4,103 words 
Stephan Lesher
George Wallace: American Populist
Addison-Wesley, 1994
Claude Andrew Clegg III
An Original Man: The Life and Times of Elijah Muhammad
St. Martin’s Press, 1997
Like many members of the Montana Militia, Elijah Muhammad believed that a Social Security number represented the Mark of the Beast. And George Wallace’s comment during Alabama’s 1970 gubernatorial campaign—”300,000 nigger votes is mighty hard to overcome”—expresses essentially the same sentiment as Public Enemy’s “It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold us Back.”
Elijah and George were little men who stood up for the little man. When Wallace took a stand against federal intervention, he measured only 5’8″, while the tippy-top of Elijah Muhammad’s spangled pillbox fez strained to reach five-and-a-half feet. But these two feisty shrimps set the world on its ass.
Both Wallace and Muhammad appealed to the hopes and resentments of groups which mainstream pundits would prefer to ignore. Both seemed to actually care about their constituencies. Both were Southern boys who weathered the Great Depression. Both said that racism was not exclusively, or even predominantly, a Southern problem. Both of them benefited from being stricken with Messiah complexes. Both were on mystical quests to avenge wrongs committed against their “people.” Both were trying to redeem a slice of lost history. Both pinched pennies and stressed self-reliance. Both were audited by the IRS. Both hated and mistrusted white liberals. Both believed that communism was a plot to destroy white civilization. Both played on class tensions within their respective races. Both were married to long-suffering doormat wives who withstood inattentive philandering for decades.
They had a lot in common.
When Muhammad’s biographer writes, “he counseled against black participation in electoral politics, railed against the Civil Rights Movement, encouraged racial separation, wrote off much of Africa as uncivilized, and did not question the basic operation of American capitalism,” he could just as easily have been talking about George Wallace.
Both biographers are to be congratulated for tackling difficult subjects. Both writers are adept at evaluating the psychological significance their subjects embodied to their followers. Both dutifully lists his subject’s perceived virtues alongside his shortcomings. Both authors use the phrase bête noire, although Wallace’s biographer uses it twice. On the other hand, the paper in the Muhammad book has a nicer smell. It’s a sweet, waxy, almost-Islamic smell.
I’ve been a fanboy of hardcore black racist sects ever since stumbling upon an Ansaaru Allah community booklet on a Philly subway seat back in the late 70s. To my delight, I learned that not only was I the Paleman and by nature a devil, but that the rock groups KISS, Santana, and the Bee Gees had collaborated with me in the conspiracy. Driven by a perverse sense of humor and an even more twisted sense of ethnic masochism, I yearned for more pan-African racial science to be dropped like pigeon poop onto my white head.
If one were to depend strictly on TV news broadcasts for one’s information, one might think that the Nation of Islam is an organization which exists strictly for the purpose of making insensitive comments about Jews. You’d hear very little about the Nation’s considerable economic and organizational contributions to black America. Nor would you know about some of the Nation’s more esoteric teachings, stuff that makes the Jew-baiting seem tame.
Thankfully, Claude Clegg’s An Original Man: The Life and Times of Elijah Muhammad contains everything you always wanted to know about the Nation of Islam (but were too white to get a straight answer). To his credit, Clegg will probably please neither the believers nor the infidels with his straight-down-the-middle approach. His book will appease neither the Fruit of Islam nor those who’d prefer to bury Elijah’s legacy under a mere compost heap of “hatemongering.” Clegg sits squarely at the 50-yard line. It’s an admirable job given the magnitude of the task. He may not have humanized Elijah Muhammad, but he softened both the divine halo and the wacky aura surrounding him. He contextualized the brutha.
Clegg traces the Nation’s ideological roots in Freemasonry, the Moorish Science Temple of America, and the economic elements of Garveyism. You’ll finally learn the truth about the Tribe of Shabazz’s 76 trillion years of Islamic history and its OCD-level adherence to simplistic numerology. You’ll say, “Wow!” when you read that Black Muslims believe in Black Martians. You’ll thrill time and again to the story of the Jap-built Mother Plane, a giant flying saucer which will hasten an Independence Day-style onslaught of Space Negroes to snuff the white devils en masse.
If you’re pale like I be, you’ll shiver at the scriptural instructions from Fard Muhammad for each Moslem to murder four white devils. You’ll flinch at the Nation’s doggie dogma, which alleges that white women enjoy the occasional sexual coupling with their pet canines. You’ll react with vicious denial when you hear of the voodoo that Yacub do, genetically grafting white snakes to spoil the black man’s Eden through “tricknology.” You’ll gasp upon realizing that the Nation of Islam, for all its hymie-baiting rep, has historically been less anti-Semitic than it is anti-Euro, anti-Catholic, anti-Fed, anti-homo, and misogynist.
The book’s title comes from the Nation’s doctrine that blacks are the earth’s “Asiatic ‘Original People.'” To me, this assertion always seemed to play right into the white-supremacist belief that blacks are the “mud” race most closely related to apes. After all, doesn’t “original” imply “most primitive” and “least evolved”? You might wanna think twice before bragging about being the original people. At the very least, the concept of “original people” should confuse white liberals who think it’s a sign of Southern ignorance not to believe that we evolved from apes, but who also think it’s a sign of Southern ignorance to believe that some of us evolved further from the apes than others did.
Elijah Muhammad wasn’t an original man in the theological sense, either, because he merely copied the cocoa-nutty tenets laid out by his mentor, Fard Muhammad.
You can buy Jim Goad’s The Bomb Inside My Brain here.
Fard (pronounced “Fuh-ROD” rather than the flatulent-sounding “Fard”—more “far out” than “fart”) is the truly fascinating character here, probably worthy of a whole book himself. Hard to pin down historically because he used a series of aliases (and because much of the information about him comes from the less-than-impartial FBI), Fard Muhammad was an ex-convict who declared himself to be God incarnate. Not a bad twist, actually. The jaw-dropping surprise is that pictures of Fard are included, and he sure as shootin’ looks like a WHITE boy to me. In an official Nation of Islam portrait, he resembles Buster Keaton, and in two FBI photos allegedly taken after an arrest, he looks like a barely awake Robert DeNiro. The FBI called him “a white man masquerading as a Negro.” (I’m sure that several New York readers can relate.) Possibly the most amazing thing about the oft-amazing Nation of Islam is that a devil may have founded it.
Devil or no, Fard Muhammad’s primary innovation was the thoroughness and boldness with which he inverted white racism and spat it back at whitey. A brilliant revisionist, Fard cast whites as the uncivilized, tiny-brained, hairy-tailed simians crawling around on all fours. He spread joy through his audiences by reassuring them that they would one day know the pleasure of oppressing crackers. There was the sly genius of banning whites from his meetings and calling them “spooks.” He cleverly placed Mr. Charley in the defensive position of having to scream, “racism!”
At least I’ll agree with Fard that my ancestors lived in caves. That’s because trailer parks hadn’t been invented yet. Maybe I am the cave-dweller. The boy with recessive genes. A cloven-hoofed albino dog-humping demon with no sense of justice, freedom, or equality. Sigh. So what? Might as well enjoy being a devil.
Elijah Muhammad, wise man that he was, learned to slay the devil by imitating him. The Nation of Islam was like Orwell’s Animal Farm in that all Muslims were equal, but some were more equal than others. It was essentially feudal in its strict hierarchical structure, despite its appeals to pan-Afro stuffed-pig-luau communalism. Like a slavemaster, Elijah once informed Malcolm X that Malcolm was his “property.” Elijah also owned a mansion and a butler. His ideas about decency differed little from Jerry Falwell’s. And by demanding financial tribute from his adherents (like Falwell), Muhammad made the mountain (of cash) come to him. Elijah excommunicated anyone, such as Malcolm X and Muhammad Ali, who seemed popular enough to threaten his primacy. But without all the murders, nepotism, and cold-blooded excommunications, Muhammad probably would have been unable to maintain power, and this Angry White Male wouldn’t be writing about him today.
Being a leader necessitates being a liar. Even after seeing Africa with his own eyes, Elijah Muhammad couldn’t admit that Africans had it better in America. His trips to the Mideast taught him that Islam can be imperialistic and intolerant all by its lonesome, thank you. And Elijah’s brand of Islamic salami contradicted the traditional Qu’ranic doctrine of global equality under Allah’s thumb.
A further irony was that in replacing European names with Arabic ones, the Nation of Islam merely swapped one set of slave names for another. While the Freedom Riders galloped through the Evil Demon Firehose South in the early 1960s, Saudi Arabian Muslims still owned a hundred thousand black slaves. Arabic culture has historically been hostile to sub-Saharan Africans, and Arabic Muslims were instrumental in orchestrating the black slave trade across the Atlantic. There is also ample evidence that human chattel slavery still exists in the Sudan and Ethiopia, none of it perpetrated by the Sons of Yacub.
Elijah Muhammad’s white-devil Bojangles rhetorical tap-dance varied little over forty years. Through all the power struggles and persecutions, he steadfastly clocked the dough and aggravated the Devil. Apart from his goofball doctrines and dictatorial hypocrisy, I think Elijah Muhammad was a pretty decent man. A mensch, even. From my observations, Black Muslims do seem healthy and filled with self-esteem. Very neat and tidy. Good posture, too. I enjoy their mushy bean pies and the high-yella journalism of The Final Call. The Nation also seems to rehabilitate black criminals better than the US justice system does. I also might add that if the feds sincerely want to help blacks instead of merely putting on a good PR show, they should allow Farrakhan to have that billion dollars from Qaddafi.
The Nation of Islam is already America’s wealthiest black organization, so it’s doing something right. Beyond its obvious economic savvy, Clegg seems to have figured the secret behind the Nation’s staying power, and why it outlasted more potentially volatile groups such as the Black Panthers:
…the Nation’s view of the end of the world, while revolutionary in a superficial sense, was an essentially conservative approach to changing the conditions of black oppression. Conveniently, the burden of deliverance was left to God, who would act in his own good time.
What always scared me most about the Nation of Islam was the suspicion that Elijah Muhammad might actually be as boring as he seemed. And after reading “An Original Man,” he remains the most charisma-free of all black nationalists, if the most dangerous to insult. His dull personality tends to blur everything about him, both good and bad. The book does not provide, as a dust-jacket review blurb promises, “an Elijah you can touch.” Goddamnit, I want an Elijah Muhammad I can cuddle! I want a Messenger of God I can tickle in the tummy and slap on the back, but it just ain’t happenin’. However, I think it’s the subject’s fault rather than the author’s. Maybe Elijah Muhammad was a little too holy for my tastes. The fact that he banged several of his secretaries turns out to be the most interesting thing about him. Why, the mini-Muslim was human after all! Otherwise, his personality seems about as appealing as the idea of performing cunnilingus on Janet Reno. He remains no more accessible than Ming the Merciless from the Flash Gordon serials. The Joe Franklin of late-night Islamic talk-show hosts. A mystical Marvin the Martian straight outta Looney Tunes: “You’re making me VERRRY ANGREEE, white man!” I’m still not sure I’d be able to tell Elijah Muhammad from Elijah Blue Allman.
Unlike Elijah Muhammad, George Wallace ate pork and smoked cigars, which could mean all the difference. I used to hate George Wallace, and now I’d like to publicly apologize. Although I used to consider him a vote-hungry, prawn-peeling, slime-stirring redneck rabble-rouser, I’ve come to find solace in Wallace. I’m sorry he’s gone. I miss George Wallace in the same way that I miss Malcolm X and Meir Kahane. And I’d let any of them cook my dinner before I’d bite into a meal microwaved by Bill Clinton or Newt Gingrich.
George Wallace was as thoroughly 1960s as Jimi Hendrix. He emerged from the South, the fabled land of boiled peanuts and ethnic intolerance, of eager hospitality and racially motivated gator hunts. To many, Wallace was no more than a frog-faced scion of hatred who spewed Confederate folderol, the man who gave us the phrases “tax, tax, spend, spend” and “the ultra-liberal-controlled press.” But Wallace also had an undeniable flair for ominous comments such as, “they are not concerned about me, but about the growing power of the people” and the rather Nietzschean assertion that cab drivers “come into fierce contact with life.” A true Übercracker, Wallace won Alabama’s Golden Gloves boxing title in both 1936 and ’37. The Encyclopedia of Southern Culture boasts a wonderful picture of a skinny George Wallace bloodying an opponent’s nose.
With his puffy cheeks, disciplined haircut, and some of the meanest eyebrows this side of Saddam Hussein, Wallace appealed to a Lost Nation of white Southerners who felt abandoned by the federal government and the mainstream media. He only became “dangerous,” apparently, when his surprisingly successful presidential campaigns started appealing to white commoners outside of the South, and especially when he stressed the non-racial tenets of his platform. George Wallace was the first Southern politician to be taken seriously outside of Dixie since the War of Northern Aggression ended. If Wallace’s messages hadn’t crossed the Mason-Dixon Line in a big way, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton would still be plowing the red clay. Biographer Stephan Lesher argues that every successful presidential candidate from Nixon to Clinton employed planks of Wallace’s campaign strategies. Lesher calls him “the most influential loser in American politics”:
Wallace, like the original populists of the 1890s, distrusted banks and the rich while advocating tax reforms that would favor farmers and working people. His suggestion to tax foundations and church-owned property went far beyond anything offered by any other candidate. Until he was struck by a would-be assassin, Wallace drew consistently larger crowds on the campaign trail than any of his opponents. His campaigns were financed by tens of thousands of small donations, making them closer to authentic ‘people’s crusades’ than anything in previous political history; he alone among serious presidential candidates was wholly independent of special interests.
Wallace was the bane of well-compensated, tax-free-foundation-funded social engineers and theoreticians, those whom he called “pointy-headed intellectuals who can’t park their bicycles straight.” He railed relentlessly against self-satisfied urbanites who identify with the black experience in the abstract, yet who don’t know poverty and suffering nearly as well as Alabama crackers do. Georgie-Porgie knew a hypocrite when he saw one: While Wallace sent his kids to integrated public schools, both Earl Warren and George McGovern shuffled their offspring off to private institutions which were almost entirely white.
Lesher sagely discerns that race wasn’t the principal element of Wallace’s appeal. He points out that Abe Lincoln, LBJ, and Harry Truman all made comments more scathingly “racist” than anything Wallace was ever accused of saying. He demonstrates how Wallace’s pro-worker policies helped thousands of Alabamians. He demonstrates how Wallace went from screaming “Segregation now! Segregation tomorrow! Segregation forever!” in 1963 to being voted Alabama blacks’ all-time favorite governor in 1986. And it’s good to see Nipsey Russell mentioned, whatever the context.
Corrupt old basset hound Richard Milhous Nixon siphoned off the exterior of many of Wallace’s ideas, then secretly financed the political campaigns of Wallace’s enemies. He also directed his goons to plant pro-McGovern literature in Arthur Bremer’s apartment immediately after learning that the hipster psychopath shot Wallace, but Nixon’s bumbling spy team arrived long after police and reporters had already canvassed the scene.
Wallace ate five bullets at the peak of his power, right when he seriously threatened to capture 1972’s Democratic presidential nomination. The shooting left him incontinent, impotent, and puttering around in a wheelchair. By the mid-70s, voters had soured on the idea of a nonambulatory ex-segregationist with a redneck accent for president. The handicapped hatemonger slowly rolled off the national scene. He returned to being a gimpy gov’ner. A crippled cracker. A disabled demagogue.
Wallace biographer Stephan Lesher seems to like Wallace better in a wheelchair, anyway. He’s the type of guy who’s still touched by images of white and black hands clasped together. Seriously. He agreed with David Dinkins that America’s ethnic fabric is a “gorgeous mosaic.” And while he worries about whether Wallace actually said “nigger” or “nigra” in 1962, he doesn’t ponder the ethno-classist underpinnings in his own usage of phrases such as “Neanderthal redneck” and “a redneck racist of the right.” And in a meaninglessly moralistic turn, he scolds us that “We made George Wallace, not the other way around.” Come again? What does that mean, precisely? I am not a moral Frankenstein, and I played no part in making George Wallace. Keep your squirrelly guilt complexes to yourself.
The major enjoyment in George Wallace: American Populist arises from the tension created when the author’s soft-left social conscience struggles against his obvious admiration for Wallace the Man. Which brings me to a general criticism of both books.
You knew there had to be some complaints.
Both authors seem afflicted with an overwhelming suspicion that Southern whites are a breed of subhuman conformists who don’t know what’s best for themselves. Accordingly, they repeatedly refer to Southern whites as one big faceless vanilla malignancy. Lesher mentions
- “defiant white Southern resistance”;
- “inherent embers of racial fear and hatred among whites”;
- “the South’s insistent inclination to [pursue] Lost Causes”;
- “the violence that lurked as an almost breathing presence behind the mannerly veneer of the South in general”; and
- “the dumfounding [sic] ignorance of black affairs that characterized white Southern officialdom.”
For his part, Clegg refers to
- “foul dealings perpetrated by whites”;
- “odious Southern traditions”;
- “the South’s crimes”;
- “the hostile white community”;
- “the naked brutality of Georgian whites”; and
- “the reality of racism and brutality that underlay Southern culture.”
These sorts of references are such a consistent element of both books that I can only speculate that both authors fear whatever potential they suspect is lying dormant within the hearts of Southern whites.
But as evil as Southern whites supposedly are individually, DON’T get them together in a group, because they instantly become a MOB. Both books refer to large assemblies of angered whites, even if peaceful, as “mobs,” while groups of blacks, even if throwing rocks and chanting “Kill ’em, kill ’em,” are called “crowds” and “protesters.” While Lesher applies the term “mob” to just about any grouping of whites, he objects to Wallace’s use of the phrase “lawless Negro mobs.”
You can buy Jim Goad’s The Redneck Manifesto here.
To prove just how evil the white South is, BOTH books reprint that famously overused photo of a snarling white Alabama cop directing his K-9 to bite a black protester who looks as innocent as Tiger Woods. Ironically, the bloodiest racial conflicts in the 60s (Watts, Newark, Detroit, y mucho otros) were all OUTSIDE of the South. And more blacks were probably slaughtered in Rwanda last year than were murdered in American history. Can we have a little bit of context, people?
Both authors apparently buy into the libbie definitions of good guys and bad guys, where only those aligned with the political “right” are capable of human evil. Both act as if power can only be mishandled by right-wingers, and as if the FBI only monitors left-wing groups. Both act as if racism can be a cynical political strategy, but not anti-racism. They seem to believe that only impoverished white voters, but never blacks, can be duped by crafty politicians. They cluck at white supremacy while endorsing its successor, federal supremacy. Any suspicion of communism is repeatedly depicted as paranoia, while an obsession with racial matters, as long as the slant is anti-racist, is portrayed as mentally healthy. This ignores the stark fact that the pinko communoids stacked up bodies in numbers which would make the Klan and the Nazis envious.
Both books also show a stereotypically superstitious liberal fear of “hate,” as if it’s something unnatural which should be vigilantly suppressed at all times. It’s hate depicted as the Ebola virus. Lesher warns us that “hatred, once unleashed, cannot neatly be channeled toward one group in particular” and counsels that “the hater may be unable or unwilling to change.” Clegg writes that “the Muslim leader, like the Nazis and others, understood the power of hatred in mobilizing a people.” Do the authors seriously believe that this vague thing called “hate” has harmed more people than quantifiable things such as greed?
Power leans toward neither the left nor the right. You could say that it wears many faces, but it’s probably more apt to say it wears no face at all. If the United States government was infiltrating the Nation of Islam and the women’s movement at the same time that it was sending spies into the Klan and the Minutemen, it stands to reason that none of these groups represented the primary American power structure. Rather, they were threats to the established order. The FBI’s main duty seems to be to ensure that Americans continue peacefully arguing among themselves.
The problem is neither with George Wallace nor Elijah Muhammad, it’s with those who’d view them as mutually exclusive. Neither man represented “the mainstream,” and yet if their respective constituencies were combined, it would probably comprise a majority of Americans. Largely dismissed by the high-toned tastemakers, Wallace’s and Muhammad’s followers induce uncomfortable feelings in those mainstream mouthpieces who wish to monopolize the tenor and substance of political debate in this country. Those who profit by the status quo are driven crazy by the fact that, despite all the grade-school brainwashing, a huge hunk of America still pledges allegiance to the Confederate battle flag or to the N.O.I.’s star-and-crescent “National” flag. Instead of tapping into underclass “fears,” George and Elijah more properly aroused the fears of those whose job it is to spin fantasies of a benign, self-contained political establishment acting in the masses’ best interests.
There’s a pervasive misperception that we can’t all hate each other and still get along. Not so. The world’s obviously big enough to fit both George Wallace and Elijah Muhammad. And that’s what makes the ever-shrinking mainstream nervous.
When Georgia trailer-dwellers and Brownsville gangstas both believe in flying saucers and blame the FBI for most of our suffering, what \does that mean for America? What are the shared experiences of cowboys and colored people? What if George Wallace’s hordes of toothless pitchfork-bearers and Elijah Muhammad’s nation of redeemed convicts were to combine their forces? How would this new coalition change the American political landscape? What would change merely by removing the perception that these two camps are eternal enemies?
The fact that I’m a despicable human being shouldn’t disqualify me from making unsubstantiated comments about modern American race relations. I’d like to think that up in heaven, Elijah Muhammad and George Wallace are playing ping-pong together. I close my eyes, whistle a medley of “Dixie” and “A White Man’s Heaven is a Black Man’s Hell,” and picture Clara Muhammad and Lurleen Wallace trading fried-chicken recipes in the kitchen while George and Elijah watch a Knicks game in the living room. I visualize Elijah and George teamed as buddy cops in some Mel Gibson/Danny Glover-styled anti-terrorism blockbuster film. I see them paired together in some Sunshine Boys/Golden Girls script in which the two old geezers, because of fixed incomes, are forced to share the same Florida condo, where various bittersweet comical mishaps teach them to gradually reconcile their racial differences. If Dr. King was entitled to ridiculous dreams, so am I.
Written in 1997. You can get Jim Goad’s books HERE. All books are signed by the author. Now accepting PayPal and Venmo.
31 comments
“land of boiled peanuts”
A gen x-er from the northeast, I had never eaten boiled peanuts until 2023. I saw them in cans in the discount section of my ghetto supermarket. They had graphics and design on the label that looked like they hadn’t been updated since 1972. In that store, in my ignorance, I thought they were aimed at Jamaicans. Being an urban hipster, I bought them. They are simply the best, most perfect snack food. I understand in the South they are not in cans. I was thinking of going South just to get boiled peanuts at a roadside stand, but have you priced Amtrak recently, or realized what you have to do with Real ID to fly? No boiled peanut Bourdain trips in my future. But I try to stockpile the cans as long as that store carries them.
Re:Yacub
I think many more blacks than hardcore NOI think it’s true. Once I overheard a relatively normal, goodnatured non-white-hating black talking to another non-NOI black. He said something like “I don’t believe that Yacub stuff.” The fact they would even be talking about that at all when they could have been talking about their normal subjects, basketball and football, is an indication that the Yacub story is more widespread among them.
“Both [Wallace and Muhammad] seemed to actually care about their constituencies.”
I’m pretty sure both were grifters.
In his first (unsuccessful) run for governor, before he reinvented himself as a arch-segregationist, George Wallace’s candidature was actually endorsed by the NAACP, and, in his last run for governor in 1982, reinventing himself again as a born again Christian and anti-racist, he actually won over 90% of the black vote.
The only thing George Wallace really believed in was George Wallace
_________
“The jaw-dropping surprise is that pictures of Fard are included, and he sure as shootin’ looks like a WHITE boy to me”
Fard is definitely a fascinating figure, given the uncertainty of both his origins and his ultimate fate.
While he definitely doesn’t look black, I’m not sure he looks exactly white either.
I recall reading up on the theories as to his origins, and, as I best recall, the most persuasive theory was that he may have been either Pakistani or maybe Afghan, and, in the official NOI portrait, he does look kind of South Asian to me.
_____________
“George Wallace was the first Southern politician to be taken seriously outside of Dixie since the War of Northern Aggression ended”
What about Woodrow Wilson? He was elected Southern and became president and took the US into WWI. Pretty sure he was taken seriously.
I wouldn’t be too hard on George Wallace. George Lincoln Rockwell once said that he was “a good man.” I’m proud that my parents voted for Wallace and LeMay in 1968.
Wallace was basically a New Deal type of Southern Democrat who was not too keen on integration and race-mixing, as most White Southerners were not.
Wallace explained that he was less a racist than somebody who felt that the way the South was being treated was wrong. This is why Texan LBJ had an easier time ramming though “Civil Rights” legislation than the Boston Brahmins had prior to Lee Harvey Oswald’s two bullets.
Plus, George Wallace was a single state governor. He would have had to have a signifiant portion of the country behind him to hope to make any difference. If he could have steered his way past the mine fields on the Vietnam War, Wallace had a chance at the Democrat nomination in 1972, but after getting shot he was literally out of the race.
Also, Woody Wilson was a liberal progressive who had helmed Princeton University and been Governor of New Jersey. Yes, he had grown up in the South and experienced Reconstruction and therefore had a realistic opinion of Negro culture. But as a Liberal Presbyterian, Wilson tended to promote Jews and Catholics even if not Negroes in academia. I’m not really sure how much the South can really claim about Woodrow other than being a Liberal expat and “Scalawag.”
🙂
RE: Origins of Wallace Fard
The consensus amongst prominent NOI figures who had actually personally met the individual is that he was of Pakistani descent. The fact that he found a way to slither into the U.S. is yet another historical indictment of our “broken” (What a euphemism!) immigration system.
A Pakistani origin would also explain why he naturally chose Islam (albeit a very odd corrupted heretical version of Islam) as the vehicle for his ideology.
Were India and Pakistan separate countries when Fard burst onto the scene?
No. They were both still part of the British Empire. I’m not even sure that the name Pakistan had been coined at that time. It was coined around this time by a student as an acronym for the envisaged provinces of an independent Muslim state, while also meaning ‘Land of the Pure‘. So to say he was was Pakistani or of Pakistani descent is indeed a bit anachronous.
Canned Food Aficionado: May 10, 2025 “land of boiled peanuts”
—
That’s your takeaway from Goad’s clever, fact-filled review of a couple of liberal authors’ books on two racial leaders — one White the other Black. Really?
…It’s probably more apt to say [power] wears no face at all. If the United States government was infiltrating the Nation of Islam and the women’s movement at the same time that it was sending spies into the Klan and the Minutemen… none of these groups represented the primary American power structure. Rather, they were threats to the established order. The FBI’s main duty seems to be to ensure that Americans continue peacefully arguing among themselves.
That paragraph caught my attention. Made me wonder if Mr. Goad ever wrote an honest piece about the “primary American power structure” and the FBI’s role in protecting it. I’m referring to organized Jewry’s power structure. Go after small factions of Blacks and Whites but stay clear of that other race: what he calls the well-documented primary American power structure.
“That’s your takeaway from Goad’s clever, fact-filled review of a couple of liberal authors’ books on two racial leaders — one White the other Black. Really?”
I was trying to fill the void of commentless weekends on this site by saying something light and “kooky.” No, of course that’s not my takeaway. But abler minds like you can talk about the serious stuff, so why should I (and I mean that, I think you’re a good commenter and have learned from your comments)? What I perhaps should have written was, why did Goad say Wallace was short? 5’8 is not short, it’s near average.
Canned Food Aficianado: May 11, 2025
“That’s your takeaway from Goad’s clever, fact-filled review of a couple of liberal authors’ books on two racial leaders — one White the other Black. Really?”
I was trying to fill the void of commentless weekends on this site by saying something light and “kooky.” No, of course that’s not my takeaway. But abler minds like you can talk about the serious stuff, so why should I (and I mean that, I think you’re a good commenter and have learned from your comments)? What I perhaps should have written was, why did Goad say Wallace was short? 5’8 is not short, it’s near average.
—
Height is relative, 5′-8″ is short to a 6-footer and tall to a 5-footer. Goad had apparently read about their heights in the books he was reviewing.
I’m pleased you have learned a thing or two from my comments on C-C. I was looking for something about the new Pope where I could make a comment but there is nothing. His big appointment/love fest this week has serious racial aspects. I found this on C-C from 2019: Hope for a Non-White Savior. Its opening sentence is “Some on the Dissident Right hope that the next Pope will be black.”
Those on the “Dissident Right” who had hoped that back then, whether they know it or not, have gotten their wish, and one would think that it should be a topic of discussion on Counter-Currents — so here goes from Kevin Strom on today’s American Dissident Voices broadcast: The Octoroon Pope | National Vanguard
Now the new Leo is just as much, if not more, anti-White than was Francis. His support for open borders, the “migrant” masses, and the cult of George Floyd are all on the record, along with many other evils. But you can’t really call him a traitor to the White race — for the simple reason that he is not entirely White, far from it in fact. Now he may be 65% or 80% White, the records are not absolutely clear on such things. But he is definitely part-Black, somewhere in Quadroon or Octoroon territory — and such things show; and such things matter, very much. The media have been crowing about this, in fact, with the White woman talking head on Jew-run ABC’s Good Morning America, Kyra Phillips (former wife of someone named John Assad), gushing about how having a part-Black “American” as Pope is “just incredible” and “I love that!” and “this is such a representation of the American story” as she disclosed that Leo is a descendant of “Creole people of color” on his mother’s side. His father’s side — evidently all of European ancestry — was not worthy of mention by all-smiles Phillips. Phillips literally glowed as she expressed the view that Leo’s Black ancestry must be “of great significance for Black Americans,” who are apparently expected to revel with joy at the thought of being part of a Mulatto / Octoroon future in which their race, too, will be subsumed — or, perhaps more accurately though all unstated, revel with joy at the contamination and future disappearance of the hated Whites regardless of all other consequences.
An ABC article posted under the Phillips video clip stated:
Both of Leo XIV’s maternal grandparents, Joseph Martinez and Louise Baquié, are described as Black or mulatto in several census documents...
Read more at the link, racially conscious White Catholics, and weep.
When they were picking the last one, I was wondering if soon Obama would be moonlighting as the Pope. Maybe I wasn’t entirely so far off!
For what it’s worth, I appreciated the comment about boiled peanuts. They just sound awful, so I instantly rejected the idea of ever eating something like that, but since you’ve given them such a glowing recommendation I may have to reconsider…
What’s cool about boiled peanuts in a can is it presents a challenge. You can eat them in three ways: 1) eat the whole thing, shell and all. You can do this because the saltwater it is packed in has softened the shell. But to me it’s too much like the George Carlin joke about eating a wicker chair to get your daily RDA of fiber. 2) The classic, Southern way, I have read, is to put the whole thing in your mouth and then, with your tongue, manipulate the seam in the shell to split it and then extract the soft delicious nuts, chewing them while spitting out the shell. This is a deft skill that takes some time to develop. I am working on mastering it but am not there yet. 3) The easy way is to put them on a plate and treat them like you would normal dry peanuts in the shell–splitting the shell with your fingers and popping the nuts into your mouth. What’s the point of doing that, though? You might as well just buy normal, dry roasted or oiled cocktail peanuts.
”The classic, Southern way, I have read, is to put the whole thing in your mouth and then, with your tongue, manipulate the seam in the shell to split it and then extract the soft delicious nuts, chewing them while spitting out the shell.” Sounds like too much work to me! 🙃
Re: 2) The classic, Southern way [of eating boiled peanuts]…
Given that where I grew up, it was common to see vendors selling hot boiled peanuts out of the back of a van/truck on the shoulder of any given state highway, I can verify this statement’s accuracy, more or less.
To tell the truth, though, I don’t think anyone is going to routinely pop open boiled peanuts in one’s mouth using only the tongue for leverage. Assuming a typical boiled peanut, there’s just no way you could insert your tongue in the seam separating the two halves of the shell, because they’re pretty much naturally and completely sealed together.
The easy solution is to place the peanut in your mouth such that the seam where the peanut splits open is aligned lengthwise with your upper/lower molars. Once properly positioned, biting down with only the slightest bit of pressure easily pops apart the two halves of the shell. Then you can use your tongue (or fingers) to fish out the two or three individual peanuts, but that said, they oftentimes fall right out of the shell and into your mouth rather easily without much in the way of any further tongue calisthenics.
A couple more boiled peanut-related bullet points:
1. Whenever you bought hot boiled peanuts from a roadside vendor, they always came in a sealed ziplock bag that was then placed inside a brown paper sandwich bag. Always. No exceptions.
2. Hot boiled peanuts are awesome. No debate on this point is permitted. Massively better than regular baked/dried/salted peanuts.
🙂
“Virginia peanuts” are really good, boiled or not. They seem to be located in a small area west of Norfolk. The same place Nat Turner did his thing in the 1830s or whenever. Ungrateful pickaninny. I would work on those peanut farms literally for peanuts if the housing was OK and they had beer. Man, do I love eating peanuts!
I love the two pictures of George Lincoln Rockwell in full Brownshirt regalia sitting at a NOI rally flanked on each side by twin brothers also wearing the uniforms, and then the picture of him on stage addressing the audience with the twins on either side of him holding the folder containing Rockwell’s speech as The Commander read from it. In that latter photo Malcom X can be seen in the background with a wide coon grin.
Up until the mass media and CIA started pushing Michael King Jr alias MLK Jr down America’s collective throat, the overwhelming masses of blacks were more in favor of black nationalism than racial integration. Elijah Muhammad came much closer than Marcus Garvey in rallying blacks to the black separatist cause. It’s a damn shame the jews got their way in leading the blacks to pursue generational parasitism of Whitey instead of going for self and working to establish their own ethnostate from territory in the US or their own nation in the Muthaland of sub-Saharan Africa.
I think the usual suspects were less concerned with parasitism (although that’s always a big plus) than they were with ensuring that there will be lots of miscegenation. Every time a white woman pops out a nappy-headed mulatto, a jew gets his wings.
I think the jews are upset that not as many White women have bedded down with groids as they had envisioned. I know there are far too many mudsharks, for in my opinion even one White woman popping out a half human, half Africanus Erectus is one too many for my liking. We should have adopted the Arab and Turkish practice of turning our negro slaves into eunuchs. Our 13% (I think they are far more than 13% in the US) would perhaps be only 2% or 3% had we neutered our bipedal farm animals.
Let’s work to clip those jews’ wings 🙂
I want to ask about your user name, “Let’s All Drink to the Death of a Clown” is that a reference to popular culture? It seems that long of a name would be exhausting to type out frequently. 🙃
Peter Quint, it’s in reference to The Kinks 1967 song, “Death of a Clown”. I find it personally relevant in reference to the “clown world” we live in today and I have just always really liked the song.
Let’s All Drink to the Death of a Clown: May 11, 2025 I love the two pictures of George Lincoln Rockwell in full Brownshirt regalia sitting at a NOI rally flanked on each side by twin brothers also wearing the uniforms…,
I recall that first memorable photograph well. Thanks. It did not take much courage for GLR and friends to confront those NOI brothers like that — mostly just confidence.
My similar “debate” with the top NOI leader in North Carolina 30 years ago showed that his Black separatist group and our White counterpart group had much more in common than the listening audience that day had been told by controlled media.
Listen or read here: Forward Vision | National Vanguard
[…]
Will Williams: Mr. Muhammad, don’t you advocate the same thing? Uniting, based on common blood?
Muhammad: We most definitely advocate that.
Will Williams: We’re in agreement, then. Just like I said — we have nationalism versus the internationalism of the Jews, the “New World Order” that’s represented by Mr. Bush, Mr. Clinton, all these guys — these White guys that are supposedly “White leaders,” but they don’t represent me. They are internationalists. What we need is nationalism. And we’re willing to work with Black separatists. But we’re not going to be called “haters” and deal with people who call us haters.
[…]
[Black integrationist co-host Barry] Saunders: I tell you what, my head is spinning over this unlikely alliance between Mr. Williams and Brother Muhammad.
[The other Black integrationist co-host Sheila] Stewart: You’re not alone.
Saunders: Brother Muhammad, though, is there any difference between what you guys think and what Mr. Williams’ group is espousing?
Muhammad: The general principle of separation — I think that stands for itself.
Read and/or listen to more of this remarkable interview of me this three Blacks at the link.
I humbly suggest once again that you try using real links to your website. I think it would help bring more visits. I know you had trouble in the past, but now that you’re a paid insider, I think you’ll have no trouble.
For those who want a direct link to that interview page, here it is.
Will Williams,
Thank you brother. I will most definitely check out the interview. I see AdamMil has posted the direct link to it.
A White guy founded the Black supremacist NOI (Nation of Islam). OK. I’ve learned something new.
Before I read this article, I had always thought that the NOI had been founded by someone named Elijah Muhammad, who was later succeeded by Louis Farrakhan.
Not true! NOI was in fact started in 1930 by a White guy named Wallace Fard (pr. “Fuh-ROD”). He simply changed his name to Fard Muhammad & started the NOI.
Does this have anything to do with the Black Hebrew Israelites? Those guys insist that Blacks are the real Jews, and Jews are the real Whites, and Whites are the real Blacks. If so, then it all makes sense now.
A masterful bit of prose, each sentence building and melding into the next. There were no superfluous adjectives, adverbs, and verbs. The author adroitly compared, and contrasted each book to the following conclusion: If the United States government was infiltrating the Nation of Islam and the women’s movement at the same time that it was sending spies into the Klan and the Minutemen, it stands to reason that none of these groups represented the (((primary American power structure))). Rather, they were threats to the established order. The FBI’s main duty seems to be to ensure that Americans continue peacefully arguing among themselves. Again, an adept command of the English language to lead the reader to the conclusion that things may not be what they seem to be. 🐍
Peter, I note that you and I had a similar take on Mr. Goad’s fine review, reacting to the same paragraph in it, rather than to the mention by him of boiled peanuts.
—
Peter Quint: May 11, 2025 at 11:52 pm A masterful bit of prose, each sentence building and melding into the next. There were no superfluous adjectives, adverbs, and verbs. The author adroitly compared, and contrasted each book to the following conclusion: If the United States government was infiltrating the Nation of Islam and the women’s movement at the same time that it was sending spies into the Klan and the Minutemen, it stands to reason that none of these groups represented the (((primary American power structure))). Rather, they were threats to the established order. The FBI’s main duty seems to be to ensure that Americans continue peacefully arguing among themselves. Again, an adept command of the English language to lead the reader to the conclusion that things may not be what they seem to be.
—
I, on May 11, 2025 at 4:37 am, had asked Canned Food Aficionado if [boiled peanuts] was his takeaway from Goad’s clever, fact-filled review of a couple of liberal authors’ books on two racial leaders — one White the other Black. Really?
…It’s probably more apt to say [power] wears no face at all. If the United States government was infiltrating the Nation of Islam and the women’s movement at the same time that it was sending spies into the Klan and the Minutemen… none of these groups represented the primary American power structure. Rather, they were threats to the established order. The FBI’s main duty seems to be to ensure that Americans continue peacefully arguing among themselves.
That paragraph had caught my attention. Made me wonder if Mr. Goad ever wrote an honest piece about the “primary American power structure” and the FBI’s role in protecting it. I’m referring to organized Jewry’s power structure. Go after small factions of Blacks and Whites but stay clear of that other race: what he calls the well-documented primary American power structure.
I’ve never tried boiled peanuts but now I’m curious.
When I was in the Army in 1981 they served “hominy grits” at the Atlanta airport and it was a staple in the post chow halls in the state og Georgia. I liked it ─ sort of like Cream of Wheat but made with hominy instead of wheat. Almost none of the Yankees liked Grits, nor the soldiers from Idaho that I served with.
But Grits was bit of a step up from what I grew up with, which was not even the Cream of Wheat with the Negro chef “Rastus” on the box (LINK).
What I mostly grew up with was homemade cracked wheat cereal made from actual wheat. It wasn’t too bad with a little brown sugar added. We called it “Moon Mud” and I even took it to school in a metal Apollo 11 lunchbox, although I preferred something for school lunches that was a little more trendy. My Mom was raised on the same thing, a Mormon staple, except her Dad called it “Lumpy Dick.”
I never found anybody in the South who actually cooked up possum like Granny Clampett from the Beverly Hillbillies, although I’ve eaten a few whistle pigs (marmots) in mining camps. “Tenduh as Buttuh [i.e., Rubber].” If you want to cook things like this in a stew with potatoes or beans you have to bring along a pressure cooker in your backpack because of the high altitude.
🙂
Gov. George C. Wallace was the ONLY presidential candidate that could have of saved the old America, without a revolution!
I can remember on the old, “Huntley-Brinkley Report”, Wallace was quoted as saying, “ if we supported Germany during WW2, we wouldn’t have to worry about the Russians today!”
This was in response to the Russians donating S-300 SAM that caused the downing of a B-52 bomber very 3 days over North Vietnam. A few days later Arthur Bremmer attempted to do away with George. Wa this a coincidence or did “someone” (cough, cough!), didn’t like what was said?
Responding to a two-week-old comment I just now discovered.
—
AdamMil: May 12, 2025 I humbly suggest once again that you try using real links to your website. I think it would help bring more visits. I know you had trouble in the past, but now that you’re a paid insider, I think you’ll have no trouble.
For those who want a direct link to that interview page, here it is [hyperlink]
—
Thank you, Adam. Your comment is directed to me, who might be the least sophisticated “insider” commenter at C-C. I haven’t ever even learned how to do hyperlinks; your “real link” works.
Yes, I’ve had difficulty here, linking to relevant articles at NV, mostly to ones by Dr. Wiilliam Pierce, so instead of doing one like this <Forward Vision | National Vanguard> I’ve begun doing them like this, <“Forward Vision” at nationalvanguard.org>. I would think that anyone who goes to the trouble to search that title at the NV site’s search block will be led to the article. Maybe not.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.