sanctions on Iran. She’s not who she pretends to be.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  90. @Justvisiting

    Reminds me of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, who (at least while I was practicing and therefore keeping completely abreast of all matters legal, especially from the nation’s highest court) would invariably invoke the same description from news reporters describing the various Justice’s queries to the appellants before them during argument: “As always, Justice Thomas asked no questions during oral argument…..”.

  91. Mr. Hood only partly quoted Sandra Day O’Connor when he said that she claimed affirmative action might be needed for 25 years. She actually added, that it might be needed in perpetuity. If I were Black, I’d be offended. Boy, did Reagan screw up on putting this “conservative” traitor in.

    • Replies: @Rich
  92. Rich says:
    @Dr. Charles Fhandrich

    Reagan gave good speeches, that’s about it. Along with appointing the affirmative action O’Connor, he signed Martin King Day into law, granted millions of illegal aliens amnesty, started the insane deficit spending nightmare and ran like a rabbit when terrorists murdered 241 American military personnel in Lebanon. I guess he gets points for appointing Antonin Scalia to the USSC, but that’s all I’m giving him.

    • Replies: @Dr. Charles Fhandrich
  93. Hibernian says:
    @anonymous

    “John” and “Roberts” are extremely common names, perfect for a pseudonym, or maybe the passenger was another John Roberts, of whom there are certainly many. Margaret Thatcher’s maiden name was Roberts.

  94. Anonymous[267] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rich

    Yeah we can’t have the fruit of tax cuts for the middle class without wolfing down the rotten apple of tax cuts for the rich. I’ve heard it and don’t buy into it. The corporations are our enemy. Say it once, say it twice, say it a thousand times until you are saying it in your sleep!

    • Disagree: Rich
  95. @Anonymous

    Taxes on the rich sound good, but they are a poor tactic–because they won’t work in an era when keystrokes can move assets from one jurisdiction to another.

    Seizing assets and jailing executives is going to be the only way we get them off our back.

    I don’t want them to “pay their fair share”. I just want them put somewhere where they can’t ^%\$# up my life.

  96. @Anonymous

    That tax cut was 100% for the rich. That anon is stupid on an epic level.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Gregory Hood Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
Becker update V1.3.2