The World as Cuck and Miscegenation

“I mean I’d rather her marry an eight foot tall nigger worth a hundred million dollars.” – Hulk Hogan

“The contemporary crises of identity in the west, especially as experienced by white youth, are eased when the ‘primative’ is recouped via a focus on diversity and pluralism which suggests the Other can provide life-sustaining alternatives.” – bell hooks

Cuckin’n Suckin’


The cuckold, the cuck and the ‘cuckservative’ have lost their heads in the multi-headed world of the interracial gangbang, but it is the little head whose function is perdue, ‘the head that gets head,’ in common vernacular, which is symbolically decapitated or castrated by the ascendency of the Other and the diffusion of power which swells around the identity politics of the last half century. The Cuckservative, the mainstream Conservative, who is a traditional liberal, wishes to ‘conserve’ the most heterodox system of laissez-faire free enterprise which ultimately leads to his own ‘dispossession.’ This idiocy Zizek identifies as “The traditional Rightist supporting the market economy while ferociously rejecting the culture and mores that economy engenders.”[1]

Conversely, white and black males tend to form bonds through misogynistic practices, so if the hole is vacant… high fives over the pig roast…

If the imagery is crude and pornographic it is only a reflection of the times, rather than the Acephale, whose decapitation symbolizes the death of reason and authority – the death of God, necessarily came first, the Cuck’s symbolic castration represents the death of virility and fecundity (the West’s inability to procreate and create legacy – the sterile sexualization of buggery). The decline of the West in sexualized terms, which as a consequence of decadence, has been evident for a long time; “Thus Du Bois, with a slight to the unnaturally childless white woman, sees “more future promise in the betrayed girl-mothers of the black belt than in the childless wives of the white North,” and has “more respect for the coloured servant who yields to her frank longings for motherhood than for her white sister who offers up children for clothes.”[2]

The Cuck experiences vicarious pleasure through the pleasure of the Other, as a function of liberal-democratic horizontal ‘right to happiness.’ The mainstream conservative by his nature is an egoist in his belief in the selfish benefits of a free markets with small government, but by practice is a cuck in its democratic function and social functioning. Interracial Cucking then is the outperformance of the white male by the BBC, made explicit in pornographic content, but equally acknowledgeable in the realm of various spectator sports, the white male’s acceptance of his inferior social status in the social world is reflected in his acceptance of historical guilt, in which he has been stripped of his ‘institutional power’ by a cohort of Jews, feminists, queers, liberals, blacks, etc. and thereby regulated to the sidelines to cheer on the black running back or basketball or porn star, receiving vicarious pleasure along with pious feelings of transcendental humanism, or the perverse pleasures of masochism, for the Other’s many triumphs. However, ironic as it is, without the infrastructure of Western Civilization all black “achievement” in the cultural and athletic spheres would have degenerated into African barbarism – that vitality sucked up into a fury of temporal imminence dissipating into the vegetable growth of the jungle – signifying nothing.

Way before I had developed into a full-fledged Fascist Shitlord, I first became aware that I had inborn racialist attitudes when I would get an uneasy feeling around black male/white women couples. There was something innately wrong and putrid about it and I could not put my finger on it.


Indeed, the Black in so far as he has been forced to become ‘Enlightened’ has no use for the spiritual choir ideals of Christian humanism in a now secular world, he sees like Marx, “the rational kernel within the mystical shell,” that is he seeks the material rewards of his freedom, such that as Malcolm X put it the negro will not think he is successful in life “unless they have a white woman as a wife,” or as a side-chick, one should add, in order to be contemporaneous. This is not some isolated expression of untermench will, but one that is repeatedly expressed by the scions of the revolt of the underman given its extreme expression today in the Rapefugee sex attacks across Europe. The sentiment is that of both colonial and black slave-resentment duly recorded in a well-known passage from The Wretched of the Earth by Franz Fanon: “It is a town of niggers and dirty Arabs. The look that the native turns on the settler’s town (‘the settler’s town is a town of white people, of foreigners’) is a look of lust, a look of envy; it expresses his dreams of possession – all manner of possession: to sit at the settler’s table, to sleep in the settler’s bed, with his wife, if possible.” Or take this passage from the prison memoir, Soul on Ice, of Black Nationalist and Black Panther leader Eldridge Cleaver:

“[W]hen I considered myself ready enough, I crossed the tracks and sought out white prey. I did this consciously, deliberately, willfully, methodically — though looking back I see that I was in a frantic, wild and completely abandoned frame of mind. Rape was an insurrectionary act. It delighted me that I was defying and trampling upon the white man’s law, upon his system of values, and that I was defiling his women…I felt I was getting revenge. From the site of the act of rape, consternation spread outwardly in concentric circles. I wanted to send waves of consternation throughout the white race.”[3]

Of course this is ongoing today in the black male consciousness: 24 year old black man from Everett, Washington. I believe in black supremacy, although I am against violence. I believe in a ‘soft’ war thru breeding white girls. I’ve been travelling around Europe and this is a record of each country I’ve been to.” But it is not solely to Blacks, but to all Other groups that the European male is now cucking for, all emergent groups, as former head of the World Bank James Wolfensohn puts it; there are “tectonic shifts” in the world’s wealth taking place. The West is going from controlling 80% of the world’s wealth to 40% that is representative of a mega ton of lost mojo. Consequently, as the rest of the world grows confident and powerful in its newfangled acquisition of wealth, our own governments are using our tax dollars to further develop our competition overseas in infrastructure building along with one-sided trade deals that send our wealth and technology to our global non-European competitors in exchange for cheap consumer goods. Cucking is the essence of our dispossession.


This Cucks for You!

The Rapefugee crisis, “takes place at a historical point in the West where there are few restrictions on erotic behaviour; they have several outlets for the satisfaction of their sexual pleasure and for a time enjoy their participation in this new middle-class ‘sport’ where ‘pleasure is a right.’” Ultimately this leads to the liberal cucking in which “True revolt demands equal liberty for all.” The link between liberty and free access to white women was made implicit in a 1959 film called The World, the Flesh and the Devil. But before we get into that a little background information is relevant. The Motion Picture Producers and Distributors Association (MPPA) Production Code of 1930, dealt explicitly with interracial romance, stating that “miscegenation (sexual relationships between the white and black races) is forbidden.” In 1965, the year of the second Vatican Council ended, in which it ratified the separation of church and state, the Legion of Decency was completely weakened. Hollywood broke the production code, which as E Michael Jones tells us was kept in place by Catholic political power. And their depictions of interracial relationship would change American perceptions on issues like miscegenation fundamentally. Today 87% of the population approve of black-white marriage vs. the 4% in 1958.[4] Stanley (((Kramer)))’s Guess who’s Coming to Dinner (1967), which dealt with an explicit black male/white female relationship, culminated with the end of America’s civil rights period and the decay of the Legion of Decency. Pushing the pornographic envelope further is the infamous Mandingo (1975). While, Black Snake Moan (2006), playing on Southern ‘prejudices” brought it full circle: after the white woman has been “liberated” into a nymphomaniac, she cannot control herself, but ends up restrained for rehabilitation under the chained guidance of an older black man. In the film she engages in multiple instances of miscegenation but rebukes a white male’s advancement and ends up savagely beaten by the spurned white male – the black man is now her favored sexual partner, her savior and her rehabilitator. “The possibility of sexual ‘mingling’ across racial lines always implies the potential dissolution of those ‘lines’ and the categories and social structures they enforce.”[5]

Is the white man a bottom or just on the bottom?

With the exemption of D.W. Griffith’s Birth of a Nation (1915), which must be viewed as an anomaly which predated the progressive agenda of later Golden Age Hollywood, early portrayals of interracial relations were dealt with in a sympathetic fashion –focusing on female characters who ‘pass’ as white, thus, blurring the color line as the white male forays into exotic pun tang. This was the case in 1949’s Pinky, about a black nurse from the South who ‘passes for white’ in the North where she falls in love with a white doctor who wants to marry her, it ends with Pinky going back to the South and establishing a nursery school for blacks, thus reaffirming ethnic cohesiveness and cooperation – Spike Lee’s Do The Right Thing (1989) reinforces the idea of non-white group consciousness but through violence – that is through the black male now – at the time of the rise of the rap counter-culture and the very literal “niggers with attitudes.” Non-white female protagonists were used early on in Hollywood portrayals of interracial coupling in order to garner sympathy, but also because of the nature of sexual intercourse in general – the women is penetrated and therefore subordinate. W.E.B. Dubois connected Africa with the feminine, “perhaps even higher than strength and art loom human sympathy and sacrifice as characteristic of negro womanhood.”[6] Since the white male is the traditional bearer of Western Civilization, fueled in part by his desire for conquest, unrestrained female sexuality is much more pernicious to the survival of the race. But the White male/non-white female relationship was the foothold into which the normalization of miscegenation would first enter popular culture. Broken Arrow (1950), sympathetically dealt with a Native woman/ White man relationship. Third wave feminazis were right; at least about the nature of sex, heterosexual intercourse can be about power, in so far as the woman is penetrated, it involves female submission on the most basic level. As women are the wives and mothers of a society – ‘mothering the race’ their collusion in the sexual act is paramount. ‘Debasement’ of non-white women through the sexual act by white men is consistently referenced as reinforcing white supremacy: bell hooks begins her famous essay Eating the Other with an anecdotal eavesdropping, in which she recounts listening to the conversation of young white males planning their sexual conquests of non-whites, hooks writes, “Unlike racist white men who historically violated the bodies of black women/women of color to assert their position as colonizer/ conqueror, these young men see themselves as non-racists, who choose to transgress racial boundaries with the sexual realm not to dominate the Other, but rather so that they can be acted upon, so that they can be changed utterly. Not at all attuned to those aspects of their sexual fantasies that irrevocably link them to collective white racist domination, they believe their desire for contact represents a progressive change in white attitudes towards non-whites… the desire to make contact with those bodies deemed Other, with no apparent will to dominate, assuages the guilt of the past, even takes the form of a defiant gesture where one denies accountability and historical connection.” Thus, Civil Rights was a catch 22 for the white man, if he granted the Negro equality in all spheres it meant increased competition and ultimate racial integration, but it also meant that the black man, not the white man would become the symbolic bearer of what Barack Obama calls the “higher values” of Western civilization. Ironically, despite being freed by the white man, the black man would hold the position of moral superiority, the Nietzschean inversion is at work herein, whereby the Christianization of values informs the world that the slave is good and the master is bad, which in turn is pressed upon the psyche of the slave. Remember the Christian story of the birth of Christ is indeed one of Joseph’s cuckoldry to God. And if the White man had not granted the negro and the Other equality, he’s historically viewed as ‘bad’ or ‘evil’; personally I would rather be an asshole than a cuck. Herein hooks showcases that moral indignation, identifying liberal non-racist whites those “radical white youth who choose to be disloyal to western civilization” who embark upon sexual relations with non-Europeans as plagued to forever be the guilty party. Black scholars, like hooks, love pathologizing white cultural and sexual appropriation, but fail to acknowledge the perverse desires expressed in troublesome and truthful passages of non-white males like Fannon, Cleaver and Malcolm X. Black and non-white desire to appropriate the white world, its territory, communities, customs, culture, languages, technology and women is always superficially dismissed as a regrettable side effect of white racism. Non-whites are excused from any wrong-doing, carnal or base attitudes or actions and appropriation – denying them the basic agency of free human actors – they are instead transformed into merely the subjects of white supremacy; held down by the hegemonic white male. Their covetous desire for white pussy thereby becomes a heroic and revolutionary act.


The World, the Cuck and the Devil

The World, the Flesh and the Devil, was written by Ferdinand Reyher. Reyher (1891-1967) “was a novelist, newspaper correspondent, screenwriter, and playwright active in and among many influential artistic, cultural, and social spheres of the twentieth century.”[7] Reyher, the son of German immigrants was part of a group responsible for extraditing communist playwright Bertolt Brecht from Germany in 1941 and then translated much of his work. “Reyher’s first wife was suffragette, political activist, and author, Rebecca Hourwich Reyher. Also represented in Reyher’s papers is his second wife, Chinese writer and translator Eileen Chang (1920-1995).” The facts of his life, his divorce and remarriage in 1956 outside of his race, almost axiomatically make Reyher a liberal. Now that Reyher has left the white woman behind in real life for her pale Asian counterpart, in his fiction he wishes to give her away to the negro to complete his ideal liberal ‘miscegenation nation.’

Reyher’s coupling of white male with Asian female and white female with black man is statistically valid.

His second wife, Eileen Chang, a Western-educated Chinese, who’s work seems to be largely comprised of highly regarded melodrama, but has also been studied under the discourse of post-colonialism as a “de-colonizing endeavor, it is thus all the more imperative for us to examine how her concern with the exoticization of Chineseness as a cultural parody redefines the dynamic between East and West in the context of post-colonial studies.”[8] Furthermore, in his novel The Man, the Tiger and the Snake, Reyher, gives lassiez faire, itself linked to the Chinese mysticism of Taoism, a Westernized mythical sheen; as the novel begins with an exultation of the market as an “interplay of the so-called domestic and exotic… commerce, more than art or religion, has been mankind’s method of getting acquainted with itself” which has “a bit of the glint of the grail.” This is a rather obscene bit of sophistry and specious obtuse allusion, but indicates to us his general character and ideological disposition. If I have not been abundantly clear, the free market is the supreme method of cuckoldry par excellence. But for all Reyher’s Oriental fetishism, his mystification and mythologization of the market mechanism is closer to the truth of the transfiguration of the Traditionalist weltanschauung with that of the modern McWorld, which and as I have attempted to show “social liberalism is connected to economic liberalism and vice versa.” The overthrow of priest-warrior types and the ascendancy of Werner Sombart’s Jewish-merchant at the center of the social edifice represents this overthrow of the Traditional order that Evola extrapolates on in Revolt Against the Modern World.

The premise of The World, the Flesh and the Devil, is basically Omega Man with racial politics. Three survivors of a post-apocalyptic catastrophe, one white woman, one slightly older white male and a black male, engage a in an interracial love triangle in a depopulated New York City. The very Nordic Sarah Crandall played by Inger Stevens, falls in love with Ralph Burton, played by the black “king of Calypso” Harry Belafonte. But Ralph is unable to consummate his affection towards Sarah because of lingering racial norms, despite possibly being the only two human beings left on earth. Prior to discovering one another, however Ralph is alone through much of beginning of the film. Ralph, thinking he is entirely alone adopts two white manikins as his companions, dubbing the female ‘Betsy’ and the male ‘Snodgrass.’ He spends his time taunting Snodgrass and telling Betsy “she’s too good for him.” In another scene he serenades Betsy and has a violent confrontation with Snodgrass telling him, “You look at me but you don’t see me, and you wouldn’t care if you did!” then he picks him up and throws him from a balcony – ostensibly, murdering the representation of the white male patriarchy in this post-apocalyptic world, in order to win the white woman. When Ralph commits this violent act against the white male signifier, he is immediately introduced to the white female Sarah Crandall (Inger Stevens), who screams below the balcony because she thinks Ralph has committed suicide, she has been watching him, unsure whether to make contact. Ralph hears the scream and they meet. This violent act recalls Hegel’s master-slave fight to the death, in which the victor claims the spoils (both Betsy and Sarah) of the whip hand. Politically, the success of the civil rights movement by the Jewish led NAACP a decade later by Martian Luther King Jr, who according to FBI reports had a penchant for white women as well, and the further demonstrations by the Black Panthers Party and other militant black groups, like the Nation of Islam, black rage, expressed by the solidarity of black power, was met not with an equal force but with white guilt and the fragmentation of white solidarity, whites had lost the belief in themselves. In the face of black rage, the white man is smirking but impotent, like Snodgrass, which further incenses the Other to seek his historical revenge by way of conquest, sexual or otherwise.

The second thing that is relevant to this scene is Ralph’s double natured attitude towards Betsy and Snodgrass. While being kind and considerate to Betsy, he is outwardly hostile and mean-spirited towards Snodgrass. The implication that Snodgrass ‘can’t see and wouldn’t care’ is not leveled at Betsy; it is not leveled at the white world per se, only the white man.

Ralph and Sarah become friends, in one scene they watch a beauty pageant for the “loveliest girl in the world,” all the contestants are white. One day Ralph receives a radio signal from another survivor. Benson Thacker played by Mel Ferrer, arrives and Ralph begins to distance himself from the trio, giving Ben the green light to have ‘his woman.’ Sarah is conflicted by her affections towards the now largely disappeared Ralph. She brushes off Ben’s advances, so Ben confronts Ralph, sitting in front of him loading a pistol he tells the black man:

“This little game of yours won’t work, you act noble so I’ll look bad, you pretend to live us alone together, but all the while your right at my elbow looking over my shoulder, you’re everywhere that’s the trouble, plotting and scheming like some kind of spider.”

“You know, you remind me of a guy named Snodgrass” says Ralph.

“I have nothing against negroes.”

“That’s white of you.”

As Ben characterizes Ralph to this position of predatory stalking, standing behind him, looking at his prized possessions, namely his status and his woman, the dialogue is essentially reflective in regards to outside groups within our nations. Ralph stands as Ben’s anti-thesis, the underside of his ‘misdeeds,’ and his perceived ill-begotten status in the world, ready to take from him what is his, but only if Ben shows weakness, reluctance or sentimental mollification of the Other by way of cucking. Once he has been freed the black man stands behind the white man as his shadow, as his pet project and as his Frankenstein monster – look how I’ve civilized the savage, look how noble I am in freeing him to live amongst us as our equal, indeed he will honour me for it – Hegel wrote: “We alter external things in order to strip them of their foreignness, their independence, their alienation. We seek to recognize ourselves, our own doing, in the external thing – and thus we humanize it.” But no, the Black does not honour the White man for the one ‘good deed’ of emancipation; but he dishonors him for a more deplorable one; on his scorecard he is stilled owed – Snodgrass must be overthrown! And each black face becomes a remembrance of guilt and a reminder of a moral debt and deeper than that on an almost subconscious level a reminder of that ill-fitting costume of humanity.

It is a loose-fitting identity, so loose-fitting in fact that a phanopoeia of the most absurd quality is best deployed to illustrate its ineffectiveness and imprecision; imagine a man wearing a circus tent as his clothing, the apex its very center had been cut so that the man wears the circus tent about his shoulders where it drapes in folds and billows and stretches for miles in each direction. This is the clothing of human and of “absolute abstraction.” We are told that the master cannot free the slave without ceasing to be who he is, a master. In Hegel’s conception in freeing the slave the master also frees himself. That is to say he condemns himself to the existential despair of not knowing who he is. How can man be sure of himself as man, if he is not sure who he is? Oddly enough this “negative fact of self-identical consciousness” linked to a process of pure abstraction leads to “each aims at the destruction and death of the other.”[9] This is part of the West’s identity crisis. The modern world offers two choices to political identity, either as an act of humanity (liberal cucking) or as an individual (deferred liberal cucking); it tries to deny group rights.

The second option available to Ben is that of individualism; the man now dons a new costume, not comically loose-fitting like the circus tent, but this one is absurdly tight, so tight in fact that he may suffocate within the gimp suit of his own design. As Melville wrote about Hamlet, “The cheeks of his soul collapsed in him: he dashed himself in blind fury and swift madness against the wall, and fell dabbling in the vomit of his loathed identity.” Was not Hamlet reacting against the changes wrought in his identity, a crown prince and heir apparent becomes the surviving son to a slain King, and the throne of the sovereign becomes usurped by an Uncle who is now a step-father. Thus to Nietzsche’s questioning of the misanthropic cannibalism of our Prince “who ever bade you swallow men like oysters Prince Hamlet?” One could answer that the Prince was only reacting to the loss of his identity. This is the straightjacket of the White Persona reduced to individualism – that other cucked option left open to him. The third, unexpressed option of selective group collective identity is largely withheld – it is as infeasible to the fiction as it is vilified in reality.

The World, the Flesh and the Devil, represents the idea of a Year Zero, a post-racial, post-historical world; the potential for a “depoliticized collective experience,” the utopian project of progressive historicism. However, the tripartite title of the work, taken from Christian theology, can be likened to the three characters in the Garden of Eden; with the white man conceived as the serpent. Sarah corresponds to the flesh as both men desire her, and Ralph is the world – that is the Other as stand in for Humanity. Ben, as both Devil and White man, is given two options in this Year Zero, the first is as a member of humanity, since he is one of three survivors, if he identities with Ralph, he thereby identifies with the World. The second option is individually as a competitive atomized seeker of his own pleasure, to monopolize his ownership of Sarah, as a kind of proto-sexual-capitalist. The third unavailable option of selective identification is denied implicitly denied by the limitations of the drama.

It is of no coincidence that the White man is both injured and older than the healthy virile Black. As the spoils of generations of White advancement and the dethroning of the European male as Master signifier has resulted in his ‘old age’ and relative pessimism. Outside groups that gain an advantage in the White man’s weakness are emboldened by his disparaging uncertainty.

D.H. Lawrence in discussing the qualities of women, in an excellent essay on Nathanial Hawthorne’s The Scarlett Letter had this to say:

“As a matter of fact, unless a woman is held, by man, safe within the bounds of belief, she becomes inevitably a destructive force. She can’t help herself. A woman is almost always vulnerable to pity. She can’t bear to see anything physically hurt. But let a woman loose from the bounds and restraints of man’s fierce belief, in his gods and in himself, and she becomes a gentle devil.”

That vulnerability to pity was what kept Betsy from Snodgrass’ fate. There is one scene in particular in the film that this idea of man holding woman in the confines of belief holds out as if Lawrence himself had written it in accordance to his conceptions. In a mirrored scene on the streets Sarah screams “don’t touch me” to both Ralph and Ben at different times in the film, Ralph acquiesces to her request, while Ben does not, holding her about her arms manhandling her, he holds in a way that implies ownership, while in the mirrored scene the black fumbles and feels uneasy touching her. The scene culminates in Sarah asking Ben to ravage her, “Kiss me, make love to me, make me forget everything, harder, harder, harder…” then she runs off camera and we hear her car veer off in a hurry. In the next scene Ben goes to a gun store to get a rifle and ammo, but decides not to and throws down his arms. Afterwards, Sarah, playing the post-apocalyptic field, brings flowers to Ralph; this is the second time that she has given him a symbolic representation of her sexuality, the first she handed him a bunch of dainty dresses, which he fumbles with, symbolically asking Ralph to undress her, than she presents him with her flower(s). Ralph rebukes her advances, “I want him to have you.” Sarah responds, “Sooner or later someone’s got to ask me what I want,” but of course she does not know. The psychological messages herein, nearly subliminal, are two-fold, firstly they confirm to us that women desire to be confronted by males within the boundaries of the ever thinning hairline separating sexual harassment from testicular fortitude, and secondly, that if the Negro is to aspire to his desires for the white woman he will have to take her, to man up and lay claim, a la King Kong.

Together in her apartment, Ben and Sarah have the following heated exchange:

Ben – “we don’t have to play parlor games getting to the point.”

Sarah – “women enjoy parlor games.”

Ben – “I’ll remember, meanwhile; me man, you girl, how about it?”

Ben – “Are you in love with Ralph?”

Sarah – “I don’t know.”

Ben – “Are you in love with me?”

Sarah – “I don’t know that either.”

Ben – “Would you know if Ralph weren’t around.”

Sarah – “I don’t have to answer these questions.”

After more ‘parlor games’ Ben grabs her between his arms, “I’m sick of talking”

Sarah halfheartedly, “Ben don’t…”

Ben – “the other night, when I held you, I felt you come to life. For a few seconds at least, you knew I was a man and you knew what you wanted. I could force you, I’d be easy no one around to care if you screamed, all the boy scouts out of town, should I force you, is that the way?”

In this moment, when he asks her the question, his macho posturing is revealed to be a fraud, he no longer holds firm in his belief in his ownership of her, and instead she is given the right of suffrage, and sovereignty and she seizes upon his newfound vulnerability, and she wrestles herself free, “It’s a way for getting me to make up my mind.”

As we have seen, because Ben does not claim ownership of Sarah on racial grounds, but views Ben as a legitimate contender for her affections, Ben aspires to the level of individual consciousness. “Self-consciousness is primarily simple existence for self, self-identity by exclusion of every other from itself. It takes its essential nature and absolute object to be Ego; and in this immediacy, in this bare fact of its self-existence, it is individual.” This mindset leads to the Hobbesian war of all against all, as Hegel points out “each aims at the destruction and death of the other.”[10] In the plot, because Sarah has become Lawrence’s “gentle devil,” Ben and Ralph have a shoot-out through New York City trying to kill one another.

During the Hegelian fight to the death, outside the United Nation’s building donated by Rockefeller, Ralph looks upon the quote from Isaiah 2:4. “They shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.” Ralph gets the jump on Ben, but he does not kill him and he throws away his rifle, not only that but he gets the upper hand morally, and wins Sarah’s affection, she offers him her hand, which he takes in tenderness. As the black and white woman walk hand-in-hand towards the horizon Sarah then calls Ben back and takes him in her other hand, maybe so that he can hold Ben’s ballsack while he is gorilla fucking Sarah, and they walk off into the dissolute streets with the words “THE BEGINNING” coming across the screen – the polymorphous ménage a trios begins with unbridled female sexuality and white male cucking. Inter-racial male bonding often occurs through misogyny but here it occurs through cuckoldry – this is the basis of our current political and sexual politics. This is the degeneracy we must stop. In the culture war each white woman lost to miscegenation represents a catastrophic causality with generational repercussions, ultimately leading to racial replacement and genocide. The white woman has been guided down this pathway towards racial annihilation by the most sophisticated techniques of propaganda, emanating its message from the hills of Yiddish Tinsel Town. Inger Stevens, the actress who played Sarah not only carried on miscegenist relations in real life, but married a negro, Ike Jones, a business associate and friend her co-star and male led Harry Belafonte. They wed two years after the film debuted, and kept it hidden for fear of public reprisals. In so far as her portrayal of miscegenation in film was beyond such reprisals, art is contemporarily viewed as apolitical, even when it is ostensibly political; it truly represented a revolutionary form of socially engineering consent. The fact that Stevens publically hid her miscegenist marriage for fear of reprisal but flaunted it unashamedly on the silver screen points to cinema’s role as a vanguard in shaping, producing and acculturating acceptable moral and social practices – but this points especially  to (((Hollywood))) as an agent of social conditioning armed against the white race.


[1] Zizek 37.

[2] Mothering the Race: Women’s Narratives on Reproduction, 1890-1930. Allison Berg 108.




[5] Susan Courtney Hollywood Fantasies of Miscegenation: Spectacular Narratives of Gender and Race. (4).

[6] Mothering the Race: Women’s Narratives on Reproduction, 1890-1930. Allison Berg 108.