Whether we consciously acknowledge it or not, we are necessarily confronted everyday with certain unavoidable natural, economic, and political realities. For example, our need for food, for water, and for shelter; our need to be born healthy and into a family which provides us with a stable and structured material, emotional, and intellectual environment as well as our need to form meaningful relationships with those around us. Those conditions are all as natural as gravity. But barriers exist which challenge our ability to acquire those necessities. Some are natural and others are socially constructed. Our task is to overcome the ever present challenges to our existence.

A significant privation of any one of those conditions can retard our social development. If privations are severe enough, they can cause us to die prematurely before having ever had the opportunity to reach our highest stage of personal development. At its worst, significant social privations can dehumanize whole groups of people over time. We all want to avoid privation of the good things in life. We want what we think is good. But despite our best efforts we usually fall short at attaining what we believe to be good. That underscores another fact.

The fact is we are not always in conscious control of our situation. There are rational explanations for that fact but it is also because running parallel to what we consciously try to determine for ourselves are hidden irrational forces altering the designed outcome of our conscious choices. Those hidden irrational forces are like tiny metallic specks in the corners of a pair of dice making them roll off the course we design.

Inclosing the conscious sphere of our individual and collective lives is an even deeper natural reality. That reality is an unconscious yet very natural force. The unconscious is by weight a more powerful force than our rational efforts to design the best possible life for ourselves. That is so even though it’s awesome power is never fully discerned by us on our narrowly defined stage of personal drama.

Our personal drama blinds us to the existence of the unconscious forces moving us. Over a vast number of years, some of us may turn and look back, intuitively, if not visually. At that time, we experience a sweeping comprehension of the varied unconscious effects of the unseen on our lives, or the lives of those around us, and the very world we perceive. For as we examine our past at that time we may see with both hindsight and insight an altered landscape as well as an altered mindscape.

We comprehend them both reshaped around us as well as in us. We might then say: things have changed and are changing beyond my power to stop or control the incessant re-combinations and permutations of things around us. Yes, a face seen in a mirror at 20 years of age one day has a reality check and sees itself in the same mirror at 80 years of age and realizes it has been running a gauntlet of nuanced types of very physical opposition.

That unconscious force which loads the dice against us governs the ebb and flow of whole populations of creatures, big and small, across the globe. On land and under oceans, lakes, rivers, and streams. There are few remedies to its onslaught.

Darwin called it natural selection, adaptation, mutation, and gene flow. Here, there is no escaping it.  We live by and in natural selection and we are subjects to that all powerful process of change. That change extends to social selection by conflict and competition. 

With a broadened vision, some of us eventually come to comprehend that we are adrift and continually carried away as chemical film is carried on the surface of a body of water by deep and powerful undercurrents. To where in the world, we don’t know.

In time, maybe, some of us come to comprehend that we move with the ebb and flow of a great mass of human flesh. We can even feel it driving us through a wide biological undercurrent into ever shifting relational combinations.

We are tossed and turned in our lives by that unseen force. Our entering into and exiting varied personal drama is evidence of the unconscious as are the unpredictable outcomes which build up the social structures around our lives.

We know that there was no logical order to our coming to exist in the world; logical order was not nor could ever unravel the infinitely complex ever changing combination of things that bore us into a place to live out our lives. We are thrown about and where we land we are forced of necessity to just cope or if not, to die sooner than later.

We are in the world much more in the hand of blind chance than we are in the hand of conscious determination. We can be in such denial about our captivity. We blame ourselves for our captivity. Actually, we don’t have significant power. It is not always our mistakes that foil our best efforts to rise above the muck and mud, rather it is that unseen natural force which courses along its way against our own.  

But that makes conscious self-determination even more precious to us; for it is the most unique characteristic among all life forms on earth. The bouquet was thrown and we caught it; we have it. For it is conscious self-determination which can raise us above the absolute unpredictable roll of the unconscious and give to us a slice of reason coupled with action to buffer us against its shocks. Take for example reproduction. The reproduction of another human being is a free choice exercised by us to make another human creature or not.

The reproduction of offspring is contingent on many conditions.  Assuming those many conditions are adequately met, the reproduction of offspring is like spring water flowing down from a high mountain top. From that flowing spring water, entire communities draw as would a thirsty man or woman draw from a well on a hot summer day.

By it, a population, from a bird’s eye view, not spanning minutes, hours, and days but rather a view spanned over decades and centuries at a sweep would stand out as one living organism connected by a thread of DNA stretching back countless billions of years.

We would stand out literally as a transparent gooey chemical process among others in the atmosphere, but graced with a mysteriously endowed high intelligence. Intelligently, we can and do replenish ourselves and in so doing awaken at the dawn of every new generation a renewed people ready to struggle again.

But let’s assume the opposite. What if the many contingent conditions for biological reproduction are not adequately met? Under such conditions, what should we expect? 

What does science say? For science and the methodology of science is to our understanding what sensation is to our body. Zoological experts say that the fitness of any individual or population is measured by the number of its offspring that survive to sire their own offspring and through which its unique genetic codes and culture are passed through the unconscious undercurrent from one generation to the next.[1] What relevance does that have to descendants of slaves in California? My answer is that Descendants of Slaves have no meaningful place within any social sphere in the state of California. Let me tell you why that is my thesis.

No Demographic Growth for Descendants of Slaves

I recently read a study published by the California Department of Finance which predicts statistically that there will be a significant decline in the population of descendants of slaves in California. It predicted a full 2 percent drop, from 7.3 percent in 1980 to 5.3 percent by 2030.   Such population decline can be observed in every city and town in California. What we observe cannot be dismissed as being merely a statistical dip; it is a growing trend. 


The End of Marriage For Descendants of Slaves

Marriage rates for DOS are correlated with DOS demographic decline. There has been a consistent decline in the marriage rate among descendants of slaves generally.  Even among college educated DOS, the marriage rate is in free fall. The Brookings Institute reported a study which found that 60% of black college graduates have never married.[2]


In an article published by Scholars Strategy Network, Dawne Mauzon states: In 1960, 61% of blacks were married but by 2008 it was only 32%. Blacks also get divorced more often and remarry less frequently than whites.”[3]  What other factors are correlated with the marriage decline among DOS?

Mauzon hypothesizes, and I quote: “In part, the men are just not there in many black communities.” That is a social fact. It is normative for black adult males to be absent in black families. The chances are greater for that being the case than not. In California, 29% or 39, 451 of all black males are prison inmates.  

Furthermore, the Pew report revealed that DOS females have a narrowly defined preference list.[4] In short, most black women surveyed have high financial aspirations when it comes to choosing a mate.

No Marriage and Education Balance for Descendants of Slaves

The Pew Report went on to reveal that Black women prefer a well-educated black male. That preference exists although in California Black male enrollment at California State Universities is approximately 1.5 percent or 3,860 of the total student body of over 200,000 students. It is even worse at the California Universities where in the fall of 2016 at U.C. Berkeley there were only 393 black male freshmen of the 13,900 entering freshmen. At California Poly Technic State University San Luis Obispo, one of the most important engineering and architectural institutions in the nation, black males constitute less than 1 percent of the student body of 26,000 students. One must also keep in mind that a significant number of those are immigrant Africans or their descendants.

Thus, with a ratio of 1 African American Male for every 2 African American females at California State Universities, it is highly unlikely that the far more numerous females will match up with black males having equal educational credentials inside California.[5] That is a national pattern.

No Marriage and Financial Stability for Descendants of Slaves

Lastly, the Pew Research report revealed that 50% of black women surveyed want male financial stability as a precondition to marriage. That compared to only 25% of white women who wanted the same. This expectation is not what most black males can meet according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. In California, 20% of descendants of slaves are at or below the poverty line; that is 1 out of every 5. Full employment for many is a thing of the past.

It was reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in 2015 that male descendants of slaves had an unemployment rate of 11% in the State of California.[6] That rate of DOS unemployment has become a constant since California lost between 30 and 40 percent of its manufacturing jobs over the course of the last three decades.

The California unemployment rate is twice as high as the national average. Black men are more likely to be in and out of employment more frequently than males of other ethnic groups. There are many reasons for that but suffice it to say that the reality of black male financial stability does not equate with what 50% of black females in that survey want.

Those black females who want men who are financially stable will generally not find them in the private sector either. The loss of black businesses will be an unintended consequence of a declining black population and or communities in California. So, if you are African American, don’t start your business in California unless you live in a densely-populated immigrant African community or have White and or Hispanic patronage. Generally, black businesses are suffering and withering away. There will be a dearth of financially viable black men from those job markets for black women who want to marry financially stable black men who own a  business.

Part of the reinforcement feedback loop will be a loss of black patronage for black businesses including banks. And there is no evidence to support a claim that white and Hispanic people will significantly patronize black businesses including the use of black professional services. A derivative effect of low or no financial stability in the DOS community is that in California they have no political power.

No Political Representation for Descendants of Slaves 

All citizens are urged to employ legislative representatives for remedy of their grievances in democratic societies. We are taught that the laws that govern us all will clearly reflect both our fears and hopes. We are taught the enforcement of those laws will recognize no class differences by state law enforcement agencies. We are taught that every citizen brought before our criminal courts are presumed innocent until proven guilty. We are taught that justice is blind and so not respecting the person hears only the facts.

We have virtually no representation in the State Legislature. As of 2016, only 10 state legislators are of African descent. That is a far less proportion than the proportion of DOS in California. No wonder our needs go unmet.[7]  Black politicians serve the interests of their doners. The interests of their doners is greater power for themselves not DOS.


If a community’s interests are defined in terms of power, meaning that their interests are reflected in the laws and policies of society and acted upon by its many agencies, then DOS have no political power in California. For the overwhelming magnitude of social and economic privations among DOS in the many cities where they are concentrated evidences a wide fault line in this Californian democracy. On one side of that fault line are Descendants of Slaves and on the other side is everyone else including black politicians who generally supported the NAFTA agreement signed into law under Bill Clinton in 1994.

DOS have been politically abandoned in California. Therefore, descendants of slaves do not participate the democratic process in California enough to qualify them as voice in state affairs. Descendants of slaves are institutionally powerless and perhaps more importantly, they cannot muster street power to make their voices heard. 

No Habitat for Descendants of Slaves

There is a zoological assumption at the foundation of my discussion. The truth is there is inadequate carrying capacity for most DOS in the state of California.   There is too much environmental resistance on all levels to DOS growth. There was a time when we were not here and there will be a time very soon when we will be here no longer. As a unique ethnic group in California, DOS are running out of habitat in California. Like any other animal, the loss of habitat spells doom.

The factors which I have identified along with many others including those of mental health, religious institutions, and political affiliation are also parts of reinforcing feedback loops causing DOS communities to spin irreversibly out of control. Though some individuals will live on in the state, generally there is no future for DOS as a community in the State of California.



[1] Quran: 76:2, 18:37, 23:13

[2] American Family Survey; Restricted to Women aged 25 to 35, cited from Brookings Institute: Race Gaps in Marriage Rates for College Graduates

[3] Dawne Mouzon, Rutgers University, Why Has Marriage Declined Among Black Americans, Rutgers University, 2013

[4] Pew Research Center, Survey, 2010

[5] Keep in mind that most college educated men marry down the socio-economic scale or are indifferent to a women’s education level.

[6] U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Unemployment Rates for Blacks by State, 2015

[7] California Research Bureau, California State Library

MORAL POWER, by Dr. Steven Nur Ahmed

How can our earth have such plenitude of life, clean water, and dense forests just 12,000 years ago, but now have become reduced to increasing scarcity of life, unclean water, and diminishing forests along with rising human misery after only a few hundred years? What is the cause or what is to blame? I think that history reveals a clear relation between the choices we make and planetary enhancement or degradation.

We cannot blame technology in and of itself because technologies of whatever kind are merely instruments of human creation and use. Technologies do not have a practical purpose independent of the design given to them by human beings. Technologies are only purposeful when guided by the hand of a human being.

The technologies which are designed, mass produced, and marketed by corporate power elites filter down to billions of people in global markets and into homes worldwide. Then, when used on a mass scale by people who do not understand the harm such technologies do, the harm done to earth grows to immeasurable depths.[1]

The mass use of a single technology like a cellular phone or automobile by billions of human beings on any given day is causing mass irreparable damage to the fabric of our moral lives and to life forms on earth. The fact is that moral depravity and earthly depravity are positively correlated.

The signs of global resource scarcity, environmental imbalance, and rise in human misery point to specific choices which some human beings have been making with cold indifference to other better alternative choices which could have been made by them.  Their choices are ‘moral choices’.  Moral action and its opposite called negligence are the context of all human relations.

Both the Bible and the Holy Quran make the same argument by means of an allegorical story.[2] The first human beings were made guardians of a Garden; imagine that the Garden symbolizes the Earth.  A guardian is a moral overseer. Their prime directive from God was to do no harm and break no promises.  After committing harm and breaking a promise, the first human beings were condemned to physical, emotional, and spiritual degeneration in perpetuity. It is called: the fall from grace. That allegorical story implies the necessity of making moral choices so that we can have healthy social and environemental relations.

In law school, I studied the law of Torts. I studied a branch of Tort called the Tort of Negligence.[3] The central proposition in the law of negligence is simple. It is that ‘every person has a duty of due care so as not to harm another’. When one breaches his or her duty of due care to other persons and harms them, they are defined by law as having been negligent.  They are defined as having breached ‘the social contract.’[4]

Before we act, we should always consider what behavior is the best behavior so that we reduce the chance we will do harm to another including all other animals. Undeniably, the law of Negligence is a moral principle. The law of Negligence is a civil law implicit in all criminal laws; it is a fundamental principle in all human groups. The fact that human groups exist at all makes moral principles self-evident.

When a person is presented with more than one choice of action in a circumstance, the question is: which option is the best choice out of several alternatives? There is always the best choice of action out of several options in every given circumstance.

Some scholars argue that human beings are fundamentally selfish.[5] But the best choice cannot simply be that choice which optimizes what is good or pleasurable for the person making the choice. That would be an act of irrational selfishness.[6] For what is good for one person or even several persons or even a whole nation may be disastrous for billions of other persons in the short and long run.

Evidence exist to support that claim. Look at the last several thousand years of what I call the ‘Empire Game’. The Empire Game has been and is now an unmitigated disaster for all humanity. The Empire Game has even assumed the title of ‘World History’ implying that all other facets of human history are less important than it.

But there is also what are called in law ‘acts of omission’. Sometimes, under some circumstances, even making no choice can be an act of negligence which causes harm to another. Therefore, the argument that ‘some choices are amoral’ meaning morally neutral is a false premise because individuals and groups always make choices they define as good or pleasurable for themselves. And those choices even if it is a choice not to choose any course of action always cause effects. Therefore, there is no such thing as an ‘amoral’ choice because all choices and even decisions not to choose have unintended consequences on other people and the earth.[7]

For that reason, the issue of moral power and its effect on human and other environmental relations is the central problem facing us today. It is a central problem facing descendants of slaves. If that problem is not solved quickly, there will be no hope for mass survival during this age of global dysfunction.[8]

The political, corporate, and religious power elite casts a very long shadow over billions of people on this earth of ours. At the end of the day, their shadows convert to social and spiritual privation for all those living in their shadow. In a sense their shadow blocks rational sunlight from reaching into the lives of many people. It makes us less able to live moral lives because it stresses us to be less cooperative and more irrational and conflictual in relation to our neighbors and earth.

For subordinate people, everywhere, the life of the power elite is the antithesis of the life lived by those in their shadow. The elite, whether they be political, religious, or business elites, live a life of wealth and intellectual supremacy at the biological, economic and social expense of all people subordinate to them. 

What can we do? Can we hypothetically get a grasp of the gravity of our social and economic problems? Let’s imagine some possibilities and follow them through to a conclusion. Let’s do a thought experiment.

Hypothetically speaking, if every descendant of slaves who is incarcerated in State, Federal, County, and City jails were released tomorrow; and

Hypothetically speaking, if every descendant of slaves who is released vowed to never commit another crime; and,

Hypothetically speaking, if no crimes were committed by descendants of slaves released from prison thereafter; and,

Hypothetically speaking, if all other descendants of slaves vowed that they would never break the law; and,

Hypothetically speaking, if all descendants of slaves in fact did not commit felonies ever again in the United States, then what would happen?

First, there would be an extra million and a half descendants of slaves living mainly in cities but also in small towns throughout the United States.

One million and a half more descendants of slaves would immediately add about 2% to the African American unemployment rate which already stands at about 16% or twice that of White unemployment.  That would make the unemployment rate for African Americans about 18%.   What can we compare an 18% unemployment rate to?  For that, we turn to the 20th century.

During the height of the 20th century’s great depression, the percentage of unemployed Americans was 25%. Thus, if there were a 2% rise in unemployment, descendants of slaves would experience an economic depression equivalent to the great depression wherever they lived in the United States in 2017.

Secondly, if no crimes were committed by descendants of slaves, the criminal justice system would collapse unless it seized upon another ethnic group to criminalize. Let’s assume the criminal justice system did not seize upon another ethnic victim. What would happen?

An unintended consequence of mass lawful behavior would be a second wave of unemployment adding to the 2% rise in black unemployment; but this time among whites. The ripple effect would expand far and wide into the economy. Share value in private for profit prisons stock would literally become worthless. Billions of dollars would be lost over night making wealthy white investors poor.

What would happen is that the “1,719 state prisons, 102 federal prisons, 942 juvenile correctional facilities, 3,283 local jails, and 79 Indian Country jails as well as in military prisons, immigration detention facilities, civil commitment centers, and prisons in the U.S. territories” would get significant Federal, State, County, and city budget cuts. That would include cutbacks in criminal courts with district attorneys, public defenders, police officers, and private criminal lawyers becoming unemployed along with everyone who works in the criminal justice system from administrators, correctional officers, to janitors. It would affect over 500, 000 individual employees and their families. In dollar terms, let’s say a cutback of about $85 billion dollars nationwide.  State, Federal governments would lose money because they would no longer have a justification for increased taxation of citizens to support the criminal justice system. Look at the graph below to get a bird’s eye view of the magnitude of economic dependence governments and corporations have on crime and the incarceration of descendants of slaves.

What would all those descendants of slaves choose to do under such circumstances? The economic characteristics of the United States are changing so fast that even the most educated Americans are continually having to retool their skills to keep up with technological change. How can under-educated ex-felon descendants of slaves be expected to do so?


Robots at the “Hannover Messe” trade fair in Hanover, Germany, April 2014[9].

The fact is that there would be no jobs for most of them aside from agricultural employment. The reasons that they would have nothing to do center around 1) their general lack of education. Here are the facts: “About 41% of inmates in the Nation’s State and Federal prisons and local jails in 1997 and 31% of probationers had not completed high school or its equivalent. In comparison, 18% of the general population age 18 or older had not finished the 12th grade.”[10] The educational characteristics of incarcerated descendants of slaves change at a glacial pace. The same educational characteristics hold true in 2017.

A second reason is that negative stigmata would be attached to them for having been incarcerated and simply for being ‘black’ in this white supremacist society.

Descendants of slaves have never been able to even minimally compete with the dominate white culture on any level. Some say ‘well what about sports’? I say to them that ‘No descendent of slaves owns a professional sport team in any league or sport.’ That holds true generally in the entertainment industry as well. Some others will argue, ‘well we can restart Black Wall Street such as the one which existed in Tulsa, Oklahoma in the 1920s.’ I say, “one cannot step twice into the same river.” Times, circumstances, and especially sentiments among Descendants of Slaves completely rule out that possibility. Some others will say: we can join a church or Masjid or Temple. I say that none of those American religious institutions will bite the hand which feeds them. They have become instruments of the banking system debt slavery and therefore of Wall Street.

Furthermore, that kind of change is not likely now because of ethnic integration and the rapidity of technological changes taking place. Add to that the increasing dysfunctional social life of most descendants of slaves particularly those million and a half individuals in our thought experiment now out of prisons and jails.  It leads to one conclusion. The only rational choice, the best choice, for descendants of slaves would be the choice to exercise moral power. Simply obey all laws. 

[1] Include under technology genetically modified organisms.

[2] Genesis Chapter 2, Torah; Holy Quran 2:30

[3] The Tort of Negligence literally means: the harm of negligence

[4] The Social Contract. Jean-Jacques Rousseau

[5] Charles Darwin, Origin of Species, 1849; Richard Dawkins, The Selfish Gene, 1976

[6] All human beings are intinctual or behaviorally unconsciously driven but we are also conscious and rational when fully developed. Moral decisions arise out of rational deliberation. Out of that kind of deliberation society is made possible. There is initially an imbalance in favor of instinct. But over time conscious rationality more or less increases.

[7] I once heard George Soros say that his decisions are ‘amoral’. Soros is in conscious denial or lying.

[8] William Vogt, Road to Survival; chapter 2, ‘Biotic Limits’, 1944

[9] Erik Brynjolfsson, Andrew McAfee, and Michael Spence July/August 2014

[10] Education and Correctional Populations, Bureau of Justice Statistics, by Caroline Wolf Harlow, Ph.D., 2003

STALK THEM, AND KILL THEM, By Dr. Steven Nur Ahmed

Stalk and Kill

Stalk them, and kill them. That is the subtext of Charles Darwin’s theory of Natural Selection. In 1859, Charles Darwin published what would come to be one of the most influential books in human history. It was entitled: ‘The Preservation of Favored Races in The Struggle for Life’.  The basic premise of his theory of Natural selection is that both environmental challenges and a race’s genetic makeup cause some races to lose in the competition for resources and to eventually become extinct.

At the same time, those same conditions can cause other races to win in the competition for resources and to increase their population numbers because  their genetic makeup is more adapted to the unique challenges in their environment.

Thus, Darwin argued that all races are involved in a naturally determined zero sum game; in that game there can be only winners and losers. His vision was one which saw all life forms in a state of perpetual warfare and wherein human codes of morality are nothing more than instruments used by races on the cut list of nature.

More specifically, what is relevant for us today about Darwin’s theory is a prediction he made. He predicted: “At some future period, not to very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races.” I have some questions concerning his predictions.

One, just who are the savage races he identified as facing inevitable extermination? Two, just who are the civilized races he identified as the exterminators? And third, is the prediction he made not a law of nature but rather what sociologists call a self-fulfilling prophesy?

In order to identify savage races which Darwin identified as facing inevitable extermination, all we need to do is survey the years since the publication of his book in 1859 and to find so called savage peoples defined by him as well as by the U.S. Federal and State governments, and the European nations. Let’s look at three such peoples.

One example is the Tasmanian people. They were black people who lived in Australia. They numbered in the thousands before the arrival of the British but by 1847 they had been virtually wiped out off the surface of the earth. They were shot dead, their women raped, and their children were knowingly and purposely infected with smallpox. Charles Darwin had visited Australia in 1836 and defined the Tasmanian people as savages. The last Tasmanian person died in 1869. The Tasmanian people are extinct.  

The Namibian people of South Africa are another example. They were experimented upon and murdered by German colonists. Their bones were buried in mass graves. This was done to them up to the year 1907. First, the Hereo (He-re-o) tribe which totaled 80,000 people was ultimately reduced to 15,000 people.  They were shot and starved to death. Their land was taken by the German government and distributed to German citizens in South Africa.

Next, the Nama tribe of Namibia were attacked. They fought back but half of their 20,000 population were killed. The remaining 10,000 Nama people were put into concentration camps where they were put into laboratories and experimented upon and where they died of malnourishment and starvation. Some of the remains of Nama people were sent to Europe for display in museums.  Some others were put in cages for public viewing in Belgium and German zoos.

AAAABlack Girl in a Belgium Zoo

Others were put into concentration camps, their women were used as sex slaves and their mixed offspring were used as experimental guinea pigs by a German eugenicist named Eugen Fischer. Fischer was a student of Charles Darwin.

Based upon his experiments with the Namibian people, he wrote and published an influential book entitled: ‘The Principles of Human Heredity and Race Hygiene’.  Adolf Hitler cited Fischer’s book in his own book: My Struggle. Both the Nama people and the Hereo (He-re-o) people were defined by Fischer as subhuman savages. But this kind of scientific racism was not limited to Germans in South Africa. Similar forms of repressions were taking place in the United States and throughout the Americas by France, the Dutch, Spain, Portugal, and British governments.

For example, there were approximately 15,000,000 (Million) indigenous peoples in the continental United States before it was colonized by Western Europe. By 1924, there were only 224,000 Native Americans who remained alive in the United States. Similarly, there were over one million Hawaiian people when Captain Cook discovered the Hawaiian Islands in 1778. By 1900, there were 50,000 native Hawaiian people left; today there are about 5,000.

In the continental United Stated, ninety three Native American tribes were exterminated by the western powers before and after the newly formed colonies and United States. The exterminations began before Darwin’s book was published but the exterminations were given scientific justification after 1859 and picked up momentum by means of shootings, knowingly an purposely exposing Native Americans to smallpox, and by starvation in Federal government concentration camps.

So determined where Federal and State Governments such as California to exterminate Native peoples that they paid individual white men for each bullet used to stalk, kill, and scalp men, women, and children upon proof of showing a native scalp or head.

bounties for Indians

Native American land was stolen based upon the fallacious claims made on philosophical  grounds put forth by John Locke. He made the claim that Native Americans were not using the land productively and therefore had no right to recognizable title to it.  Native Americans had also been defined as savages and thus on the pale of humanity by the United States Supreme Court in the famous 1823 case: Johnson v. M’Intosh. The court decision was written by Chief Justice John Marshall.

In writing for the court, he states that the Federal Government was justified and excused in taking possession and title to all Native American land based upon White Supremacy and Native American racial and cultural inferiority.

Historically, there is a common political, legal, literary, scientific, and military strategy played out by Europe and the United States worldwide.

In each example, it was the European exterminators who claimed to be civilized and superior by race and thus justified and excused to murder and commit larceny on all people defined by them as savages according to the theory social Darwinists called: “Survival of the fittest.” 

For social Darwinists, survival of the fittest is a condition driven by a natural law and cannot be changed by secular convention. The theory of survival of the fittest necessarily causes conflict between different races as well as between rich and poor; intelligent and less intelligent, strong and weak.  But at the time Darwin wrote his theory there were differing theories in the market place of ideas.


Charles Darwin did not claim the only global theory of evolution. A Russian anthropologist named Peter Kro-pot-kin wrote a book entitled: ‘Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution’. His theory is based upon the premise that ‘mutual aid’ or ‘cooperation within groups’ and between different groups, though not the only factors, are the greater factors associated with whether or not a species survives, thrives, and evolves.

If we accept Darwin’s theory as absolutely correct then we would be forced to justify and excuse injustice and ultimately slavery, murder, and genocide. We would have to accept the many injuries committed against us as the normal course of affairs; at the end of the day, we would have to approve and admit our racial inferiority. We would have to admit that reparations for past injuries to a whole people are never justified under the theory of survival of the fittest.

However, if we accept theories like Kro-pot-kin’s theory of ‘mutual aid’ then we must necessarily conclude that human beings are not only driven by changes in their environmental conditions and their genetic make-up but that also they are driven by something more.

What we would be forced to do is to analyze race relations not only in terms of conflict but also in terms of prospects for reasonable accommodation, constructive competition, and mutual aid or cooperation.

That is what makes the difference between all other animals who ‘stalk and kill’ and human beings who are not only animal but also rational. Human beings endowed by their Creator with the rational capacity to rise above the compulsions of natural law and in so doing to make peace by imposing upon natural law the ideals of human cooperation and mutual aid.

Only human beings can apply such ideals of reasoned justice for all people in spite of the fact that we have in common with all other animals the same unconscious instinctual drives which make fear and therefore social and global conflict a constant danger to us all.

So now you should know who the real savages have been in the past and who they are today. The Western European nations and United States and all those who have condoned their murderous acts and larcenies are the real savages not the innocent people enslaved or made extinct by them in Australia, Namibia, and in the Americas and throughout the world.

They are those who have failed the high standard that defines what it means to be a rational human being and instead they are comfortable moving along upon all fours in the role of predatory beasts.

They, like all non-rational animals, are driven by unconscious forces of greed which prevents peace in the world. They are those who ‘stalk and kill’ innocent people ‘under the color of political authority’ and the use of state police force.

Their institutionalized ideology of racism generates self-fulfilling prophesy in all social relations between citizens and non-citizens. 

Self-fulfilling prophesy is a social theory expressed by Robert Merton. It is defined as: “A prediction we make at the start of individual or collective social performance which affects our behavior in such a way that we make the prediction happen.” The prediction which triggers behavior can be based upon a myth like racial inferiority but that myth once it becomes institutionalized and universally taught triggers behavior which makes the false myth real in everyday social relations.  

Throughout our nation, when you see police officers ‘stalk and kill’ innocent black people at a rate of 1 per every 28 hours you are witnessing ‘self-fulfilling prophesy.” You are witnessing acts of savagery.





Names of allah

Malcolm Little was faced with a compelling question.  It might have been formed into this question: ‘Do I have an essential identity?’ Or the question may have been formed in this way: ‘Am I that same African?’ He knew that the name ‘Little’ came from someone who owned one or more of his ancestors? He had learned from his father that he was a descendant of slaves.


 But how could he go about answering those questions? His surname (Little) was but a livestock property tag; a name derived from a slave owner. He could not do a family lineage study because there were no records he could research which would lead him back to that African’s name. Birth and death records for slaves were not kept.



That African was thus just an ‘X’ in Malcolm’s mind. Despite that as time passed he overcame the practical problems associated with identifying his family lineage. Malcolm filled the void with the study of the science of anthropology and genetics.  This became his fascination.


Turning one dog eared and yellow stained page after another, book after book, both thick and thin until his eyes burned for lack of both adequate light and closure he read on.  Finally his research uncovered names. He identified two thinkers whose books were like lanterns, illuminating for him a narrow path which if he thought deeply upon might lead him to answers to the questions which fueled his sleepless nights. Those thinkers were Charles Darwin and Gregor Johann Mendel.  Both men had provided light in a tunnel of darkness and had altered the current of modern thinking on the origins and nature of human beings. 


By the time Malcolm had came to understand, the theories he’d discovered by Darwin and Mendel had been manipulated by other men. Leading anthropologists and biologists had made profound changes to the way scientists thought about the ‘Genus Homo’ especially ‘Homo Sapiens Sapiens’.  There had also been changes in the way scientists thought about other genetically related hominids such as Neanderthal and their particular genetic relation to some human groups in Europe and Asia. They developed their own hypotheses about our origin from common ancient mammalian and ultimately reptilian species; and, our genetic relation to other animals.  More importantly, scientists were putting the pieces of a complex puzzle together to form a picture of how we have been able to morph and extend our ‘genetic plasma’ through time and space.  


Charles Darwin published: ‘The Origin of Species By Means of Natural Selection or The Preservation of Favored Races In The Struggle For Life’ in 1859.  His basic hypothesis is that natural selection is the mechanism by which some species of animal come into being and survive environmental changes while others become extinct. Over time that process results in the presumed evolution of more environmentally adapted species. Darwin’s ideas of competition for resources and mating opportunity, ‘fitness’ or the number of offspring generated by a male and female over the course of their life-time, adaptation, and mutation underscored an idea from Heraclitus: “There is nothing permanent except change.” and that those life forms which cannot change successfully in relation to material changes to their environment will at the very minimum suffer and at most they will become extinct.


Malcolm in his pursuit of understanding must have discovered that Darwin’s theory of natural selection had social as well as moral consequences. That was important to resolve because Darwin’s theory had been interpreted into a social theory of change by Herbert Spencer; social Darwinism came to dominate the interpretation of human worth based upon the thesis: Only the economically fit should survive in society. 


While in prison, Malcolm must have mulled over the consequences of manipulation and the application of Darwin’s theory to social structures and social relations.  Social Darwinism had become an entrenched social theory by the 1940s in most universities throughout the U.S.  Before the great depression of 1929 to 1941 when social Darwinism was wedded to Adam Smith’s theory of unregulated capitalism. This union of thought and practice was used to rationalize the impoverishment of millions but also to support the unequal distribution of income amongst 1% to 20% percent of United States the population.


Malcolm understood that social Darwinism rationalized the extreme disparity caused by 1% of the population taking 27% of national income in 1929.  Such inequality was rationalized by the argument that those at the bottom of the social hierarchy are ‘naturally selected’ to be poor because they are less adapted to the social changes caused by industrialization in the early 20th century. 


Malcolm understood that proving the assumptions wrong may not be the problem. He recognized that even if the assumptions of social Darwinism are proven wrong, if they are ‘believed’ to be true by those who wield power and control over the superstructure of society then the next step is the institutionalization of those beliefs. This happens through a massive social infrastructure. Finally, the machinery of society plays it out and that causes social consequences along a path predetermined by groups in power. 


Those social consequences had manifested during the depression of the 1930s. In the 1930s, thousands of men, women, and children starved to death on the streets and in alleys. Millions of others were reduced to the humiliation of begging on the streets of large and small cities and towns across the United States. The social Darwinists argued that such poor deserved their condition because ‘only the strong survive.’


Though Darwin’s theory had flowed beyond its zoological landscape and onto the social landscape it would fall upon Gregor Mendel to unlock the laws of biotic extension over time and space.


Gregor Mendel wrote ‘Experiments on Plant Hybrids’ between 1856 and 1863.  From Mendel’s experiments, ‘Punnett’s Square’ was derived. Mendel’s experiments were rediscovered in 1900.  For Malcolm, Punnett’s Square was a good study because not only was it foundational to the field of genetics but because of its arithmetic simplicity. Malcolm learned it quickly.  Mendel’s hypothesis involve simple relations between chromosomes.  The basic discovery by Mendel revealed that the physical characteristics of parents and ancestors are heritable according to a very predictable law of probability.

punnett square

Mendel’s discovery led Malcolm to one undeniable conclusion. Malcolm’s study answered his own question: ‘Am I that same African?’ His answer would necessarily be, yes, ‘I am that I am’.  Genetically, Malcolm was a DNA link. He was but a DNA link which spanned backward in time and space. He was preceded by every person in a complex tapestry of lineal ancestry dating back millions of years and perhaps even encompassing millions of planets in the Milky Way galaxy.


But even more importantly, Malcolm no doubt came to know that he was a created soul. He no doubt came to understand something more. Though he was but a link in a chain of DNA which stretched back billions of light years in space and time, he saw his existence in a higher light. He saw that at the end of that chain his body, dangling, held down on the floor of this world as would an anchor hold in harbor a ship, so, too, his body anchored his soul to this foreign mindscape. At the end of his logical reasoning to infer his true identity, the facts, one upon the other and all true, constructed like a long spiraling stairway led him up to an undeniable truth. That truth he discovered was that he was a reflection in this world of the Mind of God.  





John Brown, pic EC

John Brown was a great man. He was an abolitionist in the pre-civil war United States.  He eventually came to understand that Christian religious/moral arguments against slavery would never be persuasive to slave owners and their states to stop the institution of slavery. Nor did he believe moral arguments could cause an anti-slavery amendment to the U.S. constitutional because Congress could never meet the required 66% ratification of both houses of Congress or 66% of the States because of greed.

He also came to understand that logical arguments based upon the Enlightenment premise that each person has inherent natural rights and that each person must be presumed reasonable would not be persuasive to the slave owners, their states, and the massive economic infrastructure which had grown dependent upon slave labor for national economic prosperity, either.  He understood that race ideology was a tool used to short circuit logical reasoning so as to create straw man arguments based upon the premise of white supremacy.

John Brown was compelled to reach one conclusion.  It would be necessary for African Slaves to fight their way out of slavery by any means necessary.  With that thought in mind, John Brown and some of his sons seized a U.S. military armory.  They then called on neighboring slaves to fight their way out of slavery side by side with them.  The slaves refused to do so.

Some of the slaves informed on him.  The others refused to stand and fight.  John Brown fought the U.S. Army. Most of his sons were killed. He was wounded and captured. He was hanged on December 2, 1859.  But he stated in his last words that only a bloody war against the slave owners and their states could free the slaves.  He was right.  The Civil War started in 1861 only two years later.  Over 600,000 people died in just four (4) years.  It was a savage blood bath.

I do not mean to belabor you with so much history; but history is so important for an understanding of present social circumstances. What people did and thought in the past should be studied. Note, the slaves wouldn’t fight and note some of them informed the plantation owners of John Brown’s plan.  Can we identify the same patterns today?  I answer yes. However, first we must examine some of the most influential thoughts on population of the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries. These are thoughts which every African American should know and understand.


thomas malthus


The method to reduce birth rates of poor populations was devised centuries ago. Thomas Malthus wrote a book entitled: ‘Essays on the Principle of Population’ in 1798. In that book he laid down a theory.  He said that population will grow indefinitely because people have an automatic sex drive which causes them to reproduce offspring and because people need to eat food. He stated that unless there are checks and balances in the environment to stop it population would grow unabated.

What should be of concern to African Americans is what Malthus identified as a method to decrease the birth rate of an unwanted population.   He termed it ‘Preventative’ checks on population growth.  It originates as political policy.  As such the sentiment and laws of the general public promote and execute such method as a matter in the interest of the state.

By the ‘Preventative’ method to decrease a population’s birth rate he said that two general political policies must be executed among the lower classes.

The first, he said, must be a policy to institute ‘vice’. Vice would constitute the social encouragement of uncivilized habits combined with poverty.  For example: discourage good hygiene, make them live in neighborhoods that are polluted areas of a given city with narrow streets making them more vulnerable to disease and or physical disability, provide less habitable dwellings than needed by the them so there is homelessness, make available to them low paying jobs, discourage them from marriage, make their schools dysfunctional, provide small portions or cheap low quality food, allow prostitution, make criminal acts a more likely choice for the young especially the males, and introduce communicable diseases into their population .

The second policy under the ‘Preventative’ method, he said, should be ‘misery’. Misery would constitute psychological depression, low self-esteem, suicide, and institutionalized hopelessness.  Misery would follow as a byproduct of the first policy. If executed as a matter of public policy, each of the two types of ‘Preventative’ methods would decrease the birth rate of a given population over time.

Charles Darwin


Charles Darwin wrote: ‘The Descent of Man’.  It was published in 1871.  As you can see it follows in time Thomas Malthus’ book who in turn followed Adam Smith’s cornerstone theory on capitalism: ‘The Wealth of Nations’ (1776).  These writers signaled the birth of a new world view.

Darwin theorized that in nature animal species compete with different species and with others in their own species for resources of every kind.  Even when there are plentiful resources greed or the fundamental insecurity of an animal will drive it to take everything for itself.  For Darwin, conflict is one of the driving forces of animal and therefore human history.  History for him is not of glory but of greed. He stated that racial extinction is the result of inter-racial or tribal competition for resources in times of plenty and scarcity.[1]

Darwin predicted in ‘The Descent of Man’ that ‘race’ war is inevitable and that in the future lower races will be exterminated by higher races. This is a population issue because for Darwin genocide is natural not criminal. The law of nature that he describes can reduce a population by increasing the death rate due to war with another group of people or animals. He also said that it is just as illogical to breed defective people as it is to breed defective animals. Please, bare with me, this is very important for you to think on.[2]



Arguments for the application of Preventative population control through state power was triggered by the Eugenics movement.  Francis Galton was the cousin of Charles Darwin. Galton wrote the book: ‘Hereditary Genius’. In that book he theorized that intelligence is a heritable genetic trait like hair color, skin color, and height and that it is passed down from one generation to a succeeding generation.  He argued that there should be selective breeding.  He invented a mathematical method to prove his theory of inherent intellectual differences between races.  His statistical method is called the normal distribution curve and the difference between means.[3]

With that method, he argued that races have different naturally determined levels of intelligence, physicality, and sexuality.  From that argument he founded the theory of Eugenics and the Eugenics movement.  The basic premise of the Eugenics’ theory corresponds to that of both Malthus and Darwin.  He argued that there should be political policies which restrict the reproductive opportunities of lower races and genetically defective people.  In the United States for nearly 80 years many states enacted laws which vested the state with executive power to sterilize women and to castrate men who were deemed genetically unfit.[4]  Such state eugenical laws were supported by the Supreme Court ruling in Buck v. Bell, 1927.

Margaret Sanger


Galton’s theory gave rise to early 20th century birth control organizations like the ‘American Birth Control League’, its spin off: ‘The Negro Project’, and today, the ‘Planned Parenthood Federation of America’.  It was founded by Margaret Sanger in 1921. Margaret Sanger believed in White Supremacy.[5]

Her husband William Sanger was Jewish by birth but was not his religious practice as an adult man. He and Margaret were both Communists.  It’s important to know their political and philosophical beliefs because as Communists they believed in an inherently amoral universe. One structured by natural law as argued by both Darwin and Galton.

She targeted African women in Harlem, New York, through the ‘Negro Project’ clinic; she also targeted other minority ethnic women and men to reduce their number of pregnancies and thereby their birth rate.[6] She argued that ‘dysgenic’ groups like African Americans had two choices. They could either choose segregation or sterilization.

She organized at a time when the poor and/or immigrants were crowded into cities but in a nation where there was no scarcity of land, food, and other resources in the United States.

The basis of her argument to women was that having too many children was unhealthy and would cause a shorter life-span.  And to both men and women her argument was that they could not financially afford to care for too many children.

She did not address the extremely unequal distribution of income which existed at that time in the United States. At that time 1% of the U.S. population took home 28% of the national income.  Nor did she target the wealthy that were called the gilded class as being exploitative of the poor.

She didn’t target the wealthy because the wealthy were funding her birth control clinics.  Familiar names to students of the international banking system are listed.  John D. Rockefeller who if you recall was one of the founders of the Federal Reserve Bank and Income Tax acts of 1913; Julius Rosonwald of Sears and Roebuck, Company; Clarence Gamble,  founder of Proctor and Gamble; and the Ku Klux Klan were all financial donors of her organization.

Her ideas were a direct offshoot of Malthus, Darwin, and Galton.[7] However, her interest was not in theory. She moved to institutionalize their ideas into state and federal law. She appealed to women’s moral sensitivity because she argued on the premise of a moral argument, i.e., a ‘women’s right to choose’ when in fact she did not believe in essential morality of any kind.  She argued it at a time when women were generally abused in society. She was for them what Paul was to Christianity.

Black Flag spray


Now, let’s look at some facts and ask ourselves: could the target population for preventative political policies Thomas Malthus wrote on in his book be us?

In 1954, the Supreme Court held in ‘Brown v. Board of Education…’ that segregation in public schools is unconstitutional. It signaled the beginning of racial integration of public facilities in the United States; it initiated the legal movement against ‘Jim crow laws’ premised upon ‘separate but equal’.

That same year (1954 to 1960) the birth rate of African American women was 4.5 births per woman. Thereafter, their birth rate started to go down such that by 1970 it was 3.0 children per African American woman ages 15 to 45.

By 1975 it was 2.5.  Today, 2013, the number of babies per African American woman between 15 and 45 is 1.9.  That is a 50% decrease over 55 years.  That amounts to a one percentage point decline per year from 1954.  At 1.9 babies per woman, for the first time African Women are not reproducing enough babies to replace the current population of 42 million.

Why is this happening to us?  One reason is that the Federal Drug Administration approved the birth control pill in 1960.  We see a negative correlation between the increased use of and marketing of birth control pills and a drop in the African American fertility rate.  That is a fact.

Was the marketing of the birth control pill a racist reactionary response to the civil rights movement and racial desegregation? A correlation does exist but it doesn’t prove causation; it could simply be a coincidence. But another Supreme Court decision might move us to a cogent inference.  It was Roe v. Wade, 1973.

Roe v. Wade was premised on the proposition that a woman has the sole individual right under the U.S. constitution to determine whether or not she should or could carry her pregnancy to term. She needs not to legally consult with anyone. She could act on her own individual needs and wants. However, the court did impose a time limit.  She must decide to abort the fetus within the first trimester (3 months) of her pregnancy.

The abortion statistics are startling.  Since 1973, African American women have constituted 32% of all abortions while constituting only 3.5 percent of the total population.  That amounts to over 22,000,000 abortions.  It equals 70 abortions per hour nationwide as of this writing. The 22,000,000 (million) abortions is three (3) times more than the number of Baby Boomer African Americans born between 1946 and 1964.  It is one-third (1/3) of the total number of people killed during World War II.  It is a slaughter.

Does what we have described conform to the Preventative Method proposed by Thomas Malthus?  Remember, he argued that there must be political policies in place to decrease the birth rate of unwanted populations of people. Infanticide or abortion was one of his proposed methods to kill those who are unwanted.

Malthus also argued that unhealthy social conditions ought to be intentionally constructed to demoralize an unwanted population of people.  He argued that unwanted people should be made miserable. Are there other socio-economic conditions which are evidence of the application of his method on African American people?  Let’s list some social conditions to see.

Given that racism is a social construction it follows logically that most misery suffered by African Americans is a derivative of institutionalized racism.  So the following conditions are social constructions for the most part just as the misery of Native Americans (birth rate of 1.4) is a derivative of reservation (concentration camp) life.

  1. African Americans are disproportionately poor at about 27% of the total U.S. population.
  2. About 15 million African Americans live in urban ghettoes.
  3. The national high school dropout rate for African Americans is 42%.
  4. Between 1976 and 2010, there were 273,366 African American ‘black on black’ homicides; that averages to 23.9 homicides per day nationwide.
  5. African Americans are 2.5 times more likely to murder their infants as compared to other ethnic groups and lead the nation in infanticide.
  6. There are now over 200,000 African American children in foster care homes.
  7. Between 1973 and 2013 there have been approximately 22,000,000 African American abortions; that number equals 1,687.5 abortions per day.
  8. The top ten leading causes of death are: heart disease, cancer, stroke, diabetes, unintentional injuries, kidney disease, chronic lower respiratory disease, homicide, infection, and Alzheimer disease.
  9. Nearly 1,000,000 African American men and women are incarcerated in city, county, state, and federal jails and prisons.
  10. About 1 out of every 4 (25%) are in the criminal justice system.
  11. The African American national unemployment rate is about 13% to 20% for the year 2013.
  12. About 9 million African Americans receive food stamps or put another way, 1 out of 3 Americans on food stamps are African American and they are primarily women with dependent children.
  13. Approximately 72% of all African American births are to single parent female headed households.
  14. The highest annual death rate per 100,000 at 898.22.
  15. 85% of ‘Planned Parenthood’ clinics are in low income neighborhoods.

I think the evidence is compelling. The social conditions which pressure a population’s birth rate to decrease are fundamental conditions to the life of the majority of African Americans.  Therefore, a cogent conclusion can be drawn.

Probably, birth control pills, abortion law, over the counter sales of Depo-Provera, Norplant, and Lunelle are primarily aimed at African American women and girls.  The purpose in this early part of the 21 century differs from that of the last part of the 20th century in four important aspects.

Automation used in factories in the United States to eliminate the need for people, the exodus of capital (factories overseas) to Asia, continuous civil rights demands on governments by some African Americans, and the aging of America resulting in a larger dependent population are collectively making African Americans more than ever before a dependent population.

These four facts make African Americans an economically unwanted population. No longer cheap labor and not withstanding their high consumption capacity of 1 trillion dollars spent per year much of which is just Federal and State money going back to Federal and State governments they are perceived as what Henry Kissinger called ‘useless eaters’.[8]

The cost to maintain African Americans is high. For example a cost of 16 billion dollars per year for food stamps; another 40 billion dollars per year on incarceration costs; 154 billion dollars in welfare costs are just a few costs which the plutocrats calculate eat away at the 1 trillion dollars spent by African Americans annually. Furthermore, most of that 1 trillion dollars is spent in ghetto neighborhood stores, fast-food outlets, and quick loan and check cashing outlets.  For 60 years it has been a continuous ‘quantitative easing’ monetary disbursement by the U.S. Treasury Department. Add to that the fact that racially African Americans are generally unwanted in the U.S.  We are perceived as a greater cost to the plutocrats than we are a benefit to them.

John Brown discovered that slaves would not fight to save themselves. He discovered that the condition of slave misery permeated the consciousness of African people. They identified themselves as slave; theirs was a slave morality. John Brown was hanged under the rule of master morality.  You better wake up.














[1] Darwin, Charles, Chapter 7, The Descent of Man, published 1871

[2] Ibid, Chapter 7

[3] Galton, Francis, Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development, Published, 1883

[4] Laughlin, Harry, Eugenical Sterilization in the United States, Pub.1922

[5] Sanger, Margaret, Pivot of Civilization, published, 1920

[6] Sanger, Margaret, A Plan for Peace, published, 1932, pp. 107-108

[7] Sanger, Margaret, The Pivot of Civilization, Published, 1920

[8] National Security Council, Washington D.C. 20506, April 24, 1974

(For Criminal citations see: Bureau of Justice Statistics: Homicide Trends, by James Fox)