THE ROBERT W. WHITAKER ARCHIVE

On CNN, the former national Republican chairman agreed with Bill Press that Bob Jones' policy of prohibiting interracial dating was "un-American!" All the conservatives and most "religious" conservatives are saying this.

As we all know, every one of the Founding Fathers, regardless of their position on slavery, opposed racial intermarriage, and all the original states outlawed it. As so often happens, I have a choice here between modern, respectable opinions and those of the Founders. As usual, if I choose the Founders, I am being un-American -- which means unModern.

And once again I choose the Founders over the Moderns.

Common sense and observation of the real world always contradicts what liberals are saying. Liberals then assure us that things

are not as they appear. They tell us that they are true intellectuals, and they see truths that seem to make no sense to us.

It always turns out that common sense and observation of the real world were right, and liberals were wrong. But we always have to adopt liberal policies and create a total disaster before we dare admit the liberals were wrong.

When I was a university student and professor in the 1950s and 1960s, "intellectuals" knew that socialism was inevitable. Further, it was the only efficient and fair way to run an economy. In plain English, socialism means that the government owns and runs all the industry.

For a rational person, it is obvious that if government bureaucrats run the whole economy, it will be a disaster. True liberal intellectuals made it clear that this was an absurd myth. They said Communism worked just fine, and they firmly believed the faked CIA statistics that showed the USSR overtaking the United States in per capita income.

There is a long list of things like this "socialism-is-efficient" nonsense that was pushed in the name of True Intellectualism. The only thing one was allowed to say in the media was that criminals were not the bad guys. Punishment was useless in fighting crime. In education, all the old standards were declared to be out of date.

We all know what happened with each and every liberal policy. Education scores plummeted. The crime rate went through the

roof. Their foreign policy led to Korea and Vietnam. Gun control leads to more crime. Everywhere that liberal policy was applied there was disaster.

Since liberals control the media, they declare which conservatives are respectable and which are not. Conservatives are desperate to be respectable, so they never remind liberals of the list of total disasters they have caused.

Our forefathers noted that every country where the races have mixed is a disaster for the people living there. Even today, the life expectancy of a child born in one of racially-mixed countries, no matter what its history, is extremely low. Poverty is routine. This applies to Brazil, the Dominican Republic, it applies to Egypt and to Panama. It applies where there is a history of colonialism and where there is no history of colonialism. It applies where there once was a great civilization and to new countries.

I do not know why this is true. I know it is true. And I tell you this in all earnestness: nothing convinces me that this is fact more than the unanimous liberal insistence, once again, that what is perfectly obvious simply cannot be the case.

Liberals tell us that this is merely the appearance. They tell us that, like their crime policy and their education policy and their economic policy, this time race mixing will come out just fine. Any conservative who wants to be respectable had better agree.

They do. Every conservative tries to elbow out other conservatives in shouting out his total loyalty to the eventual disappearance of the white race. Anyone who doesn't is anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

And nobody will shout that louder than respectable conservatives.

National "Christian" conservatives join in the shouting.

I don't think there is a single respectable conservative or "Christian" conservative who does not suspect what a future American

version of Brazil or Santo Domingo will be like. It doesn't matter to them. After all, that agony will be left for our posterity. The important thing to these people is that they look unprejudiced and respectable today.

This is not a Christian attitude. That is why I put "Christian" in quotes when referring to these "leaders."

To be a real Christian requires guts. These people prefer respectability.

Judging from real-world evidence, miscegenation is an evil thing, because it dooms future generations to poverty and lives that will be "nasty, brutish, and short." Imagine the whole world being exactly like the third world of today! Imagine there being no Western World, no white-majority countries, to lead the way out of poverty!

I cannot prove this will happen, but those who say it won't are always wrong, and they crush anyone who dares to oppose them.

Liberals and social scientists assure us that miscegenation in the future will lead to a wholly different result this time.

They promised us that rehabilitation would end crime and educational experiments would improve education. They have NEVER been right!

But unlike crime and education policy and socialism, miscegenation is permanent. The disaster that results will not be reversed by its being costly to our living generation. Respectable conservatives and "Christian" conservatives can court liberal favor by pushing miscegenation, and they will die before the results come home.

Judging by what I know of the real world, miscegenation is an evil thing. As is the case with all trendy policy, every country that has mixed white and black races genetically in the real world is a disaster.

But one must be very careful about government trying to prevent it. Like Internet pornography or other social problems, the cure may be worse than the disease, and if the government takes charge of it, it probably won't work.

Nonetheless, these considerations are completely different from saying that an evil thing is good, or that it is morally neutral. The fact I cannot prevent evil does not exempt me from calling it what it is. A private, Christian institution like Bob Jones has not only the right, but the duty, to oppose miscegenation if they feel it is wrong.

I doubt that any intelligent person who was not a hypnotic liberal ever believed that criminals were actually the good guys, or that punishment didn't work. I doubt that any intelligent person who was not a hypnotic liberal ever believed that an economy run by bureaucrats would be efficient. But, when it came to public discussion, they were careful to look as if they took these ideas seriously.

Likewise, I think that any person who is not a hypnotic liberal shares my worry that blithe liberal assurances about racial mixing are wrong.

But to moderates, respectable conservatives and so-called "Christian" conservatives, respectability came before the public welfare. That remains true today.