Statement on the Racial Privacy Initiative

Statement on the Racial Privacy Initiative

James Landrith

by James A. Landrith, Jr.
October/November 2001

As editor and publisher of The Multiracial Activist and The Abolitionist Examiner, one half of an "interracial" marriage, and an individual who can identify as "multiracial", I would like to take this time to express my commitment to ending our government's obsession with classifying Americans by "race."

These nasty little classifications have been contributing to America's "racial" problems from the beginning of our nation's history. It is far past time for Americans to unite, abandon the insidious concept of biological "races" and deconstruct the arbitrary "racial" walls dividing one American from another. Continually dividing our fellow Americans by "race" reinforces the concept that one group of Americans are so different from another group of Americans that they must be viewed differently and as a nasty consequence of this type of thinking, treated differently. These "racial" classifications do not end or lessen "racism." These classifications do, however, reinforce the concept of "race", which in turn fosters the twin demons of superiority and inferiority. This is government-coerced segregation of the body, mind and spirit. It violates the most basic fundamental principles of privacy and fairness. It is just plain wrong and if we are to survive as a free nation, we can no longer allow it.

Many people believe that abolishing these categories will allow "racism" to multiply unchecked. These alarmists want people to believe that abolishing the categories will bring back the horrors of Jim Crow. I believe those people are wrong. I believe that continuing to force people into little boxes for the purpose of fighting "racism" is intellectually bankrupt and a form of collectivist intolerance. These nasty little boxes were designed from day one to keep people separated for the purpose of ensuring legislative power in slave states. The very idea that these categories have the magical power to end "racism" is a perverse concept when you consider the reason they originally came into being. You cannot fight "racism" while simultaneously promoting the concept of different "racial" classifications.

Further, the potential for abuses of such "racial" data are immense. Just ask those Americans that the Census Bureau so kindly singled out as being of Japanese descent during World War II. Just ask the Department of Justice, who used this data to corral these Americans into concentration camps for the sole crime of ancestral heritage For those who wish to round up citizens based on supposed "racial" background, there's nothing better than Census rolls which identify people by address, "race" and number of people in the household.

Of course, during the 1980's and the Gulf War, politicians and Administration officials once again discussed rounding up American citizens based on ancestral descent. In particular, the INS created its now-infamous "Option Paper," which laid out plans "to locate, apprehend and remove a body of aliens from the U.S." This scenario included the use of a 100-acre prison in Oakdale, Louisiana for holding detainees. This time, instead of Japanese, it was Middle Eastern ancestry that became a reason to put people in concentration camps. Fortunately, in January 1991, politicians like Representatives Don Edwards, Norman Y. Mineta, and Romano L. Mazzoli, among others spoke out and changed the direction of the debate away from the ugly path that America appeared to be headed down. Now, in light of the events of September 11, we need more than ever to abandon this insidious concept of separating Americans by supposed "race." Unfortunately, the terrorist attacks have led some to commit cowardly retaliatory attacks against those perceived to be of a specific demographic. Our government only feeds this type of mindset with its insistence on dividing Americans by "race."

When fascist forces rear their ugly heads again in government, we must not make it easier for them to fulfill their horrific agendas by providing them with lists of Americans by "race" and home address.

So, with the thought in mind, that in order to defeat "racism" in America we must first defeat and destroy the concept of "race," I have accepted Ward Connerly's invitation to serve on the steering committee of the Racial Privacy Initiative (RPI). RPI will ban the State of California from classifying people according to race, ethnicity, color or national origin. While this alone will not end "racism," it is an important first step in allowing Americans to break out of the "racialist" mold. Governments must not be allowed to continue to impose "race"-based thinking on it's citizens.

"Mighty little force is needed to control a man whose mind has been hoodwinked; contrariwise, no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything-you can't conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him." -Robert Heinlein

The concept of "racial" classifications is one of modern history's biggest "hoodwinks" and is anathema to the concepts of liberty and free will. These nasty little boxes, as used by the government, have now become the weapon of choice by "racialist" groups like the NAACP and National Urban League in their battles for political power against "multiracial" people and "interracial" families who refuse to submit to the oppressive "one-drop" rule. The "one-drop" rule as currently applied by these groups dictates that individuals with even the slightest amount of so-called "black blood" must identify solely as "black" for the sake of "black" political power. Aside from being biologically false, and perpetuating "racist" stereotypes of what is and isn't acceptable "black" behaviour, this offensive philosophy violates the free will of Americans to identify how they see fit, including the right to shed a "racial" identity altogether. This is intolerable and must end now. The American public has pushed the Ku Klux Klan and Aryan Nations to the fringes of society, so shall it be with the NAACP, National Urban League and other traditional civil rights organizations if they continue to push these offensive 18th century "racialist" designs down the throats of "multiracial" people and "interracial" families.

It is my steadfast belief that until these categories are gone, we will not be able to begin to give "racism" the appropriate burial it deserves. These categories, created for the sole purpose of ensuring slave state political power at our nation's birth are not the solution to "racism." To state otherwise is a perverse distortion of history. America, it's time to step out of the 1790s. The Emancipation Proclamation was signed in 1863, yet here we are in 2001, still trying to ensure slave state political power.

It's time to let the deconstruction begin.

James Landrith is the notorious editor and publisher of The Multiracial Activist and The Abolitionist Examiner, two cyber-rags dedicated to freedom from oppressive racial categorization. Landrith can be reached by email at: or at his personal website/blog.

Relevant Links:

  • Racial Privacy Initiative
  • American Civil Rights Institute
  • The Multiracial Activist
  • The Abolitionist Examiner

    Copyright © 2001 The Multiracial Activist. All rights reserved.


    1. Date: Friday, May 10, 2002 1:29 PM
      From: W. Sanford Smith III
      Subject: Letter to the Editor

      Mr. Landrith,

      I read your piece in Freedom News and wanted to encourage you a little. While I’m not especially multiracial, I totally agree with you about eliminating race-based questions on the thousands of applications and surveys. To be clearer, they can ask. We shouldn’t have to answer.

      Whenever I come across a question like that, I either choose “decline to answer,” or if that isn’t available, I check “other,” and write “Human.” Keep fighting for what’s right!

      Sanford Smith in Texas

      “Necessity is the plea of every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.”
      William Pitt

    2. It doess matter

      I’m afraid the “deconstruction of race” will never happen, unless literally everyone mates outside of their race. You see, while the genetic differences b/w races ( however you want to describe physically distinct human populations ) might be insignificant/minor, realistically people are visual creatures so race will always exist and matter in a social and cultural context. By this I mean everyday people don’t think like “oh the differences that determine this are actually irrelevant”, if they see major differences( skin/hair/facial features) in people they will react upon this, even if technically the genes that determine these differences are actually very minor. Humans and apes also share a lot of genetic similarity, but I don;t feel I have anything incommon w/ apes. The truth is, not everyone( and not just whyte suppremacist kkk members or militant seperatists) wants to be colour blind or live in a colour blind society. I think most people feel comfortable around other people who look like them, even if similar racial characteristics doesn’t always guarantee solidarity b/w two cultures who belong to the same race. The truth is, race does matter. If not genetically, then socially/culturally and which is more important to everyday people?

      2002-11-04 22:26:00

      1. First of all, there is only one race – Human. There is a much bigger difference between an Ape and a Man than there is between a Chinese person and an African. First of all, Apes and Men are different species and are not able to mate and create offspring. Humans, on the other hand, are actually all people and this enables them to procreate with each other regardless of eye color, hair color or skin color – all of which are specific genetic traits, but the only one that separates us is the skin color thing.

        I think that you mean that YOU feel more comfortable around people who look like you, and that’s absolutely fine for you. I feel more comfortable around people that I have something in common with and I find that I have things in common with all different kinds of people, including people from different countries, with different eye colors and of different religions. I have a Falasha friend from Ethiopia, a Pashtun friend from Pakastan, I have friends who are Europeans, I have friends who are European Americans, I have friends who are African Americans, you name it. I love my world the way that it is.

        If you don’t bother to reach out to people who look different from you and to find common interests, you will never know that we really have more in common than we have differences, will you?

        2002-11-11 11:34:00

    3. Date: Tue, December 31, 2002 5:57 am
      From: Alfred Ruess
      Subject: RPI, ahead of the curve

      Dear Mr. Landrith,

      I am in complete agreement with the RPI, but the exemption for Law Enforcement troubles me, because it does disproportionately impact minorities, but more importantly, it is ineffective, even counterproductive and destructive.

      If a suspect is identified, by witnesses, as an African-American, without any reference to skin color; hair color; hair texture, shape of nose; shape of lips; eye color; eye shape; hair style; clothing etc. this information is useless in black ghettos. In mixed environments this information is not only useless but counterproductive and destructive because the search for the suspect can not be focused, Law Enforcement resources are squandered and a lot of innocents are inconvinienced, or worse.

      A total prohibition of racial identification by any government agency must be the ultimate goal. See enclosed.

      Logically and respectfully yours,

      Alfred Ruess

      Disclaimer: The past, the present, and the future are an omnidirectional continuum. Recorded history is a collection of linear segments of the past, arranged to please the collector.

      September 15th 2001

      Dear Dr. Reich,

      Your analogy of anti-Semitism with an ancient plague, “LOS ANGELES TIMES, APRIL 13. 2000”, might not have been intended to be a medical one, but deserves to be explored as such.

      As it was with the ancient plague, so it is with anti-Semitism. It was not, and it is not enough to document the course of the malady, but one must seek to identify the source, and develop and prescribe antidotes and prophylactics.

      The source of the plague is the Bacillus Pestis, cross infecting rodents and fleas. The plague is endemic, the reservoirs are rodent populations. Certain conditions will lead to deadly epidemics, which take three forms, often concurrently and interactively: bubonic plague; pneumonic plague; and septicaenemic plague. The antidotes against the plague are: a serum (Yerses 1895) and antibiotics. Prophylactics are: improved personal hygiene; improved sanitation; destruction of rodent habitats near humans; and pesticides.

      The source of group aggression is the Supremacy Bacillus, cross-infecting pro group think and anti group-think. Group aggression is endemic, the reservoirs are libraries, museums and archives. Certain conditions will lead to deadly epidemics which take three forms, often concurrently and interactively: patriphobic anti-Semitism; fratriphobic tribalism; and xenophobic racism. The antidote against group aggression is the enclosed ” Absolute Emancipation Passport”, which should be distributed and prominently displayed in all libraries, schools, universities, museums, public buildings, archives, workplaces, and places of worship. Prophylactics are; the above disclaimer as a preface for all books and communications with historic content; the worldwide promotion of majority election for every public office, which is the only assurance for a popular consensus, and insurance against spiraling, radical polarization; the total ban of government identification of individuals by race, color, religion, ethnicity, and national origin”

      While all ancestral group think is destructive, it is particularly insidious in Jewish-Christian interaction, because it carries all the baggage, from one extreme to the other, of parent-child interaction: simultaneously loving and hating, caring and abusing.

      When two people share an identical ancestry, but one sprang from the other, they are neither strangers nor siblings, but parent and child.

      A parent may disown a child, and a child may disown a parent. Parental and filial enmity is caused by unfulfilled expectations not of strangers, but of those nearest and dearest. Inescapably bonded, never strangers, never equals.

      Carl Jung , responding in 1934 to Dr. Bally’s criticism of his role in helping to Aryanize the ZENTRALBLATT made the most telling statement: I am grateful to my theological forebears for having passed on to me the Christian premise and I also admit my so-called “father complex”: I do not want to knuckle under to any “fathers”, and I never shall.

      Leon Poliakov spoke of the “Aggressive Oedipus complex” of the Son religion of Christians.

      Jung and Poliakov must be credited with the discovery of the patriphobic strain of group aggression, in the case of Jung unwittingly.

      All this seems simplistic in light of the inability, and/or unwillingness, of experts to find a remedy for group aggression/anti-Semitism, as evidenced by continued deadly epidemics. Perhaps another medical analogy gives some insight. For centuries the medical experts were not only unable, and /or unwilling to find, but vigorously opposed, the only effective and readily available first aid remedy for skin burns: cold water and ice!

      I beg of you, and of all who abhor group aggression/ anti-Semitism to make use of the outlined remedies, or if you should find them wanting, replace them with improved remedies of your own.

      Logically and respectfully yours,
      Alfred Ruess

    Leave a Reply

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