by H. Millard (c) 2001

Jeff Jacoby is a columnist for the Boston Globe. He is also Jewish, and you'll see the importance of this a little further on. Apparently, Mr. Jacoby, if I understand some of his columns correctly, is also a race denier. Well, actually, he's not a denier of the existence of HIS identity group that is often the functional equivalent of, and substitutes for race. He just denies the reality of YOUR race. Just for background information, you may remember that Jacoby was the columnist that the Globe sent on hiatus a couple of years ago after Mr. Jacoby apparently engaged in some alleged lazy columnizing. Anyway, Jacoby is back at the Globe and he continues to write his opinions. But, as they say on the streets, opinions are like a-holes; everyone has one.

Notwithstanding the above, or what is to follow, this column that you're now reading isn't really about Mr. Jacoby. His columns just present convenient and concrete examples of a wider strain of thought--an idiocy of the age--and the all too common and non-critical thinking that is leading to massive genocide on a road greased with the curtailment of free thought and free speech. The only reason I've identified Mr. Jacoby by name in this present column is so that readers may read Mr. Jacoby's full columns and form their own opinions.

blenderIn one of his recent columns, "A blended America," Mr. Jacoby propagandizes for racial blending. In fact, he even uses the term "blended" that I've used in many of my columns to describe the result of the blending being pushed by what I've called Blenders. He writes, for example, "Too many Americans still believe that people can be 'scientifically' classified by race, a 17th-century notion more closely related to myth than science." Right. Like, er, there aren't any breeds of dogs either. "Why, boys and girls, there's no difference between a Greyhound and a Chihuahua. The only reason that Greyhounds win more dog races is because that's their way out of the kennel." You probably caught Mr. Jacoby's trick with "a 17th-century notion." You were supposed to subconsciously think "Yeah, like that's old and it was only a 'notion,' anyway. We're more modern and knowledgeable now. And, besides, Jacoby says it was 'more closely related to myth that science.' That sure proves it. I'm not dumb enough to believe in myths." Actually, no matter what Mr. Jacoby and some others may want you to believe, race is not a myth. It's a reality. I've written extensively about this in other columns and readers may look them up for the facts and figures of this.

"melting pot team"In another column, "Who's white? Who's Latino? Who cares?" Mr. Jacoby gives us more of his columnariat genetic wisdom as he writes that "For 250 years, the American melting pot has been turning ethnic groups once thought to be racially distinct into undifferentiated Americans." One almost expects Mr. Jacoby to next write: "Don't put hyphens in my name, boy, I'm just an American." Ah, however, to judge from the number and tone of columns that Mr. Jacoby has written on Jewish issues, one might be forgiven if one forms the impression that Mr. Jacoby signals that he actually finds a good deal of his essential identity and belonging in his Jewishness--which, to many Jews--is the functional identity equivalent of a race, or its country cousin "ethnicity." This internal sense of identity and belonging, expressed, in this case, as Jewishness, by Mr. Jacoby and others, is denied to many generic white non-Jews, especially in America, where, remember, the melting pot at the turn of the century blended away their national identities and sense of belonging in favor of a plain wrap white European in America. The turn of the century melting pot destroyed the narrow artificial national identities of the Europeans coming here and replaced them with a sense of worth based on a broader essential racial identity. Thus, one became less an Irishman or a Swede and more a white person which, up until recent years, was subconsciously synonymous with "American."

For some years now, however, the blenders have been trying to destroy that identity: "white person," and sublimate it into "American" which has lost it's meaning as a synonym for white person. So, given the present de facto denial of the right to white identity for white people and the promoting of the blended identity substitute "American," the result is that white people don't have a sense of their essential identity or of peoplehood. They are alienated from their essential individual and group selves. The equivalent feeling of identity that should be natural for white people and which is found in Jews in their Jewishness, is not found by non-Jewish white people, in being, say, Catholic or Baptist, or in other well known religious beliefs, but in race. But, as already mentioned, this identity based on race is being stripped from whites by the race deniers. Non-Jewish whites are being told that they are not a people; that race does not exist; and that they are no different from all other people.

Ellis IslandBut, to repeat; lest this be lost, the melting pot of the turn of the century was simply the reality that non-Jewish EUROPEANS who were coming to America from different EUROPEAN NATIONS were blending away their NATIONAL differences, and becoming something of a plain wrap EUROPEAN on the American continent. Most of the Europeans coming to America were virtually identical genetically. They were all of one (get ready, boys and girls, I'm about to use a bad word) RACE. A German living on this side of the road in Europe wasn't much different genetically from a Frenchman living on the other side of the road. Switch the children of the German with the Frenchman and you wouldn't notice a thing. However, today's evil neo-melting pot, of which Mr. Jacoby and others write, is a genocide machine that is destroying distinct peoples who are genetically different. Oh, I forgot. Mr. Jacoby, the great student of genetics (Oh, he's not?), apparently has rejected the notion of meaningful genetic differences. You will remember that in his earlier mentioned column, above, Mr. Jacoby told readers that race is more myth than science. How does he know that? He doesn't, and he offers no proof of his assertion, because there is no such proof. It's that old a-hole and opinion thing, again. Say, how come I haven't seen any of Mr. Jacoby's relatives on the Boston Celtics? Is it just a myth that most of the Boston Celtics are black?

Zeek, the mute rock creature native of the primative world called the Melting Pot. If one doesn't like the word "race," then switch it to "breed" or "human type" or even "extended family with like characteristics." No matter what the likes of Mr. Jacoby want to call it, or not call it, there are different human types, and these different human types will breed true if they remain out of the neo-melting pot. And, in this sense, "breed true," as we can see it with our own eyes, means that the children will look like the parents and not be some sort of midway blend. For example, blacks mating with blacks will produce black children with all the other racial characteristics of black people. Whites mating with whites will produce white children with all the other racial characteristics of white people. Blacks mating with whites will usually produce midway blended children who won't look like the parents but will be in between. Such cross breeding has the potential to eventually destroy our present distinct human types, and lead to a conformity of genes among humans that will lead the species to a stagnation and genetic conformity in the middle of the Bell Curve. Evolution is led by differences, not sameness. Indeed, the evil neo-melting pot, unless it is discredited, will lead to genocide and extinction.

But there's more wrong with Mr. Jacoby's type of thinking, as expressed in his columns, that needs to be pointed out. Turn, for example, to the issue of free speech. When one reads various things by race deniers, it becomes clear that in addition to their race denying, they also often share a double standard regarding free speech. Instead of across the board, bedrock principles that apply equally to all speech, some of these individuals seem to have one set of rules for themselves and their friends, and another set of rules for others.

Dr. LauraA clear example of this double standard emerges from two of Jacoby's columns. In Jacoby's May 25, 2000 column, "The New Blacklisters," Mr. Jacoby defends "Dr. Laura" Schlessinger who was, and still is, under attack from gay rights organizations, for her perceived anti-gay bias. Jacoby writes, "Increasingly, gay activists are insisting that you not be allowed to hear the arguments for and against. Instead of trying to refute opinions they don't share, the new strategy is to label them "HATEFUL" or "dangerous" and to SILENCE THE PEOPLE making them." Sounds like this Jacoby guy is all for free thinking and free expression, doesn't it? Hold on a minute. Turn to Jacoby's April 17, 2000 column, "The Denier's Real Goal," in which Mr. Jacoby writes "That is what the [Holocaust] deniers are Adolf Hitleraiming at: Acceptance of the idea that their HATEFUL FALSEHOODS are a legitimate 'other side' of Holocaust history. The more they repeat that the Final Solution never happened, the more some people wonder: Well, did it? Each new seed of doubt grants Adolf Hitler a posthumous victory, and makes the destruction of the Six Million a little more complete" (emphasis added).

So, if I understand Mr. Jacoby correctly, Dr. Laura should be able to speak freely about gays, but those who want to speak freely about the Holocaust (and, inferentially, about race) apparently shouldn't be allowed to do so. Gays who call Dr. Laura "hateful," are wrong, and are wrongfully trying to silence her, but Jews who call those who want to openly discuss the Holocaust "hateful" are right, and are rightfully trying to silence them.

In fact, just to make the point clear; aren't the race deniers, including Mr. Jacoby, trying to do exactly what Mr. Jacoby claims the Holocaust deniers are trying to do? Aren't the race deniers planting seeds of doubt about the reality of race, and might this not lead to the destruction; not just of the memory of Six Million, but of entire distinct races of humans? Aren't the race deniers aiming at acceptance of the idea that their HATEFUL FALSEHOODS (that race doesn't exist, for example) are a legitimate 'other side' to cause people to be confused about genetics and to destroy themselves?

Gas chamber - Bed ChamberJacoby writes "But in the piquant phrase of demographics expert Ben Wattenberg...the separatists are being 'defeated in the bedroom.'" Of course, Wattenberg is just saying, but with a happy spin and in slightly different words, what I wrote several years ago: Genocide via the bedroom chamber is as long lasting as genocide via the gas chamber.

Jacoby finishes up his already mentioned column on Holocaust deniers with, "Intimidation, censorship, blacklisting, 'derecognition'- these are the coward's ways to win an argument. Those who believe in gay rights used to also believe in reason, persuasion, and the free exchange of ideas. What happened?"

Black RabbiRabbiThis begs the question: What happened to you Mr. Jacoby? And, Mr. Jacoby, what do you feel about Jewish assimilation via intermarriage, which, according to many Rabbis, will mean the destruction of Jewry? Genocide is genocide. To extinct peoples, it doesn't really matter if it came with guns and frowns or with sex and smiles. The neo-melting pot is a genocide machine for distinct peoples of all types.
#   #   #