Zebraphobia in the History Department of Southern Illinois University at Carbondale
April 28, 2005

That segment of our society's ruling elite which resides in and around our colleges and universities drapes itself in the righteousness of anti-racism while enjoying material blessings and other perquisites. Yet there is a brittleness. Their position depends on no one figuring out what the racket is. We could talk about "information disease," as described by anti-cult figures from the '80s, or we could talk about "tipping points," but the situation is perfectly described by the old European folk tale, "The Emperor's New Clothes." The Politically Correct position, to which all mature, well-adjusted subjects clung, was that the Emperor was clothed in beautiful garments. A child mentioned that the emperor was naked and the P.C. position disintegrated.

Academic leftists and their friends are propped up by an array of simplistic notions: White people are racist, their good fortunes rest on privilege, racial and ethnic "diversity" always enhances educational experiences and quality of life in general, mass immigration is good for America, black people cannot be racist, the misfortunes of black people are the result of white racism, 400 years of slavery, etc., black people commonly suffer violence from racist white people, white people are (almost) never the victims of violence by black people, Martin Luther King, Jr., was a great man, and so on. These positions are cemented into the public mind by diversity training, Black History Month, advertising, movies, TV shows, college courses, and so on, the effectiveness of which is enhanced by constant reference to Emmett Till, James Byrd, four little girls murdered in a church, etc. I do not deny those horrors for a minute, but we might note that similar or worse horrors endured by white people at the hands of black people are given as little coverage as possible, and when they cannot be ignored entirely, the racial angles are given little mention in the mainstream media.

To offer the truth in these areas is to challenge the well-being of the powerful. Thus, when the truth is uttered, when difficult questions are asked, the anti-racist witch hunters and their well-instructed minions react with a hysterical fury exceeding even that of the anti-communist witch hunters of decades long past. Their dominance, in other words, stands on top of a great manure pile of lies, and when strains of the old German school song, "Ist das nicht ein Haufen Mist?" waft in from the margins of our political universe, the would-be proprietors of our thoughts rush in and yell, "Stop! Stop! Stop!" lest innocent young minds reply with the obvious point, "Ja, das ist ein Haufen Mist."

That's the basic story behind the persecution and vilification of Jonathan Bean as performed by the inmates of the History Department of Southern Illinois University at Carbondale under the direction of Professor Robbie Lieberman. Apparently, Bean handed out or posted a copy of Remembering The Zebra Killings by James Lubinskas (FrontPage Magazine.com, 30 August 2001). In the San Francisco area in the early '70s, 71 white people were murdered by a gang of black men who had set out to do just that -- murder white people. A truly sickening story. When you add to it some of the numerous, subsequent tales of black savagery against white people, then black victimization narratives lose much of their power, and the careers of academics who have deliberately omitted any mention of the serious problems caused by black-on-white violence are in jeopardy. Read Academic Witch-Hunt by Thomas Ryan (FrontPage magazine.com, April 27, 2005) for a detailed, illuminating account of the attacks on Professor Bean. SIUC has become a nut-house.

I can't help recalling a passage from an article I ran across a few days ago: Race to Our Credit: Denial, Privilege by Tim Wise. Wise makes his living as a promoter of the concept of "white privilege." In the article, he writes:

Of course, what is ultimately overlooked is that denial of one's privilege itself manifests a form of privilege: namely, the privilege of being able to deny another person's reality (a reality to which they speak regularly) and suffer no social consequence as a result.
The CPICs (communist professors in charge) at SIUC obviously meet that definition. Seventy-one murdered white people are just as much a reality as four black children burned to death in a church and yet the leftie academians pour great energies into denying that reality. They hope to get away with it! I hope they don't.

-   *   -   *   -   *   -   *   -   *   -

There is a discussion thread on this topic at American Renaissance.

-   *   -   *   -   *   -   *   -   *   -

Addendum, March 24, 2005:

A short FrontPage magazine.com article, Enforcing the Academic Party Line, by Larry Schweikart describes the mechanisms used by left-wing radicals to acquire so much power in our colleges and universities.

-   *   -   *   -   *   -   *   -   *   -

Addendum, May 2, 2005:

A thread on the web site insidehighered.com has accumulated much commentary about the controversy at SIUC over Professor Bean's Zebra Killings assignment. Retired policeman Louis Calabro states:

I was working the streets when the Zebra Killings occurred. Twenty three whites were attacked and fifteen died, all because they where white. Some of the killers remain in the CA. Prison system--and some remain free on the streets of America.

While Calabro's remarks cast light on the exact extent of violence in San Francisco, the following remark by someone posting under the name "John Martin" gets to the heart of the question of why there is such a great fuss being made over Professor Bean's handout:

The reason that there is, and will continue to be, a preponderance of liberal voices in academia is because there should be and must be--it's the purpose of a "liberal education" to challenge the assumptions, beliefs, and institutions that conservatives cling to so desperately. When those ideas and assumptions can't stand up to the scrutiny, it's inevitable that their proponents react with claims of injustice and bias--they have no other way to maintain control than to suddenly claim the status of the victims that they've traditionally made of all other minority populations.
Yikes... Definitely some bizarre inversion going on there. I honestly can't tell if "John Martin" is an arrogant liberal professor or a devilishly clever right-wing satirist. I don't think Einstein could figure that one out!

-   *   -   *   -   *   -   *   -   *   -

Addendum, May 3, 2005:

Like I wrote yesterday, there is some bizarre inversion going on in the "John Martin" comment. It is "liberals" (loosely speaking) who "react with claims of injustice and bias" when their "ideas and assumptions can't stand up to . . . scrutiny." It is "liberals" who use claims of victim status in order to "maintain control."

Martin's remarks also ignore the fact that the campaign against Jonathan Bean went way beyond simply holding his "ideas and assumptions . . . up to . . . scrutiny." I agree that the James Lubinskas article was an "inappropriate source." Bean admitted that. So why was there an uproar? Because the leftist history profs wanted one.

Martin's grotesque claim that "it's the purpose of a 'liberal education' to challenge the assumptions, beliefs, and institutions that conservatives cling to so desperately," is itself an idea desperately clung to by leftists. Who gave them the job of twisting everyone's heads around? It is the leftists who need to be challenged!

Now, here is the real problem. Martin's ideas are easily challenged and easily dismissed. But they can be neither challenged in nor dismissed from the mind of John Martin. There is nothing you could tell him that would cause him to change his mind. His ideas are reasonably self-consistent, but they include the notion that any disagreement or contrary evidence are simply manifestations of the "racism" he opposes. He is like a postmodern exorcist. Any protestation that one is not possessed is taken as a sure sign of possession!

The cabal of professors who signed the disingenuous letter complaining about Jonathan Bean's handout ended it with the statement, "We call on the University community to open a dialogue about the issues raised by this incident." Their call has been answered! LOL!

-   *   -   *   -   *   -   *   -   *   -

Addendum, August 9, 2005, slightly modified on September 8:

Shortly after posting the main article, I read some material that called into question the body count of 71. So I prefaced the article with the following:

After posting this entry, I read some comments in the American Renaissance thread linked to near the bottom of this page which indicate that 12 or 14 people were killed, not 71. The number 12 is given in this history of the San Francisco Police Department; one poster said that this account of the Zebra killings from crimelibrary.com (which I haven't read) gives the number 14. It is still a noteworthy crime, though not of the magnitude I believed when I composed the original entry. For more reportage and commentary on the Professor Bean controversy, see 'Handout Hysteria' or Insensitivity? in insidehighered.com.

A few days ago I recieved the following comment from Nicholas Stix, writer and maintainer of the web site A Different Drummer Commentary:

According to Clark Howard in Zebra, the state of California acknowledged that the Death Angels had murdered 71 whites across the state. They murdered 15 in the city of San Francisco alone. Howard estimated that the Death Angels actually murdered just under 270 whites in the state of California.

Note that the article at crimelibrary.com by Julia Scheeres is, by Scheeres' own admission, based virtually in its entirety, on Howard's book. Hence, I would be curious to know how she saw fit to downgrade Howard's numbers. Note that she has a history of writing for SMSM newspapers.

I guess the San Francisco area vs. entire State of California issue explains the widely different numbers. Mr. Stix, in a subsequent message, wrote that James Lubinskas "is an excellent writer," leading me to have second thoughts about my original claim that the Lubinskas FrontPageMag article was an "inappropriate source."

-   *   -   *   -   *   -   *   -   *   -

Addendum, October 28, 2006:

Here is a link to a new article by Nicolas Stix:
Domestic Terrorism: The Nation of Islam and the Zebra Murders

 
Copyright © 2005, 2006

If you wish to link to this article, try copying and pasting:

<a href="http://m3peeps.org/02/zp-saluki.htm">Zebraphobia in the History Department of Southern Illinois University at Carbondale</a>

[Go to index for Web Log, Volume Two]

[Go to m3peeps.org home page]