Kill the Kids First: The Coming of Black Genocide


The following essay was first published over twenty years ago; it is one of several texts which will be republished later this year by Kersplebedeb in a volume with the provisional title, Snapshots from the Scene of a Crime.

It is being posted on this site ahead of time as the concepts and social development touched upon are relevant to discussions and realities proceeding at the present time. Before delving on ahead, though, please read the editors’ Critical Note To Readers:

These two essays are not new but quite old. And in that lies their unique value to us.

These writings are only fragments, little noticed then. Coming from an unexpected angle. Parts of a larger political discussion in the new women’s community of that time. As seen in an episodic and anonymous Amazon journal called Bottomfish Blues. The unknown role of some euro-settler women in trying to sound the alarm.

The first article, “Kill the Kids First”, is a long, bitter rant that factually traces what was happening at street level, in daily events, in New York City then. New York was the screaming hell, the early epicenter of Black Genocide. The breakthrough point. It was a violent hurricane of imperialist hate institutionalized in state and business. In which a mob of thousands of euro-settler N.Y. police could blockade their own City Hall, in one nighttime union contract protest that morphed into an undisguised hate rally. Newsmen on the scene watched a cop spitting on a New Afrikan city councilwoman trying to enter the building, as other cops nearby yelled “nigger whore” at her.

In the mornings, you walked the sidewalks in certain neighborhoods to the crunching of used plastic crack vials underfoot. Working class New Afrikan women were singled out for public abuse of all kinds, and increasingly denied employment or simply survival. As New Afrikan housing was steadily wiped out block by block by fires and bulldozers and settler gentrification.

Not everything the article analyzed necessarily proved out overall. Such as the authors’ deep suspicions about the origins of the increasingly-New Afrikan AIDS plague. But twenty years later we pick it up still bristling uncomfortably. With an array of disturbing insights about the murderous intentions of “post-civil rights America”.

The second essay, “Integration”, brings the focus down. It documents in detail one local political struggle in another city within the new women’s community. Just women struggling with and against new awareness. As euro-settler women tried to work out and then had to fight out between themselves what neo-colonialism was. In other words, finding that genocide in the age of neo-colonialism equaled integration.

So here is this old, buried intellectual explosive device, improvised and handmade by anonymous women. Dangerous remains of earlier battle, but still live.


Kill the Kids First:
The Coming of Black Genocide


Who’s been sitting in Dick’s chair, eating Dick’s porridge, and sleeping in Dick’s bed? We, that’s who, doing it and liking it.

When we demanded to be let not only into Dick’s house, but into his business and his government, and he welcomed us, we shoulda checked ourselves out. Really checked ourselves out.

Because Dick is carrying out Black Genocide, against the New  Afrikan Nation and its communities. And we are right there beside him. Not an accident or an afterthought, but a carefully worked-out strategy to permanently answer the “Black Problem”. Of course, we don’t call it genocide or even racism when the white women’s movement does it. We call it the struggle for equal rights or our equal privilege to swill at the trough.

We crave equality with Dick, which is the equality to oppress other people. We wanna gang up not get down.

Now, Dick don’t care what we call it as long as we do “it”. Early on Dick saw us coming. He read the cards, saw the plays and clearly understood what we still willfully fail to see. White women’s equality is the key to white solidarity that allows Dick to eradicate his lifelong dependence on Black labor and its dangerous potential.

Who’d ever believe that good old Jane would go along with this. In fact, white women don’t believe that good father Dick, or son Dick, or brother Dick, or lover Dick are doing “it”.  We see what we wanna see. So we can do what we wanna do. But a careful examination of the facts of history and herstory tell a clear tale.


Today, two juggernauts are pushing their way into our common lives. They are the rising tide of genocidal violence against the Black community, and the unrestrained sexual violence against women.

Serial rape-murders, racial lynchings, child rape and the wholesale kidnapping of New Afrikan women and children from their communities, are becoming ordinary and everyday events in amerikkka. There is a unity in these events, a dialectical connection that meets in the strategy of genocide against New Afrika and the rise of the so-called women’s movement.

Father & Son Inc. faces a problem. Go back to white amerikkka 1960-1970. You say you wanna kill 40 million Black people. You say your empire has to stamp out the flames set by 40 million New Afrikans imbeded in your Land base. You say you’re engaged in a war ten million miles away in Vietnam. You say half your people are women who are im-bed-ed in your homes, your offices, your factories, on their backs at the lowest level.

Women see the fires, smell the smoke, get the itch. They want up, you want them down but you can’t turn your back. You need them more than they need you. You need white unity but on your basis. You hafta give up something. You can’t afford to have white women on the other side. You need to replace the labor power of the New Afrikans you cannot trust in your cities. White women would be the perfect answer. They are more white than they are women.

But you need to police them. So with your dick in one hand and the civil rights act in the other, you offer “equal” rights if they walk your way and rape-death if they get loose. And along comes white Jane and says thanks. So let the show begin…


Genocide isn’t new. Wasn’t new with Nazi Germany. Wasn’t new with the Indians. Genocide is old, a tried and trusted solution to the problem of intractable populations, people. Folks who get in the way and won’t quit.

Things are known about genocide: the hows and whys. The technique and timing. We can’t just get up one day and do it. We have to let it sneak up, look accidental, be acceptable, fade into everyday events. We have to say it is unthinkable, something only madmen do.

We can’t admit that it is natural, intrinsic to your white, patriarchal imperial culture. If peoples saw it coming then it can’t be done. It must seem like a series of small answers to things everyone agrees are problems. We can’t just jump up and propose it on the 7 o’clock news.

So what do we tell a people when they begin to suspect that they are up against execution, mass death? What do we say about genocide when our intended victims begin to whisper the word?

Think about what amerikkka, the media and schools, really say about genocide. We say the Nazis slaughtered 6 million Jews in gas chambers and ovens. We say men did it back in the ’40s with bullets and cyanide gas. We say it over and over. Genocide, we say, is something men did and women have nothing to do with it.

But when do we talk about the twenty years of preparation in Germany that led up to the death camps?

We never do, do we?

That is what i want to talk about. What the years of preparation look like from the inside. A report from amerikkka, where we’re already dreaming about throwing a monster block party to celebrate Black disappearance day. It has already begun.

In the beginning are the kidnapped children. Close down the future by starting to kidnap and kill off Black children. This is the Jefferson Plan, first proposed by u.s. president Thomas Jefferson. Who helped write the u.s. constitution and bill of rights. A slaveowner, Thomas Jefferson was worried that someday Afrikans might overthrow the white masters and take over the u.s. He wrote “a revolution of the wheel of fortune, an exchange of situation is among possible events.”

His proposal in 1800 was to start taking Afrikan children away from their parents, to be held for disposal somewhere else. Meanwhile under his dream, aging Afrikan adults would continue living out their lives working away to profit white people. In 40 or 50 years no Afrikans would be left in the u.s. “The old stock would die off in the ordinary course of nature… until its final disappearance.” Jefferson said god had “blessed” his plan.

The secret Jefferson Plan was never put into effect until now, because white amerikkka couldn’t do without Black labor to support it. Now, they think their time has come.


It all starts with the children and with white women. Black Genocide wouldn’t work without white women, who are the hidden key to it. You know, we say genocide is a male military thing, men’s deeds alone: In Germany the gestapo in uniforms, with submachine guns, ordering all the Jews out of their houses into trucks and trains. There’s never any German women in the picture. But that’s not how genocide started, only how it ended.

In Germany the campaign to wipe out the Jews began against the children. German women began organizing during the 1920s to stop their children from associating with Jewish children. Mothers warned their children to stay away from all Jews. Jews were characterized as not only “subhuman” animals, but very dangerous criminals and perverts who wanted to get pure white children into their hands. It was white women’s mission, the Nazis said, to protect their families by keeping the “Jew” away.

Shoppers boycotts of Jewish stores and demands that Jewish children be sent to separate schools were conducted by German women. The movement to push Jews out of every part of German life began with children in the home, and as it gathered strength it extended to the schools, to blocks and then neighborhoods, to rural towns and small cities, then to workplaces.

Only then did the government begin to strip the Jewish people of first legal rights and then of German citizenship. The Jewish reservations (death camps) were not the first but the last stage in a complex genocidal machinery.

Violent attacks and terrorism against Jews, at first isolated incidents, grew in number over the years. Nazis shouted that they were only protecting German women and children, that Jewish criminality and animal-like behavior forced good Germans to defend themselves.

The idea of violence against Jews began to be accepted as normal, just part of life. For years the police pretended to be trying to protect Jews (just like the u.s. police), although it could be seen that many more Jews and revolutionaries were being arrested than Nazis.

After 1933 the police and the Nazis merged, with beating and killings of Jews being done under police protection. It wasn’t until nine years after that and 20 years after it all began, when the Jewish community had been already pushed out, dazed and ground down, in 1941, that death camps could begin.

While German revolutionary women died trying to stop the Nazis, most German women either supported genocide or said that it was men’s affairs and had nothing to do with them. This was the position adopted by the middle-class white feminist movement.

Striving for equal rights with their men was the program of the women’s movement, which argued that German feminists shouldn’t be distracted from their own concerns by what it defined as male political issues (genocide, fascism). And armed struggle against imperialism was viewed by the women’s movement with horror, as unfitting their view of the gentle, nonviolent nature of civilized white women (kind of like the delicate Southern belle and her mate, the slavemaster).


Nazism was indeed a male movement, in which even Nazi women held a very subordinate position. But it was dependent upon women. It was women who made genocide possible. Not only were women men’s invaluable supporters, loyally taking care of their Nazi husbands and raising Nazi children, but they played the frontline role in the early stages of genocide. Without women’s help, active and passive, the Nazis could never have justified genocide as necessary for the defense of the white family and children.

And how are amerikkkan women different from those German women?

On April 20, 1987, a small brick house at 171-27 Gladwin Avenue, Fresh Meadows, Queens, was torched to stop the City from moving in six homeless “boarder babies”, who were presumed to be Black. Rita Amato, the woman who heads the local white citizens council, said happily: “When I saw what happened to the house I was relieved.” Amato has since been arrested as one of the five who did the arson.

Another white woman who lives across the street told reporters: “Listen, we have nothing against babies. But the mothers, the dope addicts. My husband says, we will never be safe anymore. It’s nothing but dopists.”

And the neighborhood white children have been taught to imagine how dangerous these Black infants might be. One sixth-grade girl at the local Catholic school thought it was a moral dilemma: “It’s good, but it’s bad. Those babies could grow up to be rowdy teenagers. But then, they need to sleep somewhere–you know?”

That was a lot better than the 11- year old boy who asked a reporter: “Are they still going to be here when they grow up?” …What if they were, asked the reporter to whom he had posed the question. Richard shrugged: “Well, I mean this is a peaceful neighborhood, not noisy. I mean, they’re not brats. Not really brats. But growing up without parents they wouldn’t be the same, you know?”

Only 11 years old, and already he has been taught the twisted rationalizations for pushing Black people out.

This is a big theme with white women, how they and their families are endangered unless Black people are kept far away. Black people, even infants, are said to be the aggressors. White people when they torch buildings and shoot and conduct hate campaigns are said to only be defending themselves. Like the Germans did. Building the public mood that excuses and prepares people to commit genocide. If even six Black infants without parents are too dangerous, what is safety? What is the logical conclusion?

It’s even more interesting how some prominent white women have come out making excuses for the terrorists. Queens Borough President Claire Shulman said that it was the government’s fault for not reassuring the local homeowners that no adult Black people would be moved in: “Otherwise, they imagine the worst. These are our people, our citizens. You can’t ride roughshod with them, and they’re afraid.”

Lynda Spielman, chairperson of Community Board 7, said that the firebombing was caused by “frustration” from the City’s high-handed attitude. Violent whites are again pictured as the victims not the criminals.


Most interesting of all was “feminist” newspaper columnist Beth Fallon in the New York Post. Her column stated that the real issue is tighter white control over Black people. This column was valuable precisely because it starts to take the wraps off:

“The City is being overwhelmed by the sheer numbers of people who are unable or unwilling to care for themselves or their children, and who abandon the latter to the care of the state…

“City officials have said that family visits, if any, and visits of prospective foster parents for these infants would be a neutral sites away from the home.

“It is the unscheduled visits that evoke part of the neighborhood’s fears, and it is these which should be met with immediate, effective control…

“The issue of control is really the deciding one…

“Staten Island, indeed, prefers to accept a prison site to sites for the homeless. More control is exercised at a prison, and the threat to the community is therefore perceived as less.”

This isn’t hard to de-code: the government should reassure the white majority by “immediate, effective control” of any Black persons who enter white areas. Perhaps by police passbooks, like in South Africa? Facilities for Black people should become more like prisons, for “more control” is needed. Any uncontrolled Black people are a threat, and presumably white people are justified in defending themselves.

And this is a woman newspaper columnist.

It isn’t one journalist who is just loosely mouthing off. There’s a real convergence here. The New York Times has taken up the demand for more prison-like control over Black people. In an editorial about the “NIMBY syndrome”(“Not in My Back Yard”), the most influential newspaper in the u.s. has called for all new homeless shelters to include a built-in police station, so that homeless Black people would be under 24-hour police watch to reassure white people: “What’s to be done to ease Nimby apprehensions? One response is to introduce a round-the-clock police presence in each of the new facilities. Storefront offices could serve as police sub-stations…”

The welfare system and the prison system are really only one system.

You should see now what the logical conclusion of this propaganda is, what it is pointing white people towards. Someday everyone will see it, but you should see it now. Time is a thing.

If the white majority wants to push Black children out, do the welfare agencies and their group homes represent a decent white alternative? No, for the same reason that Malcolm X used to say that integration is not the opposite of segregation, only a different version of the same thing.

In the wake of the firebombing, Mayor Koch rushed out to the Queens house to hold a public meeting. He told local whites, as press and TV surrounded him, that each white neighborhood must overcome its reluctance towards government facilities for Black poor and homeless:

“They all think they’re being asked to do more than everybody else. We are trying to spread the burden.”

Beth Fallon and Mayor Koch are saying that Black people are too dangerous to have children. That white people and their government have to be in control over Black children. That Black children have to be taken away. And this is how the Jefferson Plan begins.


Those Black infants aren’t “boarder babies”, they’re really border babies. Some of the hundreds of thousands of Black children being kidnapped by the government, and taken across the border into white amerikkka as prisoners. Because in “America” you’re never too young to be a Black prisoner.

Government foster care, youth residences, welfare hotels, juvenile centers, riker’s island, attica, isn’t it all the same chain?

The government takes custody of Black children to kill them, to mess them up as much possible so they will kill each other. Isn’t that what happens?

That’s what was going down around the border babies, before anguished hospital workers leaked the word out. The government had no plans to do anything for the 300 Black and Latin border babies in City hospitals. Without mothers or without mothers with homes, the homeless infants lay in metal cribs, lined up in rows.

Actually there was a plan. To secretly let them die. If a Nazi officer had tried to let 300 infants die he’d been called a war criminal. But when Mayor Koch does it all the whites curse him for being too “liberal”.

Without close human contact, without care, babies suffer developmental damage and death. This is a medical fact. Yet the government was leaving these infants to die in isolation. That’s a fact, too. Overworked nurses were trying to spend a few minutes with each, on the run. Dr. Margaret Heagarty, director of pediatrics at Harlem Hospital, protested to the press in May 1987:

“I have children whose parents are dead, and I have no one to teach them how to walk.”

The government wasn’t interested in these children learning how to walk, since they are Black. For Black children they have a special program: genocide.

In June 1987, to stop a lawsuit, the City signed a consent agreement in Federal court promising to get all border babies out of the hospital wards in six months or so. Mayor Koch and his bureaucrats plan to set up over 60 more government-run group homes to hold them (there were already over 50 at the time). Social worker slang calls these City group homes “parking lots”, which tells us something.

The group that sued the City, the Association to Benefit Children, said publicly that the government agreed in negotiations to as little as possible, and had “kicked and screamed” over “every inch of it.” We only want Black children to die, as cheaply and quietly as possible. And they say that because Black people are so messed up, white people must have more and more control over Black children, must take these children away.

Aren’t there already many thousands of Black children in government custody in New York City alone? (Not even counting those in juvenile prisons.) All are suffering for it. A majority of the 18,000 foster care children are Black or Puerto Rican, prisoners of a system that the N.Y. Times was forced to describe this year in the following terms: “And a tragedy of major proportions is occurring each day, according to interviews with participants throughout the system… physical abuse of children has become a daily occurrence.”

These foster care kids are shuffled without any say from place to place, lose what friendships and ties they have, have little opportunity for education, undergo beatings and sexual abuse. If one, just one, u.s. white man was held in Vietnam or Nicaragua under the conditions that thousands of these children are tortured with, congressmen would be lining up to threaten airstrikes.

You’re never too young in amerikkka to be a Black prisoner. Face the fact that there are more Black children prisoners than Black adult prisoners in New York. And so the Jefferson Plan begins.

Today there are 9,000 children, the great majority of them Black, doing time in the welfare hotels. The schools admit that 50% are absent any given day. Young as they are, these kids are being brutalized, being conditioned to be the future drug addicts, the homeless, and prison inmates. The system understands this very well.

“In the cavernous ballroom of the Princes George Hotel, four boys were shooting pool, talking as tough as any New York pool sharks. One wore just his shorts, and another’s face was smeared with sweat. With the boys as old as 12, they might have seemed wise about the streets–except that two of them were sucking their thumbs.” Tomorrow morning they’ll be sucking a bottle or a jumbo to ease their pain or sticking the glass dick in their veins.

“There are 8,980 children in the hotels. They are crammed four, six or seven to a room and eat one hot meal a day.”

Children are beautiful with possibilities to become anything. A carpenter or a freedom fighter, an artist or a scientist, anything. But these children are being conditioned to be nothing, to kill each other and themselves. To be in attica, to die of AIDS, or to be on drugs when they grow up. In fact, some children from the shelters, welfare hotels and other homeless children have been pushed into prostitution for survival. To serve white men.


Amerikkka is practicing its version of equal rights, since the children are half girls and half boys. The overwhelming majority of these child prostitutes are Black and Latin. The “Johns” who use them are largely middle-class and upper-class white men.

And the police say that except for token arrests there’s nothing they can do about it (although last year they did arrest 229 homeless children from age 11 for prostitution). “In a few years, we will be seeing lots of kids die from AIDS” because of this prostitution, says child advocate Trudee Able-Peterson.

After unfavorable publicity on national TV about this child prostitution in 1985, Mayor Ed Koch ordered the police to set up a special undercover task force. He promised at press conference to end the problem. That was in October 1985.

Ten months later the NYPD reported that their undercover task force to cover the Times Square-Port Authority bus terminal area had managed to arrest 74 men for soliciting for child prostitution, an average of only 7 arrests per month.

How many “Johns” were sent to prison in ten months. Only two. Of the 53 cases that were decided by the time of the report, 4 were dismissed and 43 men were allowed to plea-bargain down to a lesser charge (mostly disorderly), paid a small fine and walked. Only 6 men were convicted of soliciting for child prostitution. One man got probation and three men were sentenced to the time awaiting trial, and walked. Only two “Johns” who must have been the wrong class, were sentenced to some prison time.

Buying a Black child for sex is being all but legalized, a minor noncrime like running a red light. And yet, white amerikkka says Blacks should turn their children over to us.

You know, there’s a special “Black desk” at NYPD Intelligence Division to spy on the Black community. Cops are busy monitoring Black radio programs (“What are those slaves up to?”). Busy following around the handful of Black political activists. But so long as white men want Black and Latin children, the government winks at their own laws. We should name the procurer supplying Black children as prostitutes–amerikkka. These young victims have really been kidnapped by white amerikkka.


The entire point of the government welfare bureaucracy is to stop the Black Nation from itself taking care of its children, to hinder and regulate and prohibit and confuse and seize.

How long do you think it would take the Black community to end the open prostitution of Black children, were it not for the police protecting the white men? A week? You don’t think all the police around mid-town Manhattan are there to protect the children, do you?

Everyone knows that once, not too long ago, there were few homeless Black children. Even though Black poverty was just as heavy then as now. The strong communal tradition among Afrikan people meant that women simply took in children that needed care. Whether blood relatives or neighbors, every Black child was kin.

There are many white women who make a living out of the disguised prison system for Black kids, as social workers and supervisors and therapists.

White women are, in fact, indispensable to the genocide of Black children, for it must be done with a thin veneer of official “caring”. These are the so-called welfare institutions, which make such a show of helping the people that they mess over. Ever notice the more we “help” them the worse off they are?


It’s hard for people to see the whole strategy for Black genocide, because it doesn’t come from the day before yesterday. The ruling class decision to seek a Final Solution to their “Black Problem” came from the 1960s. For it was in the Sixties that amerikkka first lost its white-fisted grip on the world.

First, the patriarchy found itself in deep shit in Vietnam. Something the latest fad of Vietnam war movies doesn’t do justice to. Hard to remember now that way back in 1965, as the first battalions of marines waded ashore near Danang, that the pentagon was promising that 50,000 u.s. troops would finish off Charlie. They thought that Vietnamese would be a pushover, a small nation of small people, without B-52s, IBM or John Wayne.

But the Vietnamese were a nation with a long history of fighting invaders. While they didn’t have John Wayne or the national football league, they had something real like the Truong sisters. Two amazons who led a war against the vast Chinese empire a thousand years ago (the two are Vietnam’s national heroines). amerikkkans are creampuffs, in comparison. So five hundred thousand troops later the ruling class got this sinking feeling that it was going to lose a war, and not against a major white power but to an asian socialist army.

What really did it to them was the danger of losing amerikkka itself.

Because amerikkka was exploding at home, and Black people were at the heart of the storm riding it higher and higher. In five, fast-frame years Civil Rights became Black Power, and Black Power became Black Revolution. Nonviolent student Sit-Ins faded into sniperfire and the burning buildings of ghetto uprisings. Hundreds protesting became thousands marching became millions “rioting”.

Suddenly, the patriarchal ruling class saw a coming Vietnam at home. City streets were shifting under the feet of the world’s strongest imperial patriarchy, who had believed that the Civil Rights sops of 1963 would buy them out of the shit. Black leaders selected and owned by the patriarchy were driven off the streets along with their white masters. It wasn’t going to hold. There had to be an end, a permanent solution.


Detroit, the new center of Black music, became a symbol. On July23, 1967 at 3:30 am, a police raid on an afterhours club led to instant rumors that a Black woman had been beaten. A gathering crowd in the early morning started throwing bottles at the police paddy wagon. The growing crowd spread up and down 12th street. Breaking store windows, repossessing merchandise, and burning them out. The festival grew and grew as the people ruled the streets.

In six days forty-three people were killed, 2,000 wounded, and 7,000 arrested in Detroit. There were 1,442 fires recorded by the fire department. Even the Michigan National Guard was not enough. White order was not restored until President Lyndon Johnson sent in combat-seasoned u.s. army airborne troops, which took back the ghetto block by block.

Detroit’s auto factories became simmering battlegrounds in 1968-69 for the new Black Revolutionary Union Movement. A majority of Black auto workers in the local Chrysler plants, at the Jefferson Ave. plant, at Dodge Eldon Ave. gear & axle plant, voted for this Black nationalist union and its program of socialism. It stood for aligning the Black Nation with Vietnam, Afrika, and the rest of the Third World against white amerikkka.

A Revolutionary Union Movement mass walkout at one plant proved that they could even shut down the production line. The ruling class couldn’t believe that this strange nightmare was happening to them. Even high wages amerikkkan-style weren’t enough to satisfy the mood for extreme change, for a new life. “Liberation”, one Sixties slogan went, “is coming from a Black thing.”

This revolutionary trend of looking to politically leave amerikkka was at the heart of the storm. After the summer rebellions of 1967, government researchers interviewing Black youth in Newark, N.J. found that 52.8% opposed backing the any war, not just Vietnam.


For the ruling class the decisive line was crossed when New Afrikan voices began formulating the demand for land. Not just acres and neighborhoods, but the raising up of the Black Nation. In 1968 Black revolutionary nationalists set the goal as the takeover of the five historic Black-majority states of the old Slave South: Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina. And then secession of their Republic of New Afrika from the amerikkka. Remember, Vietnam was proving that the u.s. could be defeated by a smaller Third World nation. In the Sixties so many barriers had fallen, the unthinkable had happened so regularly, that anything felt possible.

The plan of carving a sovereign Black Nation out of amerikkka shocked white people and seemed crazy to them, but the ruling class knew that it had an explosive potential. In 1969 a poll by Newsweek magazine of Northern Black people under age 30 found that 68% approved of “Black Power”, 36% thought that Black political violence was necessary, and 27% wanted to live in a separate Black Nation. And already, the first generation of Black urban guerrillas was appearing.

A certain line, unseen and yet very real, had been crossed. Black labor had been the most important source of profit for amerikkka’s ruling class ever since the original 13 colonies. But the ruling class decided during the 1960s that Black people were just too dangerous to have around (a common feeling whites often have).


The crux of the matter is that to destroy the Black Nation you have to destroy Black women. And you have to convince white women that it’s ok. Women are the key in both instances.

For all the white fright about Black men, the cool heads in the ruling dickdom know that black men aren’t their only or even biggest problem. Everyone knows that Black women are the heart and backbone of the Black Nation and its communities. They are the protectors of its children, its continuity and of its traditions of resistance.

Afrikan and New Afrikan men, like all men the world over, share the his-story and distortions of having ruled over or desiring to rule over women and children, of feeling right about themselves by physically subduing half the human race and then defeating each other, of getting over on each other, having more than the next guy. These distortions are hard to overcome. The exact things that men feel make them strong, in reality make them weak in the face of genocide.

Singling out Black women as the No. 1 target started with Daniel Patrick Moynihan in the mid-1960s. Since Moynihanism has reared its pricky head again, this has special importance to the patriarchal ruling class.

Our story begins with the release of the Moynihan Report in June 1965, before the decision for Black Genocide was reached. The Report placed the main trouble of the Black community on women-headed families, which the Report said were un-amerikkkan and sick (“a tangle of pathology”).

Moynihan was one of the four white men who had planned out the details of President Johnson’s War on Poverty. His Report, which became so infamous, was not originally meant to be seen by the public. It was an internal policy paper, given to less than eighty men in the top levels of the Administration.

His action proposals were staggering: the White House should review every government program, including federal hiring and the military, to make certain that in every way Black men get preference over Black women. Moynihan wanted a massive Federal men’s jobs program. One study of his proposals summed it up:

“In the area of concrete programs, Moynihan felt that jobs had primacy and that the government should not rest until every able-bodied Negro man was working even if this meant that some women’s jobs had to be redesigned to enable men to fulfill them.”

This was a big-stakes game. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who was then Assistant Secretary of Labor, thought that the government was underestimating the crisis.

He worried that President Johnson and his closest advisors had been lulled into thinking that the “Negro revolution” was over, that the Democrats had won Black peoples loyalty and trust for the next 100 years. Moynihan was predicting to the contrary, in Fall 1964, that the Civil Rights Act wasn’t going to satisfy the Black community, and that even bigger uprisings (“riots”) were coming.

His report begins by reminding his fellow officials how much is at stake, that the power balance of the world was being fought out:

“The Negro American revolution is rightly regarded as the most important domestic event of the postwar period in the United States…

“It was not a matter of chance that the Negro movement caught fire in America at just that moment when the nations of Africa were gaining their freedom. Nor is it merely incidental that the world should have fastened its attention on events in the United States at a time when the possibility that the nations of the world will divide along color lines seems suddenly not only possible, but even imminent.”

“(Such racist views have made progress within the Negro-American community itself… The Black Muslim doctrines, based on total alienation from the white world, exert a powerful attraction. On the far left, the attraction of Chinese communism can no longer be ignored.”)


To neutralize the “attraction” of revolutionary alternatives, Moynihan wanted the Black community to be made more sexist, more “American”. He identified the strength of Black women as the main enemy. Even more, Moynihan believed that by the government giving Black men power over Black women, by giving Black men jobs that were held by Black women whether in the P.O. or in the schools and by making Black men heads of families, that the government could pacify the ghetto in a way acceptable to white voters. No white men’s jobs would be threatened, for example.

The government, Moynihan said, could now blame Black women for the oppression of all Black people. Black women could be propagandized against as the Black man’s own worst enemy. And Black progress, Moynihan said, can only come through sexism:

“In essence, the Negro community has been forced into a matriarchal structure which, because it is so out of line with the rest of the American society, seriously retards the progress of the group as a whole, and imposes a crushing burden on the Negro male… Ours is a society which presumes male leadership in private and public affairs. The arrangements of society facilitate such leadership and reward it. A subculture, such as that of the Negro American, in which this is not the pattern, is placed at a distinct disadvantage.”

This was pretty upfront. Black people weren’t sexist enough to fit into amerikkka.

Moynihan made the crucial point that Black women have been unfit mothers, damaging their children. As he wrote “Negro children without fathers flounder and fail.”

He introduced some phony statistics to prove that Black children raised by women without a husband in the house have a low IQ. Moynihan said that these Black children were on average of “dull-normal” IQ, just above retarded. Black women were the enemy of Black children, too, he was suggesting. This tactic was to be even more important later.

In the Report, Moynihan was careful about how he made the point that Black mothers mess over male children. Cautiously, he made his point by using prominent Black bourgeois men. Whitney Young, president of the National Urban League, was quoted saying: “In the matriarchal Negro society, mothers made sure that if one of their children had a chance at education the daughter was the one to pursue it.” Social scientist Thomas Pettigrew was quoted:

“Many Negro mothers often act to perpetuate the mother-centered pattern by taking a greater interest in their daughters than their sons.”

Moynihan and his staff at the Office of Policy Planning & Research finished the Report in March 1965. Only one hundred copies were made. On May 4, 1965 his superior, Labor Secretary Willard Wirtz, gave the President a memorandum by Moynihan summing up the Report. That summer it was made evident by burning buildings that Moynihan was right about their “Black problem” not being solved. The White House decided to support his action proposals.

In June the Report was released to the public, and was a major news story. Then it became a major controversy. The White House convened a national conference of officials, social scientists, religious and Civil Rights leaders to rally the Black community behind Moynihan’s “pro-family” program. This was to be the final chapter in President Johnson’s War on Poverty.


That 1965 White House Conference collapsed into a political disaster area after the first day. Under angry Black community pressure, the Civil Rights leaders got wishy-washy about committing themselves to follow Moynihan. Some, like the Urban League’s Whitney Young, who had been happy about the Moynihan program at first, began backing out as public criticism rose higher and higher.

Within a few months the Moynihan Report was abandoned by the White House, too burnt-up to use. Dissenters within the Black community had exposed it as nothing but a sneaky attempt to blame the oppressed for their oppression, to turn attention away from institutionalized racism. Many Black women were furious that their families were called “pathological”. Moynihan became discredited as a racist in sheep’s clothing.

When the uprisings kept coming in 1965, in 1966 and 1967, kept growing, when even men with good-paying jobs on the auto assembly lines joined Black nationalist rifle clubs and took part in uprisings, then the imperialists knew that it was too, too late for the speeches about Abraham Lincoln.


And as the intractable nature of their “Black problem” became clearer, the ruling class itself vetoed all of Moynihan’s proposals. Moynihan and the Lyndon Johnson White House had thought they could turn the clock back. They thought that they could restore peace by remaking the Black community into a poorer, 2nd class version of traditional 1940s or 1950s white culture–father working and ruling the roost, mother kept at home waiting on men and raising lots of children for the ruling class, children kept in line by authoritarian father.

The Moynihan program got trashed mostly because the patriarchal ruling class decided that it could no longer live with the threat of Black revolution. It wasn’t going to hire any millions of young Black men. No way, forget that. It was going to start drawing up a whole new set of plans, do that Black Genocide. Can’t trust them, gotta dust them.

Moynihan’s mistake was that he saw this as a civilian problem, a social problem. The ruling class more correctly saw their “Black problem” as a political-military problem, needing military solutions.

Daniel Patrick Moynihan thought that with a few middle-class jobs and titles, a little Civil Rights sprinkled on top, having Black men rule over “their” women, that the Black community would be brought back into place as one of amerikkka’s profitably subject peoples. But Moynihan, who saw President Johnson’s underestimations, underestimated the crisis himself.

This was a time when, despite historic white reforms, millions of Black people wanted a separate nation of their own. The Nation of Islam, which was the movement of a separate Black society headed by Elijah Muhammad and Malcolm X, had gained an estimated five million adherents. Black revolutionaries were hijacking airliners and going into exile in Cuba. College students and factory workers alike were reading revolutionary theorists from the Third World, Franz Fanon and Mao and Amilcar Cabral. Millions of Black high school students were taking part in school walkouts and boycotts.

This ruling class could only deal with this crisis in a political-military way, by deciding on the final solution of Black Genocide. Moynihan caught on quickly. In the Nixon years he helped lead the government campaign to forcibly empty the ghetto–he coined the infamous phrase of “benign neglect”, to justify the government’s urban removal and unemployment strategy.

Maybe Daniel Moynihan got a black eye out of the controversy, but the ruling class found him useful and put their arm around him. After having been a top official for the liberal Kennedy and Johnson administrations, Moynihan was kept around as a key urban policy advisor by the conservative Nixon administration. From there he went on to be a u.s. senator. Not bad for someone who’s one big idea was a flop. Amerikkka’s ruling class needed his talent for dumping on Black women but making it sound like intellectual theorizing about poverty.

Another reason Moynihan-ism never died is that it played on the chords of sexism within the Black community. Don’t forget that the White House only agreed to risk that public conference because Moynihan had gotten private agreement from many Black leaders. His sexist theories about the harmful Black “matriarchy” were borrowed A to Z from the writings of Black sociologist E. Franklin Frazier of Howard University. Even that zingy line that most angered Black women–of their families being only “a tangle of pathology”–was only Moynihan quoting E. Franklin Frazier.

Poor Moynihan felt betrayed, double-crossed by all his Black male colleagues who encouraged him to go for it, then after the shit the fan pretended that they had nothing to do with his report.

Following the 1967 Detroit uprising, President Johnson appointed a blue-ribbon panel of establishment social scientists, politicians, generals, policemen, corporate leaders and Civil Rights flunkies, to recommend what to do.

That was the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, better known as the Kerner Commission after its chairman, Otto Kerner (he was former Illinois governor and part of the Chicago Democratic Party machine). Racism was strongly denounced in the Commission’s report, which called for the immediate integration of housing and employment.

But what they called “housing integration” was only the public front for the counter-insurgency assault that the Kerner Commission consultants named Spatial De-Concentration. There is an old saying that “the best place to hide something is in plain sight.” The Kerner Commission provided a smooth public cover for an unprecedented coming together of the u.s. leadership. Corporate heads and police chiefs, generals and bankers, urban strategists and cabinet officials, all sat down together in day after day strategy sessions on the inner cities.

The Commission had put its finger on a major military consideration: the massive weight of heavily-populated Black ghettoes, all within easy striking distance of white downtowns. White House, Wall St. & Mercantile Exchange, City Hall & Police HQ, banks and corporate skyscrapers, were all next door targets for urban guerrilla warfare. And the sheer size of Black communities made uprisings hard to prevent or control.

So the secret proposal of the Kerner Commission was to break up the giant ghettoes, to physically bulldoze and burn the Black community completely out of existence. No community, no uprisings, was their simple equation. Under the long-range Spatial De-Concentration plan, the Black population is to be widely dispersed, scattered into small pockets around the county (reservations, in other words) where they would be more easily policed.

Naturally, the Kerner Commission presented this plan as “housing integration”, a civil rights measure to supposedly help Black people. Spatial De-Concentration had two parts: The first was to resettle Black families out in new suburban or rural housing projects. Unlike in the inner cities, in the suburbs pockets of Black people would be isolated and surrounded by larger numbers of whites. Urban theorist Anthony Downs, who actually wrote chapters 16 and 17 of the Kerner Report, warned the government to develop “a workable mechanism ensuring that whites will remain in the majority.”

The main hammer-blow of Spatial De-Concentration is the physical elimination of major Black urban communities, to force Black families to break up and disperse. Anthony Downs later wrote that the plan is “a long-range strategy of emptying-out the most deteriorated areas… to accelerate their abandonment.”

This has proved easy to do: deliberate non-enforcement of building codes, police-controlled drug epidemics, urban renewal, and covert firebombing campaigns. Each year there is less and less housing for Black children, each year more of the Black community breaks apart under the gradually tightening encirclement of Black Genocide.

All part of the military counter-insurgency move of “drying up the sea.” From the analogy where the revolutionary guerrillas are the “fish” and the oppressed communities they come from are the “sea” that shelters and nourishes them. In both Vietnam and El Salvador, u.s. forces used constant air bombardment to force the people to break up and migrate out of rebellious areas.

The idea is to make the community unliveable, by physical destruction of housing, by making it a violent “free fire zone” for government-sponsored gangs and police, by deliberately spreading epidemics of crack and AIDS, all to force masses of desperate people to “voluntarily” abandon their community and disperse.

Secretly, the ruling class has been firebombing the Black community, all without a single Pentagon document or congressional declaration of war. There has been a national wave of inner city fires since the 1960s. A 1979 headline says it all: “ARSON AT AN EPIDEMIC RATE, WITH 300% RISE IN 3 YEARS”. All it takes is for the ruling class insurance companies to quietly put out their willingness to insure delapidated ghetto slums for big sums, while the police quietly make it known that landlord arson will be permitted.

That 1979 story says of 1,000 people killed each year in arsons, “most of the victims are poor Blacks and Hispanic-Americans.” Secretly murdered by amerikkka.

As an example, the story tells about a Jersey City, N.J. tenement, 358 York Road, where arson on January 22, 1979, killed five children and two adults. That was the 60th “suspicious fire” in two years in slum buildings owned by one slumlord, Kibby Kevelson. All insured. After the fires and insurance money, Kevelson sells his buildings to the government for urban renewal projects.  No jail time for these slumlords, of course.

These emptied-out inner city communities are being gradually white-washed, or warehoused for years, and then gentrified for middle-class “integrated” housing and corporate development. New “Yuppie Harlem” is only the most obvious example.

One goal of the Spatial De- Concentration is to gradually resettle a solid white majority to protect the central cities for imperialism. This only works if the Black population declines. Middle-class white women, feminists and lesbians most specifically included, are being recruited to be “urban pioneers” for the patriarchal ruling class. Isn’t that a great phrase, “urban pioneers”? The original white pioneers, we recall, invaded and stole Indian land, and did that genocide, too. Black Genocide has become white women’s equal opportunity.


INTEGRATION was also the code-name given to the social restructuring of the Black Nation, which has increasingly cleaved the Black society into a 25% middle-class, 25% working class and a 50% under-class. In the 20 year process the Black working class, once the huge majority, is being wiped out. It was seen by the ruling class as the main danger.

Isn’t it hard to imagine that in 1968, Black workers made up 50% of all the u.s. automobile industry workforce, that Black workers had formed nationalist caucuses and joined their own revolutionary nationalist unions and called Black strikes? Northern urban factories that had a 40-80% Black labor force in the 1960s have been shut down, replaced by new factories abroad or in the rural South and Midwest.

Black youth who a generation ago would have became blue-collar workers are now forced down into the growing underclass. These are people who no longer have a place or role in the economy; they are permanently without real employment, in the hustling and welfare world. The world of death at an early age that is almost half the Black population today.

“‘Before the rebellion, a Black man in Detroit had a certain stability, a false sense of security,’ said the Rev. Albert B. Cleage Jr., founder of Shrines of the Black Madonna. ‘He now has no security whatsoever. The whole atmosphere in the Black community has become one of escapism. People use drugs and every kind of hustle and drugs to get by. The dope industry has taken over the excess people from the auto industry.’”

The Black community’s share of total u.s. income hasn’t changed essentially since 1960, but it has been divided up very differently. The u.s. government temporarily forced corporations and local government to hire Black professionals as they were un-hiring Black workers.”Between1960 and 1970 the percentage of middle-class Blacks suddenly doubled, growing from about 1 in 8 to 1 out of every 4 Black workers,” writes sociologist Bart Landry.

Integration has produced a new Black middle-class that is being encouraged to transfer its loyalties out of the Black community. To live a white consumer lifestyle and reside in “integrated” middle-class housing. For awhile, anyway. Educated Black people are encouraged to distance themselves from the Black grassroots as much as possible, while the Black underclass is being encouraged to die as much as possible. This manipulation of the Black class structure is planned to socially fragment the Black community as a community, as it is simultaneously under physical assault by the strategy of Spatial De-Concentration. A political-military campaign is being masked as integration.


In Vietnam the C.I.A. ran a special war within the war: a covert program to paralyze the Vietnamese ability to resist invasion by assassinating peasant community leaders in each locality, village by village. Former C.I.A. Director William Colby testified before Congress that his C.I.A. “Phoenix Program” (which he had personally run in Saigon) had assassinated around 20,000 Vietnamese thought to be grassroots leaders and organizers; using informers, secret surveillance files, and specially trained u.s. assassination teams. This was denied officially at the time, and only admitted after the war had been lost.

Since the 1960s the C.I.A. & F.B.I. have been running an unadmitted “Phoenix Program” to neutralize Black resistance. Leaders thought too dangerous have been systematically killed or imprisoned. Black militant organizations have been eliminated. The Black Panther Party was cut down by coordinated police raids in 11 states. Over 1,000 BPP members were arrested throughout 1968-69. Many Black nationalist groups of the day were repressed. Thousands went to prison.

Front-page assassinations, such as Malcolm X and MLK Jr., were skillfully arranged to be done by cats-paws. So James Earl Ray, the Southern cracker who was let out of prison to shoot Martin Luther King, Jr., was said by the F.B.I. to be a deranged “lone assassin”. Although he was captured in London, England with three false passports and$15,000 in cash. How did he obtain that alone in prison, some skeptics asked?

The “Phoenix Program” operates on the principle that masses of people in motion can be handled by removing their leadership. The C.IA. always believed that if it had started this early enough it might have won in Cuba and Southeast Asia, and it isn’t taking the same chance in the even more crucial war in amerikkka. Neutralizing revolutionary activists is not the main blow in genocide. But it is designed to neutralize peoples’ natural ability to defend themselves against that main blow. Like destroying the body’s immune defense system against infection.


There is a white fight going on over the tactics of genocide. Black genocide is the biggest event in amerikkka, far too big to be neatly contained inside the Black community as white people want it to. It spills over into everyone’s lives in multiple ways. And white people, whose differing lives and economic interests are touched, inevitably are fighting over how to commit genocide. Who will pay the damage bills, who will profit most?

Mind you, there isn’t any noticeable fight over the strategy of Black Genocide itself. It’s only a white family squabble over the tactics of the matter. Sometimes this is a liberal vs. conservative fight, like uncle teddy vs. grandad ronnie. Or sometimes this is a ruling class vs. its white servants dispute, like Mayor Crazy Ed trying to get white racist homeowners in Queens to go along with kidnapping Black babies.

Only, the liberals want to do it gracefully, slick, with lots of p.r. and a minimum of damage to amerikkka. While the conservatives want to do it directly, to openly starve and imprison the Black Nation and let the chips fall where they may. But they both want “it”, a final end to amerikkka’s “Black problem.”

That white family fight is why there hasn’t been more dispersal of Black families out into the suburbs, as the Kerner Commission’s Spatial De-Concentration plan called for. The ruling class had to retreat on some parts when its plan ran aground on white resistance.

Emptying-out the ghetto was first supposed to be tested in Chicago. Mayor Richard J. Daley, boss of the then most powerful political machine in the u.s., was impatient to secure Chicago as a white city. Daley announced that the city’s giant housing projects, which in Chicago were built in rows of high-rises surrounding the downtown business district on three sides (the lake is the 4th side), would be gradually abandoned.

Black welfare families would be paid bonuses to relocate in new, smaller projects, which would be scattered (“integrated”) in rural unincorporated areas well outside the city, like little Indian reservations.

Instant hysteria from middle-class suburbanites created such white-hot political reaction that the government had to back off in Illinois. White people were saying, “Move 100,000 Black welfare recipients out to our county? Hell no!” And the White House had changed hands; the Republicans refused to come up with the hundreds of millions of dollars Mayor Daley needed to pull the plan off. He died in office without seeing his most arrogant move get off the ground. The right wing didn’t want to build more housing projects, it wanted to build prisons and expand the army.

The ruling class compromise was to go ahead and destroy the ghetto anyway, even without any temporary escape valves, letting displaced Black refugees spill over onto streets and downtown sidewalks. In NYC Mayor Crazy Ed keeps saying he doesn’t want to build more housing in the ghetto, he wants to “share the burden” of homeless Black people with all the neighborhoods. Further away the better.

In an amusing flip-flop, the political representatives of the white homeowners, such as Queens Borough President Claire Shulman, want the government to keep Black people away; even if it means building some temporary housing for them in the Black community.

And now Manhattan real estate interests led by developer Donald Trump and the media, are echoing the same thing. Somehow, anyhow, they demand, the government must keep the unsightly, might-be dangerous, Black refugees and casualties created by war in amerikkka at a distance. Stop them from taking over the streets outside luxury hi-rises and corporate headquarters. Prison barges and homeless barges anchored to wharves are the latest proposals.

Labels like liberal and conservative have a certain tactical meaning, but can’t hide the truth that white society has become united around Black Genocide. Whites believe that it is no longer possible–or necessary–to tolerate the Black Nation and its people.


Those who commit genocide must first become hardened to it, must be armored with a frenzy of rationalizations in which they are only victims righteously defending themselves. While the actual victims of genocide must be said to be the aggressors, like those “savage redskins” whose continent we accidently took while we were defending ourselves. This is the first law of genocide. Things must be turned upside down.

Often, it is said that the victims of genocide aren’t really human like you and i, but are “subhuman” and “animalistic”. So you really shouldn’t worry about what happens to them. Which is why Adolf Hitler lectured the German people that “the Jews are indeed a race, but not a human race.” Which is why Israeli Prime Minister Begin reassured his countrywomen that the Palestinian women being killed are “only beasts that walk on two legs.”

U.S. Sen. Alfonse D’Amato of NY, in privately vetoing proposed funding for a housing project, was quoted by another government official as remarking: “We didn’t do too well with the animal vote, did we? Isn’t it the animals who live in these projects? They’re not our people.”

Oppressors want the victims of genocide to be seen as the aggressors, as the dangerous “animals” threatening everyone. The Nazis spent twenty years convincing Germans that Jews were the aggressors. Even rank-and-file Nazi women had to be argued into not wavering about genocide.

“Often, much too often, one hears it still, ‘I find the fight against the Jews too severe. It does not seem right that the good Jews must suffer on account of their race'”, wrote Paula Silber, chief of the Nazi Coordinating Committee for Women’s Affairs in a 1933 newsletter to her followers. She went on, criticizing Nazi women for their “sentimental gush to say that the other person is also a human being and feels and senses like ourselves.”

That wasn’t true, Silber harangued her women:

“The Jew with his quite different nature, his essential being unlike ours, is a subtle poison, since he always destroys what is necessary to our life. The Jew has always felt bound to conquer the best places in the sun, ruthlessly destroying what was in his way. If we are to be healed as a people… then we must free ourselves ruthlessly from that parasite just as the body must get rid of poison if it is to be healed.” [[This passage is quoted from: Claudia Koontz, Mothers in the Fatherland. N.Y. 1987.]]

What you should know is that Black people are the Jews of amerikkka. Think about that, even if you don’t like the comparison.


It is a crime now to be a Black man in amerikkka. Like the Indian before him, the Black man, particularly the young Black man, is said by white people to be a “savage”, an “animal”, irrationally violent and always dangerous. Young Black men ages 16 to 19 years old account for 51% of all those arrested by police for violent crimes.

Anytime that a Black man is imprisoned or killed, the automatic assumption is that “he only got what he deserved”. Black men are considered a criminal class, who must be pushed out to keep white people safe. And anything that is done to them, anything at all, is ok. Everyone is told to fear them, they are the threat.

It isn’t just teenage muggers in a subway car. Black men have been criminalized as a whole. Samuel Johnson, who recently resigned as Assistant Attorney General of Vermont, says that white folks in the capitol would “lean over and lock their car doors when they saw me coming.”

People magazine reports: “At colleges in or near a Black neighborhood, Black students–particularly men–may spend their entire college careers under suspicion from campus security. Sid Smith, a Black at Yale, says he is regularly stopped and asked to show an ID. ‘I’m used to it,’ he says…” Someday Black men will need a pass to be outside the reservation.

This is the thickening atmosphere in which six Black border babies are considered so threatening that their house must be firebombed by white community leaders and the police (who conveniently pulled their patrols out for two hours so it could be done).

Black men have been so successfully criminalized that it is now acceptable for some stores in Manhattan to refuse to serve them. The usual device is to keep the front door locked, with a buzzer that the customer pushes to be let in. But if a Black man is at the door, the store personnel flash a sign saying “by appointment only” and smile, refusing to open the door.

A clothing store owner was quoted in the press as saying: “I’m afraid race is the first thing in my mind. A young, dark-skinned boy is not likely to get in here.” More prosperous stores, like in Soho, hire a Black rent-a-cop and tell him to keep everyone like himself out. No joke. Or rather, it’s a sick joke, but it’s true.


Now, the thing these Manhattan stores have in common is that they’re owned or managed by white women. While segregation of public places is supposed to be illegal, when it’s posed as white women having to protect themselves from dark-skinned “animals” then it’s all right. White women are used as the symbols of victimization, just like the Deep South used to say that they needed lynchings to protect white women. It isn’t that these few stores are important in themselves; they are one more foot in the door, one more tool in getting us used to legal restrictions on the movements of Black people. A new day is coming.

White women, like Nazi women in the first stages of genocide against the Jews, are on the front lines. Only it’s disguised as women’s equal rights. The controversy earlier this at year Wellesley College outside Boston is an example of what’s going on. Henrietta Holsman, a 1970 alumna of the exclusive women’s college, had to resign from the board of trustees. Black women had begun protesting over a lecture by her on business management.

Ms. Holsman is the owner of Stockton Wire Products, a manufacturing firm in Los Angeles. She warned her white sisters it was hard finding good workers because Latins are”lazy” and Black men would rather go “back to the street to earn more money” pushing drugs.

When you put your white toes in your big white mouth that way, instead of saying the same thing in an indirect way or in sociolo-gese, then the rules say you gotta resign (whether you’re with the Los Angeles Dodgers or are a women’s college trustee).

This wasn’t merely one woman’s racist slip, though, because white faculty and administrators rushed in to defend and praise trustee Holsman. She was only doing not too well what she was supposed to do, it looks like.

Professor Marshal Goldman of the economics department told reporters that when Holsman said Black men were drug pushers she was only “describing her real life experiences on the factory floor”. He praised Ms. Holsman as a role model for young white women: “She is just the kind of person Wellesley is usually proud of. She is young, imaginative, a successful entrepreneur, and she was trying to share her experiences with other women.”

We got the message, all right. Black men are the criminal class. Don’t worry if there are no jobs for Black men, because they’d rather be criminals anyway. And don’t pay Latins too much because they’re “lazy”. This educational message brought to us courtesy of the faculty and administration of Ivy League Wellesley College for women.

And how are amerikkkan women different from those German women?

White women are being molded by the ruling class, just as German women were, to put their shoulders to the wheel of genocide, to help criminalize Black people. Since there are some women who will question, who will hesitate and even rebel, it has become the job of what is cynically called “the women’s movement” to keep our minds in line. i don’t want to hide the fact that i consider this an act by bought women against womankind.


Amerikkka has not forgotten the Black woman in all this. Not at all. They have the place of honor in the criminalization of Black men.

You see, they say it’s all Black women’s fault. And the kidnapping of Black children, it’s all their fault too. Remember Beth Fallon’s column in the N.Y. Post? “…people who are unable or unwilling to care for themselves or their children, and who abandon the latter to the care of the state.” That’s Black and Latin women she is talking about, although Fallon is a media pro and knows you can’t use names. Her white readers fill in the names anyhow.

‘Course, then they say that the reason there’s a Black male criminal class is that Black women are so strong and dominating that their sons grow up mentally maladjusted. Really, that’s what the ruling class keeps putting out, hoping that not only white folk but also Black people will believe it. Last year the N.Y. Times ran an editorial on this:

“Larry Davis allegedly shot six police officers during a gun battle last month. Shavod Jones shot a police officer in Central Park last summer and left him paralyzed. James Ramseur, now serving time for rape, was one of Bemard Goetz’s victims in the subway shooting two years ago.

“All three, and millions of others less notorious, are among the legion of young Black men who terrify urban neighborhoods… The need to do something about such young men is a concern now because so little was done for them when they were children. Indeed, their behavior vividly recalls Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s warning in 1965:

“‘A community that allows a large number of young men to grow up in broken families, dominated by women, never acquiring any stable relationship to male authority… That community asks for and gets chaos. Crime, violence, unrest, disorder… is not only to be expected; it is very near inevitable. And it is richly deserved.'”

The patriarchal ruling class wants us to believe that the criminalization of Black men had nothing to do with them. Oh, no. They want everyone, including many Black people, to believe that it grew out of psychological problems between Black women and Black men. That having strong mothers makes criminals out of their sons. It’s all women’s fault, as usual! Notice that they’re talking openly about “millions… the legion of young Black men” who are criminals as a class now.

U.S. Sen. Moynihan and the government insist that a household without a man is “broken”, like my old television set. As if women leading families isn’t as natural as mother nature. Hey, even Jesus’ father didn’t stick around, you know. i forgot, Jesus turned out to be a criminal, too–but it was Mary’s fault!

When the ruling class says that young Black men must have some male authority, that’s their way of saying more white male authority, and they don’t mean that they’re taking Larry Davis home with them to suburban Westchester. Amerikkka is going to “help” Black youth by putting them into white male-run institutions–the military and the prisons. The biggest housing boom in amerikkka right now is expanding the prison system to hold more and more Black men.

That N.Y. Times editorial ends by saying the Black youth need something like the Vietnam War-era military draft: “It provided what many young Black men never experience: exhaustive physical training, stern discipline, male authority figures, a sense of camaraderie and group purpose, rewards for jobs well done.” Is that a recruiting pitch for a gang?


By zero coincidence, that same day the newspaper had a story on the overcrowding crisis in the N.Y. state prison system, whose population is hitting 40,000 for the first time in history. State officials say that there is no limit in sight-other than finances-to how many Black men will be imprisoned: “You can’t build your way out of this. That’s the conclusion,” said a state prison official. “The more you build, the more they fill up.” Think about that statement.

One move the story says the state is considering are juvenile forced-labor camps, as a cheaper alternative to sending Black and Latin teens to the regular prisons. These “siberias” would be located in remote rural areas upstate: “The emphasis in the state camps would be on a curriculum of out-door labor and military-like discipline.”

New York state, having already expanded its prison system by 10,000 inmates in only 4 years, has just passed an emergency prison construction bill. In the next three years they will build two 500-bed maximum security prisons, three 700-bed medium security prisons, and will convert a juvenile facility into a 2,000-bed prison. New York City’s own prison system has grown by one-third to over 16,000 since 1983, is experiencing prison uprisings and court orders.

Mayor Koch is having two new 700-bed City prisons built far, far upstate near the Canadian border. When they built the Indian reservations they also placed them in remote areas to isolate the inmates.

Amerikkka has stopped building public housing, and has shifted the funds into building prisons for Black men. This is a stone fact. Prisons are to be the Black man’s new public housing projects, his special place in the rapidly growing Black reservation system. Does that sound so extreme that it’s impossible? Look at how in just a few years they’ve made young Black men from a working class into a criminal class. And think of what this means for the future. Think about what’s happening to Black children.

“We have lost our children, “said Rev. Floyd Rose of the Toledo NAACP. “When they get to high school age they are not in school and they are not in jobs, they are on the streets. By the year 2000 it is estimated that 70% of all Black men will be in jail, dead or on drugs, or in the throes of alcoholism.”

The most profound effect of the criminalization of Black men is not external, however, but is internal. Is to sabotage peoples’ minds. By convincing youth that they are criminals the ruling class re-injects the old colonial mentality only in a “rebellious” form.

Coming of age, they discover that the system has no place in it for their survival. Poor Black men are barred from real jobs, those that pay enough so you can have your own place and support children. Being homeless is becoming normal (60% of the NY shelter population are Black men).

Every year, as the system tightens another notch around their necks, more and more Black children get pushed out of school. In NYC 72% of Black teenage males become high school drop-outs. There was a high school graduation this June where there were 300 girls but only 25 boys. Only thing is, you get pushed out slickly, in a way that it looks like you’re the quitter, you’re the stupid failure.

Last Summer in NYC 7,000 entering high school students signed up for a City program where they would get remedial reading classes in the morning and part time paid jobs in the afternoon. Although all 7,000 got official letters promising them a job, the Board of Education lied since it had only proposed to provide half of the students jobs. The other half were supposed to drop out of the program to prevent drop-outs.

Since the City enrolled the remedial students in June, but the application deadline for these federally-funded jobs was in May, there were no jobs at all. Only after TV reporters showed up did Mayor Koch scrape up a few hundred Summer jobs.

At Bergtraum H.S. out of the 353 students that signed up only 3 got jobs from the program, despite the City’s promises. Many of the students dropped out in frustration. See, the program that said it was to prevent drop-outs really was a psychological warfare behavior-modification program, to take willing 14 and 15 year olds and condition them into becoming drop-outs.

And most who do graduate from “Colonial High” find that their u.s. colonial schooling has been so poor that they cannot pass the employment tests given at the phone company, the banks and other major corporations. So why not drop out? And that, too, is supposed to be Black peoples’ fault.

Coming of age, they learn that survival is illegal. To get around town you jump the subway tollgates or push thru the rear doors of buses. On April 15, 1987, all token booth clerks were counting the number of fare-beaters in a survey. 118,314 people jumped the subway gates that day. At some stations 40%, 50% or even 70% (the Franklin Park shuttle) of the riders are illegal.

Since 1982, the transit cops have issued 2,234,659 summons and arrested 51,409 fare-beaters. When you use your girlfriend’s food stamps or share her place it’s “welfare fraud”. Every little thing is illegal in some way, because the system no longer intends for you to survive.

If children see that survival is itself illegal, that they will not even have a place to live, will not have an education, will not have a real job, will not have a family except the streets, then what does it matter? Prison or death at an early age seem normal, and are. “Teenagers consider prison a rite of passage,” says Baltimore Mayor Kurt Schmoke. “They come to expect it.”

But to be criminalized is to still act within the imperialist system, because you have internalized the values of amerikkka within yourself. You are a colonial criminal instead of a guerrilla. Criminalization channels the instinctive rebellion and need for survival of Black youth back against their own people. Including back against themselves. It concedes the legitimacy of white authority while breaking its laws.

Colonial criminalization teaches young men, who come of age in a dying community where rules and bonds are disintegrating, that they are and should be “animals”. The idea is implanted that they should become lone predators preying on the powerless. The diseased values of the colonial system re-infect their view of the world. The Black Nation may rise, but the existing Black community in amerikkka is dying.

Ya can’t understand “Black-on-Black crime” without finally accepting that genocide is a real thing. Anyone with one brain cell still working knows that the cycles of killing and ripping each other off, of children killing themselves with dope and guns, that is overtaking the Black community is not normal crime. It is beyond crime.

You know, the politicians are not the opposites of the drug pusher and the “stickups”. They are the role models. Folks are only doing what their mis-leaders and schools and police have always said: do what they tell you to get along, prove how “we” are loyal amerikkkans, get over. So the kid who wants to mug the old lady with her check also says “We oughta bomb Khadaffi’s ass!” He eagerly paid his money to watch “Rambo”, cheers on “the Terminator”, carefully checks out Penthouse each issue. Amerikkka says hate your own people, kill your brother, make an addict out of your sister, and then kill yourself. And isn’t this what’s going down?

If you can’t escape the amerikkka in your heart, then you can’t escape genocide. Time is a thing.

Black men are starting to disappear. In the 1980 census, 14% of the expected Black male population in NYC was missing and went uncounted: dead, in prison, or living anonymously on the streets. “Black men in New York are more difficult to count than illegal aliens,” officials said.

But isn’t that the point?  Afrikans who were colonial subjects now are illegal aliens.


Each year more than 10,000 young Black men ages 15 to 19 are murdered, mostly by each other. That’s more deaths than the u.s. military had in Vietnam each year. It was safer to be a GI in Vietnam than it is to be a Black child in the housing projects. And most people still don’t want to see that the machinery of genocide has been started up. Someday everyone will see it, but we should see it now.

“Black-on-Black crime” has become the basis for the idea that Black people aren’t victimized by white amerikkka but by each other. NYPD Commissioner Ben Ward is the lead mouthpiece for this idea, pushing it to more and more outrageous positions all the time (white people love it). All an evening forum of the city association of Black journalists, Ward lashed out:

“And I believe Blacks are victims but we’re generally the victims of some other Black committing crimes against us. And the person who burglarizes your house today–when you come home and find there’s been a burglary committed, it’s probably going to be some young Black who burglarized… and probably going to be some young Black that mugs you on the way home.”

Commissioner Ward then defended the routine of white police always shooting down Black men as only natural: “…most of the crime committed in this city is committed by young Black males under 30 years of age. So who are you apt to be shooting at?” After Ward’s speech the press made sure to print sympathetic Black comments like these: “‘No white person comes into Bedford-Stuyvesant and rapes a grandmother, ‘ said Carlos Russell, a Brooklyn College professor.” And reverends lead mothers to the police station to demand more white police protection. A mental smoke screen is created to hide genocide. A paralyzing mental illusion is created, that only the “bad elements” will be killed off, and that the “good elements” are to be saved by amerikkka for the Bill Cosby Show.

This is only clinging to the illusion that the oppressor only wants better behavior and more conformity; an old, old story. Some Indians thought that, desperately clinging to straws. They converted to Christianity to show that they weren’t “savages”. They promised to help the white soldiers track down “criminal redskins”. But at the end were massacred along with their nations. They didn’t mind the popular settler saying, “The only good Indian is a dead Indian.”


Genocide amerikkkan-style masks itself as “natural” events and trends. So Black Genocide is not the white stormtroopers machine-gunning the ghetto. Instead, it’s the real estate developer shrinking the Black land base. It’s the guidance counselor sliding a child out of school. It’s the welfare administrator, the mysterious epidemics of infectious diseases, the addicting substances that somehow move from other continents to pop up on the housing project playground, the degrading reservation culture. It’s all accidental, all just the way things “naturally” worked out.

And just as the white genocidists signed treaties at every turn with the Indian Nations, each time swearing eternal friendship and to honor Indian rights, so the u.s. government passes Civil Rights acts and swears “Brotherhood” each and every year (genocide is Brother-hood).

The Black land base is shrinking. In New Afrika, the rural South, the white power structure is anticipating the final end of Black farming. “At their peak in 1920, there were 926,000 Black-operated farms…” By 1978 only 57,400 remained.

Black farms are disappearing by 50% every decade. At this rate there will be no Black-operated farms by the end of the century. A Nation of 40 million people will not “legally” have the elemental power to produce one bite of food for their children, or cloth for their clothing, or lumber for their homes.

White experts say that this is only natural, that white farms are failing, also. But Black farmers point to a conspiracy by the u.s. government and the local white power structures. Somehow Black farmers don’t get u.s. agriculture dept. crop loans, or get them too late to plant, don’t get all those farm subsidies white farmers get. And every time a Black farmer dies the county courthouse crowd tries to force the family to sell out to whites. And most of the time that’s what happens.

Like one of our cuter methods. A Black farmer dies, and they don’t have a will (because our lawyers discouraged them from making one). Then we rush to find all existing relatives who can possible inherit under our laws. Twenty people show up, some of whom don’t even know each other, to get their share of the estate. There is only one farm, and it must be sold under the law to satisfy all the claims. We buy for little money. Divide that among 20 people. Whoopee, they can each buy a new car which will die in three years. But now we have the land, the capital, the ability to produce. Aren’t we nice? So helpful.

And in the cities, the Black land base is being gradually hemmed in, shrinking block by block. Black communities are paradoxically the most valuable real estate opportunity in amerikkka. In Boston, the 12 1/2 sq. miles of the Black community of Greater Roxsbury is the only land adjacent to the downtown biz district that hasn’t been “developed”. White capitalists plan to spend $750 million buying and gentrifying it, to white-wash Black slums and replace Black housing with “integrated” condos and office buildings.

The City piles extra taxes on Black homeowners (an average of 227% higher than white homeowners in 1984) to put pressure on them to sell. City planners foresee the near total displacement of Roxbury’s Black community by the early 21st century. Where will they go? As the American Express television commercial says, ‘What will you do?”


When Black people don’t want to be removed, then they are attacked by white terrorism. In Crown Heights section of Brooklyn, the Hasidic Jewish gangs have been trying to drive Black home-owners out of this once all-Black neighborhood. The home of Willie Mae Reddish and her three sons was firebombed at 1:30am by two men who ran to hide in the Lubavitcher Hasidic religious school. Police say that they can’t find any suspects. Ms. Reddish simply said, “They want what we have.” “We allowed them to move in, thinking we could live together,” Emeline Nisbet said, “and now they want the whole thing.” Ms. Nisbet has been harassed by Hasidic Jews trying to take her home. And Mayor Koch has made a public statement that all the criminals in Crown Heights are Black.

In NYC many sections of Harlem and the South Bronx have lost half to two-thirds of their Black populations. Fifteen years of landlord arsons and City tax delinquency take-overs have emptied whole blocks (the City owns 60% of all Harlem buildings), either to shelve them for future middle-class gentrification or to simply reduce Black housing. On the West Side, yuppie condominiums have already pushed over ten blocks into what used to be the border of Black Harlem.

i mean, Blacks and Latins formerly occupied one-third of all the land in Manhattan, where today white yuppies are paying $800-$1000 per room in rent, where it costs $100,000 to buy a studio condominium. Try and guess what one-third of Manhattan is worth. Billions? And that’s just one city. As with the Indian Nations, displacing Black people from the land is not an expense for amerikkka, but a windfall of immense profits.

Black urban communities have been gutted by “integration”. What is common is the wiping out of Black shops, restaurants, skilled trades, and small businesses that were the service infrastructure of the old Black community. In Miami, the Black community of 250, 000 had at the time of the 1980 Liberty City uprising, only two clothing stores and one hardware store owned by Black people. Yet, Liberty City was once a more complete and thriving community.

“When the racial barriers went down” in the late 1960s, “Blacks poured into the white stores, restaurants, hotels–devastating the Black-run economy almost overnight. Overtown, a section once called the ‘Harlem of the South’, used to play host to Sarah Vaughan and Duke Ellington; the dining room of its Sir John Hotel provided linen tablecloth and silver. Today, Overtown is a ghost city; its stores are abandoned and its streets populated by junkies and stray dogs.” Black people have been systematically starved out of Miami’s economy. Black factory workers were 10.3% of the Miami Black community in 1968, but only 2.2% in 1978 after a decade of “integration”.

In 1960, Black people owned 25% of all Miami gas stations, but by 1979 owned only 9%. Cubans had taken over the other 18% of Miami gas stations formerly owned by Black people. This change was government policy.

In those years, 1968 to 1979, the Small Business Administration in Miami loaned an equal $47 million to Cubans and $47million to whites, but only $6.4 million to Black small businesses. Black women are not even being hired as cleaning staff in the resort hotels anymore. As a final touch, urban renewal placed huge new expressways around the border of the Black community, physically blocking them off from downtown Miami. It looks like a military plan. From a community to a reservation in less than twenty years.

Land, a stable territory, is the basis of nationhood. It is the basis of community, without which there is no real independence or economy. So when amerikkka begins a program, North as well as South, urban as well as rural, to dispossess Black people from their territory and remove them into nowhere, it signals that what was done to the Indian Nations is now planned for the Black Nation.

Black people with education are still needed for white-collar jobs, but already for the bottom half, the Black underclass, there is no longer a place for them inside north amerikkka outside the reservation (projects, shelters, prisons). Like the Indians before them, the Black underclass are becoming nomads and squatters, homeless. They are dying.

Everything that kills Black people is encouraged. Drug addiction is the clearest example. Everyone knows that heroin and cocaine are killing Black people more efficiently than firing squads could. Drugs are getting Black children to kill each other. And everyone also knows that all this is coming from somewhere else. i mean, Black people aren’t growing any dope plants in jungles, they’re not flying airplanes full of it across oceans, they’re not the folks with badges and guns who enforce things, so it’s got to be coming from someone else.


Drug addiction in the Black community is really a u.s. government program, a counter-insurgency project run by the Central Intelligence Agency. The C.I.A. has always supplied most of the hard drugs for the ghetto dope traffic, while local police supply protection for the big pushers. This is a fact. It’s an unreported news story smoldering away in the back of the white closet.

As the Yankee traders did with the opium traffic in 19th century China, the C.I.A. has left the stateside distribution and street sales of the drugs to local “natives”. It controls the source, the production. In doing so it kills two birds with one stone. For the C.I.A. has used Black and Latin drug sales to finance its covert wars in Asia and Central Amerika.

While the u.s. military was busy invading Vietnam in the 1960s, the C.I.A. itself was having to operate and finance several other Asian wars all by itself. In the neighboring country of Laos, the C.I.A. had formed what it named “The Secret Army” out of 15,000 mercenaries (mostly Meo tribesmen led by General Vang Pao). Their task was to destabilize the shaky Lao neutralist government, and replace it with one of C.I.A. employees. In neutral Burma, the C.I.A. was sponsoring yet another war, this time by the 20,000 soldier “Shan State Army”. It was a right-wing Christian ethnic insurgency. There as well the goal was to install a C.I.A. led government.

Financing wars is very expensive, even for amerikkka. So the u.s. government turned to Southeast Asia heroin trafficking to help pay for its dirty wars in the Third World. C.I.A. airplanes from the front company, “Air America”, flew into the jungles with guns and flew out with dope. Most of the heroin used in the Black community comes from C.I.A. sources, the deadly profits used to feed and pay salaries for secret Asian armies. And shoot up the Black Nation, too. There was a sixties saying: “Uncle Sam is the pusher man.” In the Sixties the Black community found itself flooded with new supplies of high-grade heroin from Asia, supplied by the C.I.A.’s Asian armies, at the same time that thousands of Black GIs were coming home addicted. In ‘Nam, drugs were cheap, easy to get, all but legal. The C.I.A. was preparing its future market at home.

Now, the C.I.A. has taught the heroin trade to its latest pupils, the Afghan Islamic rebels. They now supply most of the heroin used by Black addicts. These are the same men that Ronnie says are “freedom fighters”, who rebelled against the pro-Russian government when it recognized Afghan women’s right of divorce.


A N.Y. Times report from Afghan rebel-held territory admitted the role of the drug trade:

“In the shade of an ancient tree to the side of a field where the farmers worked in Musa Qala, an Islamic teacher explained the importance of opium to the rebels. [opium from poppy plants is made into heroin]

“‘How else can we get money?’ said the teacher, an elderly man named Mohammed Rasul with a thick gray-and­black beard and large, watery eyes. His brother, Nazim Akunzada, is regarded by other rebels as the most powerful commander in the Helmand Province. They say his family has large land holdings that include extensive poppy fields.

“‘We must grow and sell opium to fight our Holy War against the Russian nonbelievers,’ Mr. Rasul said. Comments like these were heard from dozens of rebels throughout the journey…

“International anti-narcotics officials in Pakistan say they believe that Afghanistan is the largest single source of illicit opium… A State Department report in February described Afghanistan and the bordering tribal areas of Pakistan as ‘the world’s leading source of illicit heroin exports to the United States and Europe.'”

Straight from the C.I.A. to the housing project playground.

And the u.s. government, which gives the dope growers their guns and is their connect to the outside world, it doesn’t know what’s going on? Give us a break. They plan for Malcolm’s grandchildren to be junkies.

You can stuff all that “freedom fighter”, “Islamic Holy War”, blah blah. These are just more sick men with their sick religions, who want to keep women enslaved and get over selling dope. That’s why they and Ronnie get it on.

And in NYC the NYPD has been the muscle protecting the ghetto dope traffic, particularly protecting the cocaine distribution until it got firmly rooted. Oh, they make their usual number of busts, and sooner or later everyone Black on the street gets busted, but never interfering with the dope system itself. Everything that kills Black people is encouraged.


This is heavy but it’s not a paranoid thing, it’s a fact. There’s a good source for it–Police Commissioner Ben Ward himself. When Ward was speaking before the association of Black journalists this year, he was getting hot under the collar as his flunky remarks brought choruses of boos and hisses. Finally, Ben lost his cool and blurted out:

“I don’t think you can just stand and hiss and complain as we hear it here….. I am catching more hell from you than McGuire [former commissioner] ever caught from any of you and McGuire allowed 800, 800 storefront drugstores to be opened in this city and not a damn thing was done about narcotics enforcement for six years!”

Check that out. The police knew about the dope parlors opening up in the Black and Latin communities, even kept a count of them. But the police commissioner gave orders to let them alone. That’s what they say. If we can’t see what that means we’d better get retreaded. But when Black people try and stop drug dealers, which means with force, then police wake up and arrest those opposing the pushers. Is that a coincidence, or a program?

Black drug addiction is not an “uncontrolled epidemic”, as some say. It is very controlled. It is u.s. chemical-bacteriological warfare towards Black Genocide. It’s so open, so pervasive in the Black community as misery and the need to feel good chemically get deeper, that it has de facto become semi-legalized and normal.

Some people in the system say they might as well go all the way and formalize things, legalizing heroin and cocaine sales to Black people. Baltimore Mayor Kurt Schmoke, who is the former states attorney and is on the u.s. justice department’s “Committee on Research on Law Enforcement”, has called for a study on de-criminalizing drugs (kids could buy crack at the corner grocery store):

“My sense is that if we decriminalize it, one impact would be to drop the bottom out of the market. The cost of drugs would drop, and, one hopes, related crime, including murder.”

However, the C.I.A. doesn’t want to “drop the bottom out of the market”, or to reduce Black crime, especially Blacks killing Blacks. And no one is going to arrest the ruling class, after all. But the discussion of legalizing hard drug sales to Black people, formally or informally, shows how the system is getting people to accept the mass addiction of Black youth as normal.

Notice that the drug epidemic has intersected and combined with the AIDS epidemic? More coincidences. You heard about so-called designer drugs? Well, AIDS is like a designer disease. An incurable disease that comes out of nowhere, with no known origin, and that targets gay men, drug addicts, Afrikans and Latins. Just who amerikkka wants to get rid of.


Around the world most folks think that AIDS is a man-made virus secretly developed as a CBW (chemical-bacteriological warfare) weapon by the u.s. military. And that it got loose while being secretly tested on Afrikans. You know that’s exactly who they’d test it on. A series by the Washington Afro-American kept finding that answer to where AIDS came from:

“It is the theory of one local geneticist, who does not want to be identified in this piece, that the AIDS virus could have resulted from a major flaw in the manipulation of a virus.

“And he pointed to the medical and military communities reluctance to probe this obvious possibility and simple explanation for the spread of AIDS as a clear indication of a ‘cover up’.”

The Afro-American noted that in 1950 the u.s. army secretly sprayed the bacteria serratia marcescens from airplanes over San Francisco. The germ was supposed to cause mild respiratory ailments, like a cold, which from local doctors’ reports would allow the military to measure how effective its aerial spraying techniques were. The u.s. later had to admit that serratia marcescens was an “opportunistic” infection which could produce fatal respiratory problems in already ill or weakened patients. A small number of Black victims did die.

In 1951 the navy coated the outside of ten wooden cargo containers with bacteria in another secret CBW test. The experiment was to see how the bacteria would be transmitted to men unwittingly handling the boxes at a Pennsylvania supply depot. A report on the test said:

“Of the three infectious bacteria, aspergilus fumigatis had been specifically chosen because Black workers at the base would be particularly susceptible to it.”

Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, the u.s. military secretly tested many CBW agents on unknowing  Afrikans, both in the u.s. and overseas (such as in Savannah, Georgia and in the Bahamas), before promising congress that any such experiments would be banned. But medical researchers now believe that remote Central  Afrikan villages had AIDS back in the 1950s, but were wiped out in isolation and no one in the West ever heard about it. Could AIDS be an old experiment in genocide that eventually escaped the testing grounds? Or is it a new genetic weapon of imperialist science to reshape society?

What is certain is that AIDS is going to savage the Black community. In New York City as of mid-1987 there are already 50,000 women who have the AIDS virus, 80% of them Black and Latin. B.D. Colen, Newsday science editor, has written that the AIDS threat to straight middle-class whites is being deliberately exaggerated to cover up the specificity of the target:

“When public health officials don’t tell you, for fear of being called racist, is that when they talk about the dramatic increase in heterosexual AIDS, they are really talking about a dramatic increase in AIDS among poor Black and Hispanic women.”


The United Nations definition of genocide includes not only the physical extermination of a nation or people, but also the death of their culture. Biological survival of individuals or families is not necessarily survival of a people or nation. Without their culture, which is their distinctive way of life, their language and traditions, their own way of interacting with nature, a people as such no longer exist.

Also, culture is a survival mechanism, and without it a people cannot defend themselves. The ruling class understood this when they set up the Indian reservation system in the 1870s, which pretended to “protect” Indians by confining them to areas of land too small or barren to sustain their old way of life. These were the first u.s. housing projects, the first Welfare system. And then Indian children were to be “saved” by being sent away to bureau of indian affairs boarding schools off the reservation. This was not voluntary. Selected children were just physically taken.

Many thousands of Indian children were tortured for years in these behavior­modification prisons, which were upfront Intended to de-Indianize them, to wipe out all Indian culture in their minds. Children had to wear white clothing, follow white middle-class rules and customs, speak only u.s. English. Any time a child spoke in their native tongue they were hit. They were kept isolated from their families. Many children were destroyed.

The plan was to gradually manufacture generations of imprisoned “colorless” people who would not be Indian. Who wouldn’t know what Indians knew or think as Indians thought. Despite successful Indian children’s resistance (another untold story), the u.s. government stubbornly persisted in this reach for cultural genocide of Indian children until the stormy 1960s (now they’ve only changed tactics). Genocide begins with the children.


Not the serial rapist or the child rapist, but the Black woman who dares to control her life, the lives of her children, and the life of her Nation. This is the ultimate sexual crime in a world dominated by Euro-imperialism.

Here in 1987, Daniel Patrick Moynihan is once again the cats-paw, leading the social-engineering necessary for genocide. But what Moynihan is saying today is not what he was saying in the Sixties. So there is Moynihan I and Moynihan II. Now, Moynihan and the ruling class aren’t saying one word about any jobs for Black men, or about racism. The whole problem, according to Moynihanism, is that shiftless welfare mothers don’t want to work and support their children. So amerikkka has to discipline them. White man’s discipline.

Mayor Koch has gone on television with his snide, insulting pleas for welfare mothers to go get a job: “Work is good for you. Try it, you’ll really like it.” As if it was their choice. Moynihan is attacking them in print as women who are so sick that they have neither a job nor a husband:

“Imagine a state with a population one quarter larger than Delaware’s. Almost a quarter million families (241,000) live in this state, but there are no adult males. The adult males live somewhere else; where else no one is quite sure… In these circumstances, the female heads of these families are forced to look for work. However, of the nearly quarter million such women, only about 6,300 have found work, and most of the jobs are part-time.

“Shall we call this state Delaware on Hudson? For the population described above lives in New York City. It is called the welfare population.

“What exotic pattern of in-migration, out-migration, social expectation turned upside down, economic ruin, social disaster, and now, finally, plague have brought about this society without fathers?”

Moynihan is upfront in saying that mothers with young children could work if they really wanted to, so he wants to force them.

“What we allowed, in Goodman’s words, was for parents to ‘walk out on their kids’ lives, letting them slide down the economic chute.’…Where some 72 percent of women with children are in the work force (54% of women with children under age 6), less than 5 percent of welfare recipients are in the work force.”

Just like Black men, Black women of the underclass are being criminalized, too. As sexual criminals, who are having children against white orders, who are defending their children when amerikkka wants them to die.


Black women are being slammed as sluts, drug addicts, unfit mothers, sexual criminals. ‘Cause if you want to commit genocide that’s where you got to strike. You’ve got to neutralize Black women as women, eradicate them. You’ve gotta drive them out of housing, nuke them with male violence, flood them with crack, all as a pretext to take their children. You’ve got to separate Black women from their children, and demand that they stop having children. Only, you got to say it’s all just your liberal concern for the poor.

This is the new attack of Moynihan and Moynihan-ism.

Moynihan is sponsoring a welfare reform act which is only a pretext to force more Black children into the hands of white men. His “Family Security Act” would force welfare mothers to take either low-wage jobs or no-wage work for local government. Being an unpaid clerk at the welfare office or mopping the floor at the daycare center. Or else. There’s a “historic bipartisan consensus” on this kind of plan in some form.

“Workfare” it’s misnamed. But it isn’t about work. It’s about smashing Black and Latin women apart from their kids. It’s so disruptive, so out there and extreme, that some welfare agencies are themselves protesting to the media:

“Megan E. McLaughlin, executive vice-president of the Federation of Protestant Welfare Agencies, complained that when benefits are cut to mothers who do meet work requirements, they cannot provide for their families and are at risk of having their children placed in foster care…‘Senator Moynihan’s bill goes beyond benign neglect. It is a deliberate plan to remove children from families that he considers unworthy…

Hey, what they’re saying is that there really is a conspiracy, in the highest levels of the government, to kidnap hundreds of thousands more Black children. To target and destroy Black families led by women.

When Dick says “welfare reform”, “job counseling”, what it’s really going to play out to in the end is desperate women trying to hold that low-wage or no-wage job while taking care of kids in the shelters, in welfare hotels. Doubling and tripling up in rooms in disappearing slums. Praying that you don’t get sick. Praying that you don’t lose your job because your kids get sick and have to wait for hours at the clinic. It means being squeezed off welfare, losing that job, and not getting back on unless you give up your children to foster care (“It’s for their own good!”).

Moynihan’s “Family Security Act” reads: “Would require that all recipients of cash assistance with children age 3 or older (with state option to drop the age to 1) participate, at State direction, in the JOBS program.”

Of course, adequate childcare won’t be provided for most kids. And if you get laid off or lose your apartment, or if you get ill, then you’ll lose custody of your children because under the “reform” you won’t really be permitted to get back on welfare with them. It’s a one-way trip.

Before, when the ruling class wanted lots of Black labor, Black women were told to have large families, husbands or no. The slavemaster would rape Afrikan women to get more slave children. When Black labor was needed in Southern agriculture and Northern factories, Black women were expected to raise many children. But now that the patriarchal ruling class wants to erase the Color Black from north amerikkka, now they say it’s immoral and wrong for Black women to have children, since they can’t support them. Or, to be more precise, since white amerikkka doesn’t want Black women to support them. But it’s not about labor or money, anymore.

And all the while the power structure is pressuring, squeezing. Cutting back Black employment on the one hand while on the other making welfare less and less livable. In NYC, between 1970 and 1986, the aid to dependent children benefits of the average welfare family were actually cut 38%. And no one in government is proposing to raise this.

What they’re saying is that white economics must rule Black women’s sexuality, the nature of the Black family, and whether the Black population grows or declines. As though they were cattle. But it’s not about economics, it’s about disarming the Black Nation. They don’t want Black women to raise Black warriors and Black amazons. They want less and less Black people.

Propaganda for their fantasy nuclear family is only the lever for tighter government control of women’s bodies and women’s lives. In the 1960s, Moynihan hoped that u.s. imperialism could use Black men to control Black women. They’ve given up on that. Now, they see that white men have to directly impose control over Black women.

To do this the patriarchal ruling class has called in all their helpers. Not only Ronnie and Moynihan and Mayor Crazy Ed, but the white women’s movement and the puppet Black middle-class men. Everyone is in on the attack against Black women. From all angles, on all fronts.


In the Black community there have always been sexist voices supporting Moynihan-ism. Back in the 1970s the cry for male supremacy was so loudly intertwined with Black Power politics that even many Black women intellectuals, like sociologist Joyce Ladner, felt compelled to agree:

“The bold assertion of Black masculinity has required that Black women redefine their roles… The ‘traditional strong’ Black woman has probably outlived her usefulness because this role has been challenged by the Blackman.”

Many middle-class Black leaders openly hold that Black women must be subordinate, and should not have families without a man to run things. Robert Staples put this on front street, not in Hustler or Penthouse where it belongs, but in the pages of Black Scholar, a prestigious academic journal:

“That Black men are not staying with their families is due to a confluence of certain factors, not the least among them is the fact that some women make the decisions and desertion is his form of masculine protest… Desertion, moreover, is the lower­class male’s style of exercising his masculine perquisite.”

To Black sociologist Robert Staples, for Black men to desert their children is the “masculine” thing to do, just asserting yourself. While Black women shouldn’t be strong or independent–“femininity” is defined as being submissive and white as can be. Sexism and Black Genocide go together as the old saying sez, like a horse and carriage. Black Scholar prints this stuff not because they’re necessarily defending it, but because it typifies a major point of view in the community.

“The middle-class Black male, with a wider range of choices, screens out the strong Black woman beforehand in his choice of mates. Anyone who has met the typical middle-class Black wife knows she scores higher on the ‘femininity’ scale than her unmarried counterpart. Some middle-class Black men turn to white women who fit even better the model of femininity as set forth in this country….

“Is this sexism? I guess so. It is, also, a matter of personal choice that cannot be denied men. They have the right to choose a woman that meets their perceived needs, even if their exercise of that right limits the life options of women…”


That same sexism is being directed by the patriarchal ruling class in its campaign to stop Black women from having babies. Even ‘tho Black women, married and single alike, are having less babies now than at any time in u.s. history. Even ‘tho there are less Black babies on welfare in 1987 than there were 15 years ago. “Less” is not good enough for white people. None, zero, zip, da nada, is their real goal for Black children.

And it isn’t about giving Black women the right to control their own bodies, either. That right is a life-giving thing, and every mother wants her daughter to escape (you know what i mean), But what masks itself as “population planning”, “pro-family values”, “unwed mothers crisis”, and blah and so forth, is just a campaign to place tighter white male controls on Black women’s sexuality.

Look at the ridiculous scandal and fury this Summer over Liz Walker’s pregnancy. Thirty-six years old, single, and earning a good living, Walker decided that she couldn’t wait any longer to have a baby. So what? What made it a big deal is that she is the first Black news co-anchor at Boston’s WBZ-TV. No one could say that Liz Walker couldn’t support her baby, or that she’s an unfit parent. What they did say was that as a role model, she had given up her right to have a child without a husband.

All the middle-class sexists white and Black alike were trashing her. “We are trying to create proper values, this is precisely the wrong kind of signal to send”, said Rev. Earl Jackson of Roxbury Baptist Church. “What she’s doing is wrong.” Dr. James Comer, head of child psychiatry at Yale University, told the press that he was “disappointed” in Liz Walker.

Syndicated columnist Carl Rowan attacked Liz Walker’s pregnancy in print as “destructive”, and added: “What we have is a national social tragedy.” To them any more Black babies is a crisis. While “role model” means to follow white men’s orders down into Black Genocide.


Now that Black Genocide is underway, corporations are getting more relaxed, saying that poor Black women won’t get hired because of their looks. Yes, we’ve gotten so cocky about killing Black women and children off that businesses don’t have to use those tired-out lies any more (you know: “I’d really love to hire you, but we need someone with computer background who speaks nine European languages and has five years experience in aerospace engineering, sorry.”).

Ms. Susan Purser, an official with a Boston job retraining program, says that one of her Black trainees has a good chance under corporate hiring rules:

“I think I can place her easily. She’s thin, she looks good and she does not have that street language that often goes against Blacks.”

If white men don’t like the way you look or the way you talk, then you have no right to feed your family, no right to live.

Ms. Purser says that the current business thinking about hiring poor Black women is: “You have to look good, be able to spell, not be too fat, have all your teeth-and all that for $5 an hour.”

Black women of the underclass will never have regular employment, concedes Samuel Ehrenhalt, federal bureau of labor statistics regional commissioner in NYC: “The problem is single mothers in poverty, Mr. Ehrenhalt said. ‘The circumstances under which these mothers would enter the labor force seem very remote,’ he said.”

If poor Black women are supposed to get off welfare, but should not expect real jobs, isn’t that the same message amerikkka gave to the Indian Nations? The program is not survival but death, dying out.

Since they are women, as a final insult, the ruling class puts out that it’s all their fault, that it’s just because poor Black women look wrong, aren’t attractive enough to live. “Yes, boss, you’re right,” say the Robert Staples and the other puppet Black middle-class men. Criminalizing Black women has become a career for more than just Daniel Patrick Moynihan in this Land of Equal Opportunity.


And white women, where are we in all this? It’s hard to find us. The so-called women’s movement says, “we don’t have the same program as Ronnie”–but they do. Only on the second front of attack, around the back. What position do you expect from the patriarchy? Still, women are the key. You have to separate Black women from Black children. And you’ve got to convince white women that it’s not an attack on women, that it’s ok.

N.O.W. isn’t a women’s movement but is the patriarchy’s program for women. Just the same as the German middle-class feminists of the 1930s, who decided to work for equality with Nazi men within the genocide system. Genocide, those German feminists said, was not a woman’s issue. And Jewish women were not really women to them, just as Black women at the Martinique Hotel aren’t really women to us.

If Euro-amerikkkan women wanna be something different than Dicks without pricks, then we’d better turn our backs (or guns) on the drive for full equality within Dick’s house. Because it is a slaughter house with us as the butchers.

We siphon off just enough Black political women to use as ammunition for our battles for privilege, or as sprinkles to make us feel better while we do our white thing. We pull from the New  Afrikan Nation, from the Black community, just enough to nourish us. But we put nothing back. Not one drop of our sweat or our blood.

Genocide, after all, is not a “women’s issue”. Not for Dick’s women, anyway.


The media loved to picture women’s liberation as a freaky white thing, but the facts show differently. In 1972, Louis Harris-Virginia Slims opinion polls revealed that while only a 35% minority of white women expressed “sympathy with efforts of women’s liberation groups”, a 67% majority of Black women polled identified with the statement.

Radical women’s organizing found thousands of receptive minds at the end of the 1960s. Women’s liberation was irresistible, an “idea whose time has come.” And in the beginning it was explicitly revolutionary, trying to link rebellious white women up with the Third World. The most popular political poster on college dormitory room walls was the famous one of the young Vietnamese woman guerrilla holding a rifle.

At the June 1967 national conference of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), the main white student antiwar group of the Sixties, the women’s liberation workshop explored the relationship between themselves and the Third World:

“AS we analyze the position of women in capitalist society and especially in the United States we find that women are in a colonial relationship to men and we recognize ourselves as part of the Third World… Women, because of their colonial relationship to men, have to fight for their own independence. This fight for our own independence will lend to the growth and development of the revolutionary movement in this country.”

This, as we now know, didn’t see how deep women’s colonialization really is. Women have a colonial relationship to men, but white women are not part of the Third World. For white women live the contradiction of being oppressed and also being the oppressor, being aggressed upon and yet being aggressors, having white privileges without having white power. If we think about it, what could be more colonized than for women to join in men’s crimes?

This brings us back to the relationship between Black Genocide and the women’s movement for white equality.

If the just-starting women’s liberation movement had survived it would have divided white society, and would have seriously endangered the plans for Black Genocide. Born out of the sparks from Black Liberation, with its own revolutionary pulse, women’s liberation would have been a guerrilla movement behind enemy lines. It might have sabotaged the machinery of genocide. Just as the student antiwar movement did to the invasion of Vietnam. Once was more than enough for amerikkka’s ruling class. Black Genocide and, indeed, stabilizing the white home base, required dealing with the new women’s liberation movement.


The power structure neutralized women’s liberation by smothering it under the “neutra-sweet” women’s movement for white equality. And then pretended that they were both the same thing. The latter movement is more like a u.s. government social-engineering program than a real movement.

Tuning into the dissatisfaction that white middle-class women had, the u.s. ruling class had even earlier encouraged them to escape being only housewives, and promised them some of the economic and social advantages that their white brothers and husbands had.

Years before there was any white women’s struggle, any protests, any organizations, the ruling class was urging white women to have “Civil Rights” of their own. In 1960, the problem of the “trapped housewife” was promoted by the media, with stories in Time, Newsweek, Redbook, Good Housekeeping, Harpers Bazaar, and on a CBS Television Report.

President John F. Kennedy set up a President’s Commission on the Status of Women in December 1961, and many governors followed by setting up state commissions on women. All without any militant white women’s protests, or even mass civil disobedience, as had taken place during the much earlier Women’s Suffrage movement. The initiative was coming down from the power structure.

The 1963 Civil Rights Act contained a clause, Title VII, which not only prohibited discrimination by race, color, religion, and national origin, but also on the basis of sex. That same year Betty Friedan’s Feminine Mystique was published and became a bestseller. It’s main thrust was on middle-class white women’s right to escape the “comfortable concentration camp” of housewifery, and to pursue careers alongside her white husband.

Finally, the National Organization ofWomen–N.O.W.–was founded on October 26, 1965, by white women attending a Washington D.C. luncheon for members of official state women’s commissions. From the start its main purpose was to pass better legislation for white equality. As Betty Friedan scrawled on a paper napkin at the luncheon: “full equality for women in a fully equal partnership with men.” N.O.W. is still the only national women’s organization, an “umbrella group” with some 150,000 members, 765 chapters, offices and paid staff.

N.O.W. was a counter-insurgency operation against sisterhood, keeping discontented white women loyal to the white male power. Officially designated women role models (they aren’t leaders because white women have no leaders of our own) say getting accepted by the system, the male system, is where it’s at.

Ms. magazine’s socialite editor, said this year:

“There’s much more activity on campuses now than in the ’60s and 70s. We’re used to thinking about campus activism in male ways, such as rioting and burning buildings. We’re also used to thinking of a radical as somebody who drops out. For women, it’s more radical to drop in.”

And yet N.O.W. is not the problem. The male-sanctioned movement for white equality is a natural thing in this society, and was always going to be here. It’s uncontested success comes from the contradiction in the radical feminism of the 1970s. That was much more the problem. Radical feminists believed in the unity of white women just as much as their liberal sisters did. While sisterhood demands the dis-unity of white women.

What white women have united behind is getting more money for themselves, to put it bluntly. Their own economic advancement is the only common ground that liberals and radical feminists, marriage reformers and lesbian separatists, can agree upon. Sisterhood demands the dis-unity of white women. Demands that women who want to find a way of life without colonialism, whatever the price, break away from those women who intend to profit from colonialism. And i mean colonialism in all senses of the word.

Women’s liberation was lost because feminists wanted to separate somewhat from white men while still dining at the same long table. Jane didn’t want to share Dick’s bed and certainly didn’t want to pick up after him, but she was hooked on the goodies in Dick’s house. Jane wanted to be Dick’s favorite sister, with a little room of her own in his big white house. Despite its great breakthrough, radical feminism lost direction because it wasn’t radical enough about colonialization.

Without any wars, without any Mississippis, middle-class white women were handed the economic advancement they wanted. Capitalism wanted them to have it. Black women had once demanded the right to eat at the lunch counter, but white women wanted to own the restaurant. And now they do.

Mary King is a good example of this new equality for white women. Growing up in New York as the daughter of a Southern Methodist minister, she left college to join the southern Civil Rights movement. By 1964 Mary King had taken major responsibilities for communications and press relations at SNCC headquarters.

When she and other white women were forced out by the tide of Black Power in 1965, she was bitter: “I was terribly disappointed for a long time… I was most affected by the way that the Black women turned against me. That hurt more than the guys.” She turned to liberal women’s consciousness raising.

In the new climate, the Mary Kings were welcomed back into the white clan. When the Carter Administration took over Washington in 1976, King became assistant director of the VISTA program. She married Dr. Peter Bourne, President Carter’s advisor on drug abuse. Bourne became famous for helping to popularize cocaine use, declaring to the press that it was a non-addicting recreational drug. Last heard of, Mary King was the executive director of a council for u.s. investment in the Arab world. Middle-class white women have come a long way, indeed. All the way back home.

On the 20th anniversary of the founding of N.O.W., Betty Friedan accurately said: “NOW went beyond our wildest dreams. Our daughters take it for granted that they will play in the Little League, that they can be astronauts and that they can run for President. It broke through the barriers of explicit sex discrimination.”

Because that’s tha way the power structure wanted it.


White men didn’t like this, but the government and corporations forced it on them. Without a vote, either. Irregardless of what men feel, the system needed white women’s role to change for a series of related reasons. In the era of government-controlled Civil Rights, white women have been designated as the largest “minority”. Thus, white people are both the majority and the “minority” that needs special consideration. Black people have suggested that while they are sympathetic to white women’s need for jobs and income, the whole thing looks like a con game. Welcome to amerikkka!

Check it out: In the 13 equal opportunity years before Ronnie, from 1966 to 1979, the total Black share of all professional jobs rose to only 4.1%. And a disproportionate share of those Black professionals are poorly-paid schoolteachers and caseworkers.

In sharp contrast, during those 13 years the share of all professional jobs held by white women zoomed from 13% to 31.6%. So that in 1966 whites held 96.5% of all professional jobs, but 13 years of equal opportunity later the total white share was still 90.5%.

White women are, in fact, the main economic beneficiaries of Civil Rights. “‘Educated white women are really members of the family,’ said Dr. Phyllis A. Wallace, a professor at the Sloan School of Management at M.I.T., who serves on corporate boards.” The family of man.

White unity is what it’s all about. The ruling class needs and is getting a unified white society to carry out Black Genocide. Unlike the mess it got into over the Vietnam War. White women were given a stake in the system to control them. White women are owning more real estate, more land, more small businesses, make up over half the students at many law schools, are becoming government officials and doctors, executives and military officers.

Naturally, the command centers of this patriarchal society are closed to them, since the top circle of business and government will always be the Men’s Room. But white women have come so far, so fast, that they are proud just to be junior partners at the bottom of the patriarchy. Too bad all those Black women and children have to die, they think, but look at all the real estate it opens up. White women missed out in the land-grab when the Indian Nations were wiped out and reservationized back in the 18th and 19th centuries, so they’re determined not to be left out of the new looting as Black people are reservationized and exterminated.

White women’s equality is only another name for Black Genocide. ‘Cause the real question in equality is, equal to what?


Only, how come there’s more and more male violence of all kinds against women here? Sexual harassment and rape is amerikkka’s amateur sport. Serial murder? We’ve become numb, used to it. Violence against women is men’s mass movement. They had to have one of their own, you know.

Because this is white unity, too. This is the flip side of the coin. White equality has two sides. Black Genocide is one, and mass violence against women is the other. And the so-called women’s movement can deal with neither problem, can’t even confront the two problems.

The ruling class needs white men to be white men, to be their violent, racist, greedy, immoral, self-centered and manipulatible selves. So it has to let them, threatened and angry as they are over women’s existence, take it out on women and children in an increasing frenzy of hatred.

Don’t fool ourselves. There is no end in sight, you know, until women end it. This is white unity, too. This is what the system lets white men do. If you’re a white woman you can get your own American Express card, but men get to rape you if they want to. Fair is fair, in the family of man.

And the women’s movement for white equality, what of it there is, is paralyzed like a bunny staring at a snake and can’t do anything. In fact, they don’t even want to think too much about male violence. They wanna think about their fav subject, more money.

i mean, this is the heart of the beast. Without which capitalism or any other oppressive system could not live. For 5,000 years men have held women and children as property, to be used, sold, bought, exploited, raped, beaten and killed as they wanted to. All the institutions of male civilization, most certainly including all religion and the nuclear family, reinforce this. Do you think men can be made non-dangerous with a law, a speech, a little psychology, that 5,000 years of habitual sickness can be wished away? This is it, the heart of the beast, what it’s all about.

Like Black Genocide, male violence against women can only be stopped with a 9mm, with political-military methods. Only Amazons can protect women. And there is increasingly no safety in this world, only a choice of what future to risk for, what values to have.

But the women’s movement for white equality can’t lift a finger to stop male violence, because it wants to join the patriarchy as junior partners, not abolish it. There is no way to have “career advancement” while risking your life to end oppression. And while white women don’t want to feel responsible for Black Genocide, neither do they want to miss out on the profits from it. While these white women have borrowed powerful words and phrases from the Black struggle–“liberation”, “sisters”–they don’t live those ideas.

Most white women, although uneasy and worried about the violence, have clearly decided to live with it in order to go along with the system. Each is hoping it’ll be that other woman who gets trapped by that sick guy (you know, “Otherwoman”). Their role models tell them to keep thinking about money, about how they’re getting accepted by the system.


We gotta think about choices. All the time the sand is shifting underneath us. See, being white in amerikkka is like being on an escalator, carrying us upward into the structure of genocide. Everyone says that they’ve just picked this one little stair to perch on–“l’m not hurting anyone.” But it isn’t a stair, it’s an escalator, and we can only not go up if we make a choice to get off.

We have to make that choice–or passively accept the choice prepared for us to be part of that genocide. Like white women in Nazi Germany and South Africa. Whether we admit it or not, each of us must make the choice of who we are. We choose to take part in genocide or to oppose it, to work for the patriarchy or to fight it with our lives. Who we are is our choice.

There are white women, hurt and angry, who believed that the ’70s women’s movement meant sisterhood, and who feel betrayed by escalator women. By women who went back home to the patriarchy. But the women’s movement never left the father Dick’s side. You can tell that by the fact that no women died in the struggle. The jails were not filled by prisoners of that class war. There was no war. And there was no liberation. We got a share of genocide profits and we love it. We are Sisters of Patriarchy, and true supporters of oppression. We are not Black women’s sisters, or Salvadorian women’s sisters, not anybody’s sisters except father Dick.

Patriarchy in its highest form is Euro­imperialism on a world scale. If we’re Dick’s sister and want what he has gotten, then in the end we support that system that he got it all from. And our own subjugation, too. Be it ever so blood soaked there’s no place like home.



K. KersplebedebK. KersplebedebK. Kersplebedeb

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.