Roots of Radicalism



THE COSY liberal self-delusion, founded like much of liberalism and multiracialism on no more than ignorance and prejudice, that only morons and bigots could possibly disagree with their egalitarian enlightenment, was nowhere more obviously given the lie than in the life of William Shockley, who died in mid-August, aged 79.

For Shockley not only firmly and publically rejected the liberal dogma that all men and all races are born innately equal in intellect, if not - as all but the most fanatical hard-core egalitarians admit - physique. He was also one of the world's most important scientists, for twelve years Professor of Engineering Science at Stanford, one of the world's leading universities, and winner of the Nobel Prize for the invention of the transistor, which has revolutionized the world in which we live.

A Briton by birth, Shockley was brought up in America, receiving his doctorate in physics from the internationally-renowned Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1936. After war service at Columbia University as Director of Anti-Submarine Warfare Research and then as expert advisor to the US Secretary of War, Shockley began research into semiconductors at Bell Telephone Laboratories.

On 23rd December, 1947, he was able to demonstrate the world's first crude transistor. He went on to turn his invention into a practical electronic device, founding Shockley Semiconductor Industries in 1984 in the process bringing about the birth of California's 'Silicon Valley'.


As even a hostile obituarist in the Daily Telegraph had to admit, Shockley's "invention of a solid-state device that could electronic signals made the more vulnerable, power-hungry vacuum tubes obsolete and marked the dawn of the electronic age. It ranks as one of the most significant breakthroughs of the 20th Century". Without Shockley's invention we not have a vast range of modern electronically-controlled goods, from lifesaving medical equipment to laboursaving household appliances. Not surprisingly, his genius was rewarded with the 1986 Nobel Prize for Physics, the highest honour a scientist in his field could win.

Hardly the 'moronic racist redneck' of the liberal bigot's stereotype. Yet the intellectual brilliance and scientific rigour which gave the world the transistor likewise gave Professor Shockley the firm conviction, based upon his work of his fellow scientists in the fields of physical anthropology, psychology and human genetics, that individuals and races did differ in innate intellectual endowment.

Liberals were so incensed by Prof. Shockley's views that he had to be escorted by guards as he went to give lectures on campus.

On April 24th, 1968, Professor Shockley courageously stood up in front of his fellows in the National Academy of Sciences's scientific elite, armed with "facts I now consider so unassailable that I them before fellow members of the National Academy of Sciences with a clear conscience. The basic facts are: Man is a mammal and subject to the biological laws as other animals. All animals, including Man, have inheritable behavioural traits. The concept of complete environmental plasticity of human intelligence is a nonsensical wishful-illusion ... An objective examination of relevant data leads me inescapably to the opinion that the major deficit in Negro intellectual performance must be primarily of hereditary origin and thus relatively irremediable by practical improvements in environment".

It is on these facts and data, deemed 'unassailable' and 'inescapable' by one of the greatest scientific minds of this century, and indeed amassed and supported by the work of scientific intellects often of comparable calibre, that the National Front rests its case and from which it draws its political conclusions. It is our opponents, not we, whose views are based merely on prejudice and ignorance, enforced at times by crude intellectual, even physical, intimidation.

The extent of that prejudice, ignorance and intimidation emanating from liberal multiracialists can be seen from his colleagues response to Shockley's blunt assertion of facts backed by hard evidence. Shockley did not urge the National Academy of Sciences just to take his word it on matters of innate human nature and differences - as he admitted, it was not his field. Nor even just to examine the evidence as he had, and draw their own conclusions as he did.

No, for three years running, in 1967,1968 and 1969, Shockley asked America's foremost scientific body simply to go and find out for itself. To fund, or carry out itself, the research needed to discover, once and for all, the truth about inherited differences in human intellectual endowment and racial difference therein.

As the New York Post it on December th, 1969, "The National Academy of Sciences ... has overwhelmingly refused even to consider the view," as they put Shockley's case, "that millions of genetically inferior children, primarily Black, were being produced in the US".

The reason for this utterly anti-scientific refusal even to consider scientific evidence on an important social question, let alone investigate it themselves, on the part of America's top scientists is, as Shockley realised, obvious. "Most scientists lack the courage to doubt", he charged, the liberal "party line", "at least for the record". Indeed, they lacked the courage to fund, still less carry out, research which they themselves clearly realised might well leave liberalism utterly discredited - for who can doubt the eagerness with which all and sundry would have rushed, in the full glare of media publicity, to carry out that research if they thought it would discredit Shockley and "prove the racists wrong"?

It was because they knew very well further research into racial differences would only add to the vast weight of scientific evidence proving the 'racists' right that America's top scientists flatly refused "even to consider" doing such research. So much for the 'free spirit of impartial scientific enquiry'. In the liberal 'West', as much as the Marxist 'East', inconvenient facts are best not discovered or, if discovered, ignored.


And inconvenient people who point out such politically unacceptable facts are silenced. More subtly, perhaps, but as thoroughly. From the moment he dared speak the truth on the dread topic of race, Shockley, hitherto a media hero as the man who vastly enhanced the regime's technological capability, became a figure of and ridicule in Press and TV. His views, if reported at all, were misrepresented - for example, contrary to the New York Post cited above, did not describe innately less people, Black or White, as "genetically inferior". Indeed, he accused liberals of condemning Blacks in White society to "generations of genetic enslavement".

Even in an obituary forced forth by Shockley's un-ignorable contribution to Twentieth Century science, the Daily Telegraph August 18th dismissed his views on race and intelligence as "bizarre" and "his own radical version of the final solution", which "tarnished his personal ".

Inevitably, Shockley, like anyone questioning the liberal line on racial matters even purely, like Konrad Lorenz, on the determination of human nature in general, was called a 'Nazi'. Shockley, unlike the Front, had the money to gain access the System's courts to defend himself such absurd slurs. In 1984, for example, he won a libel case before a jury and was awarded damages against Atlanta reporter Roger Withespoon, had referred to his ideas, bizarrely, as "reworked Hitlerian experiments".

Nonetheless, the mud stuck, and frightened less courageous academics into one of their greatest living colleagues, in 1973, for example, Leeds University offered Shockley an honorary degree as a tribute to his contribution to electronics, only to abruptly and rudely withdraw it because of his "racial theories", a matter hardly related to his electronic research.


Finally, when Professor Shockley still refused to keep silent, still less to resign his Professorship at Stanford, which he held from 1963 to his retirement in 1978, the resorted to their usual final argument. Gangs of thugs attempted to smash up the Professor's lectures and beat him up. Yet still, bloodied but unbowed, to end of his life Shockley fought, as he put it, "to turn the ship of civilisation away from dysgenic storm" impending from birthrates among those of lower intelligence, notably Blacks, and of those Blacks with the host White populations.

In death, as in life, William Shockley gives the lie to the liberal line that it is we and not they who are prejudiced, bigoted thugs. He proved, by his repeated challenges to America's leading scientific institution, from one of its most respected members, to find out the truth on race for it is that very truth they fear and dare not seek.

Yet it is that truth, so courageously upheld in the heart of the liberal darkness by William Shockley that shall one day shine forth and set men, Black as well as White, free. Free of the shackles of liberal dogma founded on lies and the organised pursuit of self-deception, and free to fulfill the separate destinies of each and every race of man!