From Racial Reality a good criticism of the patently biased Lynn assessment of race and IQ

“Richard Lynn has long been criticized for his controversial studies on intelligence, but this latest series of criticism might just be the final nail in his coffin. Focusing on his much-condemned African IQ studies, it reveals serious flaws in his methodology and calls him out on manipulating and falsifying data, which has wider implications that make his entire body of work (and that of his associates) untrustworthy. It begins with Wicherts et al. 2010:
Although these estimates of national IQ are claimed to be “highly valid” (Rushton, 2003, p. 368) or “credible” (McDaniel, 2008, p. 732) by some authors, the work by Lynn (and Vanhanen) has also drawn criticism (Barnett & Williams, 2004; Ervik, 2003; Hunt & Carlson, 2007; Hunt & Sternberg, 2006; Lane, 1994). One point of critique is that Lynn (and Vanhanen)’s estimate of average IQ among Africans is primarily based on convenience samples, and not on samples carefully selected to be representative of a given, targeted, population (Barnett & Williams, 2004; Hunt & Sternberg, 2006). Unfortunately, in many developing countries, such representative samples are lacking (McDaniel, 2008).

A literature review is necessarily selective. Despite Lynn’s objective of providing a “fully comprehensive review of the evidence” (Lynn, 2006, p. 2), a sizeable portion of the relevant literature was not considered in both his own review, and in reviews with Vanhanen. Nowhere in their reviews did Lynn (and Vanhanen) specify the details of their literature search. Our own searches in library databases resulted in additional relevant studies that may be used to estimate national IQ. For instance, Lynn and Vanhanen (2006) accorded a national IQ of 69 to Nigeria on the basis of three samples (Fahrmeier, 1975; Ferron, 1965; Wober, 1969), but they did not consider other relevant published studies that indicated that average IQ in Nigeria is considerably higher than 70 (Maqsud, 1980a,b; Nenty & Dinero, 1981; Okunrotifa, 1976). As Lynn rightly remarked during the 2006 conference of the International Society for Intelligence Research (ISIR), performing a literature review involves making a lot of choices. Nonetheless, an important drawback of Lynn (and Vanhanen)’s reviews of the literature is that they are unsystematic. Unsystematic literature reviews do not adhere to systematic methodology to control for potential biases in the many choices made by the reviewer (Cooper, 1998; Light & Pillemer, 1984). Lynn (and Vanhanen) failed to explicate the inclusion and exclusion criteria they employed in their choice of studies. Such criteria act as a filter, and may thus affect the estimate of national IQ. Lynn (and Vanhanen) excluded data from several sources without providing a rationale. For instance, they used IQ data from Ferron (1965), who provided averages in seven samples of children from Sierra Leone and Nigeria on a little-known IQ test called the Leone. For reasons not given, Lynn (2006) and Lynn and Vanhanen (2006) only used data from the two lowest scoring samples from Nigeria. Most of the remaining samples show higher scores, but those samples were not included in the estimation of the national IQ of Nigeria and Sierra Leone. Likewise, Lynn (and Vanhanen) did not consider several relatively high-scoring African samples from South Africa (Crawford Nutt, 1976; Pons, 1974). It is unfortunate that Lynn (and Vanhanen) did not discuss their exclusion criteria. In some cases (Crawford Nutt, 1976; Pons, 1974), the Raven’s Progressive Matrices was administered with additional instruction. Although this instruction is quite similar to an instruction as described in the test manual (Raven, Court, & Raven, 1996), some have argued that this instruction artificially enhances test performance (cf. Rushton & Skuy, 2000). Given the likely differences in opinion on which samples to include or exclude in a review, inclusion and exclusion criteria should be explicated clearly and employed consistently. It is well known that unsystematic literature reviews may lead to biased results (Cooper, 1998; Light & Pillemer, 1984). Another problem is that the computation of statistics in literature reviews is quite error-prone. Indeed Lynn’s work contains several errors (Loehlin, 2007).
Lynn responded, attempting to defend his work, and Wicherts et al. fired back immediately with an even stronger rejoinder, repeating their previous criticism of his methodology and flat out accusing him of cherry-picking data that supports his position while ignoring the rest:
In this rejoinder, we criticize Lynn and Meisenberg’s (this issue) methods to estimate the average IQ (in terms of British norms after correction of the Flynn Effect) of the Black population of sub-Saharan Africa. We argue that their review of the literature is unsystematic, as it involves the inconsistent use of rules to determine the representativeness and hence selection of samples. Employing independent raters, we determined of each sample whether it was (1) considered representative by the original authors, (2) drawn randomly, (3) based on an explicated stratification scheme, (4) composed of healthy test-takers, and (5) considered by the original authors as normal in terms of Socio-Economic Status (SES). We show that the use of these alternative inclusion criteria would not have affected our results. We found that Lynn and Meisenberg’s assessment of the samples’ representativeness is not associated with any of the objective sampling characteristics, but rather with the average IQ in the sample. This suggests that Lynn and Meisenberg excluded samples of Africans who average IQs above 75 because they deemed these samples unrepresentative on the basis of the samples’ relatively high IQs. We conclude that Lynn and Meisenberg’s unsystematic methods are questionable and their results untrustworthy.
Then in a later paper, Wicherts et al. dug even deeper, finding that in addition to picking and choosing, Lynn actively seeks out and uses data that’s not reliable or representative:
The samples, considered by Lynn (and Vanhanen), but discarded here, are given in the Appendix. Besides the two samples described above (Klingelhofer, 1967; Zindi, 1994), these are Wober’s (1969) sample of factory workers, and Verhaegen’s (1956) sample of uneducated adults from a primitive tribe in the then Belgian Congo in the 1950s. Verhaegen indicated that the SPM test format was rather confusing to the test-takers, and that the test did not meet the standards of valid measurement. In Wober’s study, the reliability and validity were too low (Wober, 1975). In three of the samples in Table 1, the average IQ is below 70. These are Owen’s large sample of Black South African school children tested in the 1980s, the 17 Black South Africans carefully selected for their illiteracy by Sonke (2001), and a group of uneducated Ethiopian Jewish children, who lived isolated from the western world in Ethiopia and immigrated to Israel in the 1980s (Kaniel & Fisherman, 1991). The last two samples cannot be considered to be representative.

[…]

Our review of the literature on the performance of Africans on the Raven’s tests showed that the average IQ of Africans on the Raven’s tests is lower than the average IQ in western countries. However, the average IQ of Africans is not as low as Lynn (and Vanhanen) and Malloy (2008) maintained. The majority of studies on IQ test performance of Africans not taken into account by Lynn (and Vanhanen) and Malloy showed considerably higher average IQs than the studies that they did review. We judge the reviews of Lynn (and Vanhanen) and Malloy to be unsystematic. These authors missed a large part of the literature on IQ testing in Africa, failed to explicate their inclusion and exclusion criteria, and made downward errors in the conversion of raw scores to IQs (Wicherts, 2007). Lynn (and Vanhanen)’s estimate of average IQ of Africans of around 67 is untenable. Our review indicates that it is about 78 (UK norms) or 80 (US norms). These means are somewhat lower than the means of Africans on other IQ tests, which lie around 82 (Wicherts et al., 2010). These results undermine evolutionary theories of race differences in intelligence of Lynn (2006), Rushton (2000), and Kanazawa (2004) (Wicherts, Borsboom, & Dolan, 2010a; Wicherts et al., 2010b).
Lynn responded to that too, accusing Wicherts et al. of deriving their higher estimate of average African IQ from elite samples, but they once again showed that his lower estimate results from the unsystematic use of samples that are not random or representative.

From Bud Meyer’s blogspot:

“Doug Shulman has been the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service from 2008 under George W. Bush until the present. He was named as one of 100 of the most influential people by Accounting Today.

Like Mitt Romney, Commissioner Shulman is also very much a “private equity” guy. Shulman began his career at the global investment consulting firm of A.T. Kearney from 1996 to 1997 in their New York City office. A.T. Kearney was a direct competitor of Mitt Romney’s Bain Capital.

SOURCE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bain_%26_Company#Competitors

(It’s also worth noting that Doug Shulman and Mitt Romney are also both Harvard alumni)

Doug Shulman was the vice president of Darby Overseas Investments Ltd. (a limited liability corporation) from 1998-2000 where he managed financial and legal aspects of the company’s transactions for the holding company and general partner of several private investment funds.

In 2000, Shulman founded his own private equity consulting firm, FoundryOne Inc., which specialized in new business ventures in technology.

Shulman was the executive vice president of the National Association of Securities Dealers from 2001-2007. The NASD, a “self-regulatory” organization of the securities industry, is responsible for the operation and regulation of the Nasdaq stock market and over-the-counter markets. It also administrated exams for investment professionals, such as the Series 7 Exam. All individuals seeking to become a stockbroker must take the General Securities Representative Exam, commonly referred to as the Series 7 or Stockbroker Exam.

Shulman was also the vice chairman of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA, successor to NASD), the parent organization of NASD Regulation, The American Stock Exchange, NASD Dispute Resolution and The Nasdaq Stock Market (overseeing Bernie Madoff)

Shulman also sat on the board at the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC). He is a very well-connected man. DTCC was established in 1999 as a holding company to combine The Depository Trust Company (DTC) and National Securities Clearing Corporation (NSCC). It was set up to provide an “efficient and safe” way for buyers and sellers of securities to make their exchange, and thus “clear and settle” transactions.

The DTCC was formed just after The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1999. It repealed part of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933, opening up the market among banking companies (i.e. Goldman Sachs), securities companies (i.e Enron) and insurance companies (i.e. AIG).

The Glass–Steagall Act had prohibited any one institution from acting as any combination of an investment bank, a commercial bank, and an insurance company.

The full Senate confirmed Doug Shulman to lead the IRS in March 2008. He said he doesn’t intend to stay in the job after his five-year term expires in November

Mitt Romney (also a “private equity” guy) has $100 million in an IRA account. Was Doug Shulman ever audited by the IRS before becoming its commissioner? Did Shulman also have Swiss bank accounts? He would certainly have a lot of knowledge on the subject.

Was there ever a time when Doug Shulman and Mitt Romney ever crossed paths? After all, don’t they know their competitors?

The shadowy underworld of the private equity market has been grossly under-regulated and wrought with fraud and Ponzi schemes for a long time. Big accounting firms staffed with the best tax attorneys that money can buy, governed by nobody but a tax commissioner who has also made a career in private equity.

I’m not accusing anybody of anything, I’m just asking. (Google “Bud Meyers Tax Evasion”)

>>> The 99% Cheer as 50% of the 1% to be Tried for Tax Evasion

Other “private equity” guys:

• Bernie Madoff holds the world-record for biggest Ponzi scheme in history. Madoff stole billions while chairing the Nasdaq and maintaining cushy relationships at the SEC. He received the maximum sentence of 150 years in prison.
• Joseph P. Nacchio – The CEO of Qwest Communications International. He was convicted of 19 counts of insider trading in Qwest stock and was sentenced to six years in federal prison
• Kenneth Lay and Jeffery Skilling — Enron — Total Scammed: $74 Billion.
• Thomas Joseph Petters – The former CEO and chairman of Petters Group Worldwide and convicted for turning his company into a $3.65 billion Ponzi scheme. He received a 50 year federal prison sentence.
• Raffaello Follieri was accused of misappropriating a $50 million investment from billionaire Ronald Burkle meant to buy up Roman Catholic churches. Bishop Joseph Anthony Galante was implicated in the scandal.
• Dr. Gerald Barnbaum – Medicaid fraud, mail fraud, identity theft, sexual battery, medical malpractice and second-degree murder.
• Eugene Plotkin and David Pajcin, both formerly of Goldman Sachs, were the masterminds behind a complex Wall Street con and a scam using strippers to solicit information from Wall Street bankers.
• Richard Scrushy – He was once the superstar CEO of HealthSouth, a huge provider of outpatient rehab services until federal prosecutors accused him of masterminding a $2.7 billion fraud.
• Samuel Israel III turns his wall street hedge fund, “Bayou Investments”, into a Ponzi scheme after poor management, then attempts a fake suicide to flee prosecution.
• Dennis Kozlowski – He was once described as “The Most Aggressive CEO in America,” now sits behind bars. A poster boy of excess, the former CEO of Tyco stole millions from his company, using the money for a lavish party, a gilded shower curtain and expensive art.
• Anthony Elgindy – “The Mad Max of Wall Street” – The founder of Pacific Equity Investigations was a short seller who made millions in a trading scam using government secrets.
• Lou Pearlman – The manager of bands like *NSYNC and The Backstreet Boys and masterminded scams of $500 million from investors in the longest running Ponzi scheme.
• Al Parish – An economics professor and a trusted financial advisor was sentenced to federal prison after pleading guilty to financial fraud. Nearly 600 people lost up to $90 million invested in Parish Economic’s private investment “pools.”
• Sholam Weiss – He helps fix the National Heritage Life Insurance’s gaping $35 million accounting hole, and ends up partnering up with them – and bilking customers out of $500 million. He was sentenced to 845 years in prison.
• Robert W. McLean – An investment manager and arts patron who traveled by limousine and ran a Ponzi scheme that had siphoned tens of millions of dollars from close friends and business associates. He eventually killed himself.
• Stephen Trantel was once a Wall Street insider, a broker making hundreds of thousands of dollars in the Manhattan trading pits. After becoming unemployed, he started robbing banks.
• Nancy Kissel murders her husband Robert Kissel, who had been a vice president in Goldman Sachs’ Asian special situations group. His brother, Andrew Kissel, who had been accused of defrauding a New York co-op board of millions of dollars, was found murdered at his rented Greenwich, Connecticut estate.
• Troy Titus – A disbarred and disgraced attorney who was sentenced to 30 years in federal prison for defrauding clients and friends out of more than $8 million in Ponzi scheme.
• Alberto Vilar – An investor who was known as “a patron of opera”. He was tried and convicted in November 2008 on charges of money laundering, investment advisor fraud, securities fraud, wire fraud and mail fraud, and was sentenced in February 2010 to nine years in prison.
• Danny Pang – He was the CEO of Private Equity Management Group who ran a Ponzi scheme and made millions betting on when people will die. His wife, ex-stripper Janie Louise Pang, was murdered in the Villa Park house, possibly by a contract killer, after she took steps toward a divorce. He has also since died. Wall Street Journal
• Marc Harris promised financial freedom to people with off-shore bank accounts as a way to keep assets out of the reach of government. But the “guru” was running a Ponzi scheme and bilking clients out of millions of dollars.
• Greater Ministries International – A story of religious fraud and a $500 million dollar pyramid scheme.
• Robert Allen Stanford – He was the chairman of the now defunct Stanford Financial Group and was a sponsor of professional sports – – now accused of a massive Ponzi scheme.
• Larry Salander – One of the biggest names in New York’s art world (Salander-O’Reilly Galleries), but collectors see red when he swipes more than $100 million from their pockets.
• Sholom Mordechai Rubashkin – The former CEO of Agriprocessors, now-bankrupt slaughterhouse and meat packing plant. He was convicted of 86 counts of financial fraud, including bank fraud, mail and wire fraud and money laundering. In June 2010, he was sentenced to 27 years in prison.
• William “Boots” Del Biaggio III – A venture capitalist and former co-owner of the hockey team San Jose Sharks. He was sentenced to eight years in prison and more than $67.4 million in restitution for misappropriating funds from individual investors he advised.
• Scott W. Rothstein – A disbarred lawyer and the former managing shareholder, chairman, and chief executive officer of the now-defunct Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler law firm. He was accused of funding a massive 1.2 billion dollar Ponzi scheme.
• John Bennett – His Foundation for New Era Philanthropy operated a notorious Ponzi scheme. After having raised over $500 million from 1100 donors, he embezzled $135 million.
• Martin Frankel – A financier and con-man who vanished with $200 million dollars. A story of money laundering, prostitution, bizarre sex and drug abuse.
• Eric Stein – Masterminded one of the largest Ponzi schemes in Nevada history, cost his victims nearly $34 million.
• Reverend Abraham Kennard – As many as 1600 churches nationwide are swindled out of $10 million.
• Reed Eliot Slatkin – An ordained Scientology minister and co-founder of EarthLink was the perpetrator of one of the largest Ponzi schemes in the United States since Charles Ponzi himself.
• Robert Ray Courtney – A former pharmacist who owned and operated Research Medical Tower Pharmacy. He was convicted of pharmaceutical fraud and sentenced to federal prison.
• Bernard Ebbers – The CEO of WorldCom becomes the poster child for everything that went wrong on Wall Street in the 1990s. WorldCom’s eventual downfall shakes the financial community and the lives of thousands of investors.
• Stefan Wilson – Operated a fraudulent investment fund. His Ponzi scheme took almost $13 million from over 50 investors and landed him 20 years in prison.
• Marc Dreier is a high-powered lawyer with celebrity clients. But Dreier is a conman and steals more than $700 million from hedge funds.
• Arthur Nadel – Manages the hedge fund Scoop Management Co, a $350 million fund. In the blink of an eye, he disappears and leaves clients without their life savings.
• Joseph Medawar – A television producer runs a scam to rob investors out of millions of dollars.
• Barton Harry Watson – One the chairman of Cybernet, a wildly successful global technology company, he stood accused of stealing millions in an elaborate fraud.
• Dana Giacchetto – Advised Hollywood’s hottest stars (from Leonardo diCaprio to Ben Affleck) But his star-power faded when nearly $10 million goes missing, for which he spent 5 years in prison.
• Alfred Taubman – A wealthy art collector and the former chairman of Sotheby’s who is now a convicted felon for the price-fixing scandal at Christie’s and Sotheby’s.
• Nevin Shapiro – A University of Miami football booster who is currently imprisoned for orchestrating a $930 million Ponzi scheme. He even purchased a yacht on which sex parties with prostitutes were held.
• Kenneth Starr – An accountant to stars like Sylvester Stallone, Diane Sawyer, and Wesley Snipes, but mismanages his clients’ money, pockets millions, and then he marries an exotic dancer. But then later he gets more than seven years behind bars for a multimillion-dollar investment scheme.

Doug Shulman’s Education:
Georgetown University Law Center, JD
John F. Kennedy School of Government
Harvard University, MPA (Mitt Romney also went to Harvard)
Williams College, BA.

Sources:
http://www.finra.org/Newsroom/NewsReleases/2001/P011431
http://www.baincapital.com/Team/ManagingDirectors.aspx?viewType=ManagingDirectors
http://www.darbyoverseas.com/darby/index.jsp http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Securities_Representative_Exam
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bain_%26_Company#Competitors
http://uicaccounting.org/Readings/Career/Top-100-Accounting.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Shulman http://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/nasd.asp#axzz21B3Dmup7
http://www.allgov.com/Official/Shulman__Douglas http://goingconcern.com/post/doug-shulman-five-years-irs-commissioner-plenty-me-thanks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A.T._Kearney

Audit the Fed

Update (July 26): I’m adding this to make it clear that I think the elites want Obama to win. So, when Ron Paul enables a Romney victory (whether he endorses him officially or not is less important), he has in effect helped Obama.

ORIGINAL POST

It’s a black-and-white thing……literally and figuratively.

Figuratively, Romney is Mr. Wall Street. He’s mixed up with the Stanford Ponzi (directly), with Goldman Sachs (directly), with private equity and vulture funds. Good luck with trying to run a candidate like that in post-2008 America.  Romney’s also got money in off-shore havens. There may be nothing wrong with those havens, in the minds of Austrian economists. We’re talking public perception.

Literally, Obama’s people have been salivating to play the race card, documentably since 2008, and recently just before 2011. OccupyWallStreet which I’ve dubbed on this blog an Obama re-election strategy is deliberately geared toward polarizing race tensions.

I collected a lot of research to that effect last year in September, but decided against putting it up, in case it was seen as adding to racial tensions.

Romney, for any PC people out there who claim not to notice such things, is white. He’s also a very good looking guy, with a very good-looking family. All this will provoke visceral reactions from the majority white population, and ditto from minorities.

Romney is on top of all that a Mormon. Mormonism, a British Israelite related heterodox Christianity, is racist in its original dogmas. More explicitly and more recently than other religions.

Romney was preaching those dogmas at the time he was a missionary. I would love to see how he is going to explain that in public. It doesn’t matter that Romney has stood up to racism. Or that he is not personally a racist.  A campaign has to deal with how other people see things, not with just how you really are.

Maybe, Rand is counting on that.

Maybe he wants to turn the race card against the left and talk black racism. Maybe it will work.

Maybe both sides think a divide like this will be helpful.

Personally, I think this is a plot from the elites to prevent people thinking about the money-supply and financial crime. They want them thinking instead about blood and soil.

Blood and soil will trump money every time.

Especially, when the colored populations that are being bombed and threatened start fighting back even more.

Their fights and Occupy Wall Street’s fight will be conflated. They are already conflated.

Someone’s conflating them intentionally. Conflation will lead to conflagration. Only a matter of time.

The lines will be drawn black and white and straight through, all though they are actually every shade and as muddled as can be.

Black-and-white thinking  is us-and-them thinking. It’s flight-and-fight thinking. It’s the mob. The lizard brain.

America will not flee, even when she doesn’t know who the enemy is exactly. She will fight.  That has been her nature these many years.

We will have capitalists, whites, the West, and Romney on one side. Everyone else will have to move over to the other side.

You see what happens?

The lines are drawn so sharply, so bitterly, it will justify global war.

If whites feel that the defense of their culture is tied up with the defense of Capitalism and the defense of the Anglo-Jewish establishment, they will lose their antiwar fervor and vote for war. Or, not care enough not to vote for it.

That is why it was a terrible strategy to focus on the Federal Reserve alone instead of the crimes of Wall Street as well.  They could have tied the two together and directed the anger in the right direction.

By doing that, the right lost the high ground they had seized in 2008. They let the left direct the anger the way they wanted to.

The right might still win.

But it will be on low ground.  They will have to use race as well.

Yamaguchi.com

[I found this excellent resource of  19th century texts about banking history and am posting one of Ezra Pound’s well-known speeches, with the anti-Jewish vituperation removed. Please note that I do not endorse Pound’s analysis, but I do believe it is necessary not to succumb to intimidation, either, and to read the original words of the primary source of much of the anti-Fed arguments made by Eustace Mullins, who surely was a racist. Has Pound’s reputation be damaged by this rhetoric? Not seriously.  Nor has Eliot’s, nor Carlyle’s, nor Kipling’s, nor Belloc’s, nor Jung’s, nor any of dozens of other writers, who, rightly or wrongly, voiced anti-Jewish and misogynist and racial feelings. As long as these feelings don’t taint the entire personality, as they did with Eustace Mullins, and lead to psychotic misreading of history (as they did at the end of his life with Nietzsche) or to grossly evil actions, as they did with Hitler, there is no reason to shun opinion, however wrong we may think it. There is never any knowing whether something is fully wrong, wrong only in emphasis, or in this or that particular, unless we stop ideological gulags and out-casting. Until then, we will be feeble creatures, fully deserving of the tyranny of mind that is our fate in this allegedly free-thinking age.]

5 (December 7, 1941) U.S. & U.K.(A66)

Ezra Pound (somewhat bowdlerized):

Europe callin’, Pound speakin’.  Ezry Pound speakin’.  And I think I am perhaps still speakin’ a bit more TO England than to the United States of America but you folks may as well hear it.  They say an Englishman’s head’s made of wood, and the American head made of watermelon.  Easier to git something INTO the American head, but nigh impossible to make it stick there for ten minutes.

Of course I don’t know what GOOD I am doin’, I mean what IMME DIATE good.  But something you folks on both side of the wretched ocean will have to learn, war or no war, sooner or later.

Now what I had to say about the state of MIND in England in 1919, I said in my Cantos (14 and 15).  Some of your theosophists and fancy thinkers would have called it the spiritual state of England.  I am content to say state of mind.

I can’t say my remarks were heeded.  I thought I had got ’em simple enough.  Words short and simple enough.  In fact some people complained that several of ’em contained no more than 4 or 5 letters (some less).

Now I hold NO Catholic has ever been or ever will be puzzled by what I said in those Cantos.  I have, however, never asked for sympathy when misunderstood.  I go on trying to make my meanin’ clear and then clearer.  And in the LONG run people who listen to me (very few do, but members of that small and SElect minority) do know more in the long run, than those who listen to Mr. H.G. chubby Wells and the liberal stooges.

What I am gitting at is, a friend said to me the other day that he was glad I had the politics I have got, but that HE didn’t understand how I, as a North American, United Stateser could have it.

Well that looks simple to me.  Things OFTEN DO look simple to me.  On the CONfucian system that if you start right, and then go on, start at the root and move upward, the pattern often is simple, whereas if you start constructin’ from the twig downward, you get into a muddle.

My politics seem to me SIMPLE.  My idea of a state OR an empire is more like a hedge hog or porcupine, chunky and well defended.  I don’t cotton to the idea of my country being an octopus WEAK in the tentacles and sufferin’ from stomach ulcers and chronic gastritis.

I wish Brother Hoover had spilled his facts about the stinking and rotten Treaty of Versailles while he was still in the White House.  But I am glad he has done so now.  Tho’ he could also confess his OWN errors and aid even now to acceleratin’ the United States of America welfare.

Anyhow, I have, in principle, NO objection to the U.S. absorbin’ Canada and the whole NORTH American continent.

The rot of the British Empire is from inside, and if the whole of that senseless organization, headed by Montagu Skinner Norman, makes war on Canada, or Alberta, I see no reason for Canada not making war on the bankers in London.

What I am ready to fight AGAINST is havin’ ex-European Jews making another peace worse than Versailles, with a new two dozen Danzigs.  Namely the United States bein’ left with war baby bases in Aberdeen, Singapore, Dakar, South Africa, and the Indian Ocean! All draggin’ the tail of their coat, and making dead mathematically sure of another war for Dupont, Vickers, Mond, Melchett, Beit, Ellermann in ten or fifteen years after the present one (present war).  And to that end Roosevelt, Morgenthau, Lehman are working, day and night, not to mention the Warburgs.  And precisely on the subject of Warburgs, I wish Herb Hoover would say MORE about the stink of Versailles.

God knows I have loathed Woodie Wilson, and I don’t want to see more evil done to humanity than was done by Woodrow codface.  And the sooner all America and ALL England wake up to what the Warburgs and Roosevelt are up to, the better for the next generation and this one.

And as an American I do NOT want to see my country annihilatin’ the population of Iceland, as the British annihilated the Maoris.  And as for the Australians, they deserve a Nippo-Chinese invasion.  Criminals were their granddads, and their contribution to civilization is not such as to merit even an imperial medal.  Why the heck the Chinese and laps don’t combine and drive that bankers out of Australia, and set up a bit of civilization in those parts, is for me part of the mystery of the orient.

And in any case I do NOT want my compatriots from the ages of 20 to 40 to go git slaughtered to keep up the Sassoon and other banker rackets in Singapore and in Shanghai.  That is not my idea of American patriotism.  We are gittin’ on for the centenary of the opium war, that never did any good to the lads of Lancashire or of Sussex, and that brought no prosperity in Dorset or Gloucester.

Hardy’s England, aye, aye sir, where is it ?  Did Rothschild save it ?  He did not.  Did the Goldsmid save it ?  He did not.  Does Churchill endeavor to save it ?  He does NOT.  I repeat the rot and stink of England, and the danger to her empire is inside, and has been: from the time of Cobbett.

And NO number of bank touts in Wall Street and in Washington can do one damn thing for England, save let her alone.  And a damn pity they didn’t start doin’ sooner.  That is a pity for England.

And a peace with American war bases all over the whole of the planet would be no more a real peace than Versailles was.  And as to all visible signs Roosevelt is MORE in the bankers’ hands than Wilson was in 1919.  I am against havin’ him mixin’ into ANY post-war matters whatever.  This objectin’ being academic.

An’ I think it would be well for ALL men, from China to Capetown to SEE as soon as possible what Franklin is up to.  Let him keep his paws on the North American continent.  Even if it means DIMinished gun sales for all his pals, and for all gold-bugs.

Eight years ago he was sayin’ “nothin to fear but fear.” Well what has become of THAT Roosevelt ?  What has he done for three years but try to work up a hysteria on that basis ?  He got his face into a paper called Life, eight or ten photographs.  Jim Farley would have been less nuisance in the White House than snob Delano, who objected to Farley NOT on moral or ethical grounds, but PURELY as snobism; didn’t want a mere henchman to succeed him.

And as to American labor.  When will American labor start lookin’ into the currency question ?  “Question,” of course there ought not to be any INTERROGATIVE element in it.  Even a hod carrier OUGHT to be able to learn why interest payin’ debt is NOT so good a basis for money as is productive labor.

But will they ?  Will the American hod carrier and skilled engineer (includin’ Mr. Hoover) ever git round to the currency issue ?  (I call it issue, not question.)

And will the American big employer or financier, except Baruch, ever start studyin’ the solution of HIS problem, which is a corporate solution, in the sense of that word now current in Europe ?

A CORPORATE problem, or issue, which does NOT mean starving the workman, or breakin’ him up by scab mobs.

Lord knows I don’t SEE how America can have fascism without years of previous trainin’.  Looks to me, even now as if the currency problem was the place to start savin’ America.  As I have been sayin’ for some time back, call it ten years or call it twenty.  At this moment it looks like as if John Lewis would take just as long to git round about feedin’ my books to his troops, as it would take the Harvard faculty to git Mr. William G. Morse’s permission to use ’em in Harvard (Economics Department).

Both sides will have to come to it.
continue