Robert Putnam, a Harvard political scientist, interviewed nearly 30,000 Americans in coming up with a report, E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-first Century, which stated the obvious: white, blacks, Irish, Jews and all American ethnic groups prefer to live among and socialize with their own kind.
“The greater the diversity in a community, the less civic engagement it shows,” [Clarence] Page wrote of Putnam’s report. “Fewer people vote. Fewer volunteer. They give less to charity. They work together less on community projects.” And “they trust each other less,” Page admits, “not only across racial and ethnic lines but also within the lines. In other words, residents of the most racially and ethnically mixed neighborhoods show the least trust not only of other races but also people of their own races.”
Clarence Page is a black “conservative” columnist. Does he, then, believe that government should let people enjoy “life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness?”
“Heavens to Betsy, no!” is Page’s hysterical reaction. The government must take military-style action to impose “diversity,” Page argues.
[citation from American Free Press, September 17 & 24, 2007, page 15, “AFP ON MULTICULTURALISM” by James P. Tucker, Jr.]
Does Mr. Page really want diversity, or does he really want its opposite? There is no compelling rationale for diversity within a political economy. Therefore, its artificial engineering by means of law fails the test of reasonableness. The marked willingness of the elite to use fixed bayonets to achieve for them what reasonable argument cannot suggests an ulterior motive. When all inequality is viewed as “undesirable” and even as “dangerous,” a society has positioned itself to walk through the doors of bedlam. The bell cows of looniness will guide it in. The doctors await. Can shock treatment be far behind?
This short article, appearing in the AFP issue cited above, delves into surely the most misrepresented and most certainly scholar-unfriendly area of today in America. The observer is asked to treat with respect and an “open” mind such competing propositions as “race is an illusion,” “race is observable,” “there is only one race,” and “there are at least several races, depending on definition.”
The system of defining creation is alleged to have begun in the “Garden of Eden” when Adam took on the task of naming the “flora & fauna.” That happens to be my anchor. In modern times the European Linnaeus provided the definitive base for biological ordering. Again, this is an anchor in my view of this subject.
The word “species” is derived from the Latin word, meaning “to see.” Therefore, the employment of this word requires first and foremost the ability to recognize and distinguish. When patterns amongst life forms within the flora & fauna manifest them, tend to be replicated through generations, involve groups that recognize one another and live together, and which, if they replicate sexually, do so within the group, such patterns may involve such species. Nature tends to be generally exclusive. Therefore, the black oak tends to replicate with black oak; the red oak tends to replicate with red oak; the white oak tends to replicate with white oak; and the pin oak tends to replicate with pin oaks. Do these ever have “mixed marriages?” The answer seems to be: Not very often, if at all. Nor is there a likelihood that the fruit of such “marriages” will long survive.
Of course, animal forms tend toward the same exclusivity, but not to the extent of plants. Mating between distinct variations, if not species, occur. Witness the occasional mix of lion and tiger, horse and zebra, etc. Of all the animal forms, humans are the most adventurous in this regard. On the animal level human tampering with nature is often the most essential factor resulting in, say, a horse-burro mix, a zebra-horse mix, a lion-tiger mix, and so on. There seems to be a curiosity within humans in regard to the question: “What happens when you cross…?”
For me, once again, Scripture and Apocrypha, provide an anchor. “As in the days of Jared…” Whether there are angels, whether some came to Earth “to teach men,” whether some of these taught the unnatural mixing of flesh, I cannot say. But some sort of misuse of nature, I believe, was occurring at that time.
In our time there can be little doubt that scientists across the globe are experimenting in the mix of flesh fit to make the Watchers of Apocrypha proud. We are advised by them and by industries which employ their techniques how wise and beneficial their “advances” are. In fact scientist are insisting for themselves a role consistent with that of a superior caste, whose work is not understood by the benighted masses and which work can not be abridged at all by these mere “children,” who are too ill-equipped to make such judgments.
Would it be absurd to suppose that they believe that cow’s milk squeezed from a banana is a sound idea? And many another such scheme as well? Although some may devise a stronger grain vis-à-vis a blight by this means, one gets the feeling that there are plenty of scientists in this field who have become “deranged” by the fantastic possibilities. I, for one, have no doubt that human experimentation, utilizing non-human genes, has occurred “big-time.”
If one can validly assert that there are highly intelligent men, scientists, men remarkably skilled, who are so convinced of the good of a project they envision, that they proceed with their work without undue concern for the views of the great bulk of their fellow citizens, then I think that we have stumbled across the very sorts who force discrete groups into special social chambers, where they can be artificially blended. Since such scientists try to operate in an objective and detached fashion, their very techniques tend to shear the human “guinea pigs,” or “specimens,” as the case may be, of their humanity. In the process of doing this, these scientists most certainly lose their own. Yet, in bedlam who notices insanity? In the brotherhood of the lab, what doctor puts sound ethics and morality before his experimentation upon Herr Mouse? Do their mouths and hearts act as one?
In regard to these “scientists,” alluded to above, we find a sort of hybrid mind at work. Such people seem to be blends of the scientific minds of the Age of Reason, as found in Europe, and the mystical mind of the Mystery Religions. One sees and notes the rational observation of form and structure, wedded to the incantations and symbols of the “golem-makers.” All in all, there seems to be a certain appropriateness here. These are the “sorcerer’s apprentices,” stirring up a New World Order. They need to produce a New Man to inhabit it. What choice have they but a global hybrid? What means other than government troops with fixed bayonets compelling it? With such an order can a Resident Evil be far behind?
