But, alas, here again:

(a) Under Paul Craig Roberts;s article, All Races Suffer from Police Violence, Unz Review (3 June 2020), https://www.unz.com/proberts/all-races-suffer-from-police-violence/#comment-3949098 :
* My comment of June 5, 2020 at 12:41 am GMT (comment # 14)

(b) Under Ron Unz’s article Race and Crime in America, Unz Review (20 July 2013), https://www.unz.com/runz/race-and-crime-in-america/
* My comment of June 3, 2020 at 2:09 am GMT (comment # 221)
AND
* My comment of February 19, 2020 at 3:05 am GMT (comment # 151)
* My comment of February 19, 2020 at 10:04 pm GMT (comment # 158)
* My comment of February 19, 2020 at 10:38 pm GMT (comment # 160) as corrected in my comment of February 19, 2020 at 10:49 pm GMT (comment # 161)
* My comment of February 20, 2020 at 10:31 pm GMT (comment # 168)
* My comment of February 21, 2020 at 12:47 am GMT (comment # 170)
* My comment of February 21, 2020 at 4:21 am GMT (comment # 172)
* My comment of February 22, 2020 at 11:00 pm GMT (comment # 184) as corrected in my comment of February 23, 2020 at 2:10 am GMT (comment # 186)

(c) Under Fred Reed’s article, Her Name Is Breonna Taylor, Unz Review (7 June 2020), https://www.unz.com/freed/her-name-is-breanna-taylor/#comment-3957894
* My comment of June 8, 2020 at 9:24 pm GMT (comment # 236)
* My comment of June 10, 2020 at 2:12 am GMT (comment # 401)

Si vous, Monsieur Durocher, avez étudié les statistiques, vous n’êtes pas simplement coupable d’erreur analytique, vous êtes sans scrupules.

Among the evidences I have presented to show that the pseudo-“statistics” are unreliable even quite invalid, one evidence item was the proven rate of false-convictions — according to one respected and reliable source, up to about 60% of murder convictions and about 36% of rape convictions: Samuel R. Gross, Kristen Jacoby, Daniel J. Matheson, Nicholas Montgomery, EXONERATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES 1989 THROUGH
2003, 95 Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 523, at 529 (2005),
https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=7186&context=jclc

I presented also three other sources’ similar showings:
(1) http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Documents/Race_and_Wrongful_Convictions.pdf [specially relevant to false convictions of Blacks]
(2) https://time.com/wrongly-convicted/ [all “races”/”ethnicities”]
(3) https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/251115.pdf [all “races”/”ethnicities”]

Somewhat “less” disturbing statistics obtain from a presentation of a long-time member of the board of directors of the Innocence Project, John Grisham, a famous novelist and attorney. Relying on statistics accumulated by the Innocence Project, Mr. Grisham noted: (a) During the period 1990-2015, DNA evidence led to 2,000 judicial exonerations (judicial judgments of innocense, not merely determinations of convictions produced by invalid process or insufficient evidence). (b) Of those 2,000 persons, 200 were death row prisoners (scheduled to be executed). See https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-grisham-wrongful-convictions-20180311-story.html , which excerpts pertinent parts of Mr. Grishom’s original presentation contained in Mr. Grisham’s Foreword of the book “The Cadaver King and the Country Dentist: A True Story of Injustice in the American South” (27 February 2018), Radley Balko and Tucker Carrington, authors. In a Cato Institute review of that book, the reviewer observes:

In a nation with roughly two million people behind bars, a conservative estimate of the number of imprisoned innocent people is probably in the thousands, and perhaps in the tens of thousands. * * * The state of justice in Mississippi may have been particularly bleak, but so many of the problems that happened there are not unique at all.

The book-reviewer was Jonathan Blanks, Research Associate of the Cato Institute’s “Project on Criminal Justice” and a “Writer in Residence” at Harvard University’s Fair Punishment Project. The Cato Institute is not left-wing, but libertarian.

My presentations show, clearly and compellingly, that the Blacks-commit-most-felonies pseudo-“statistics” are toxic dross — viler than junk science — redolent with the stench of psychopathic race-hatred. I wonder whether you READ all of my former comments that I cited in my comment of June 24, 2020 at 2:50 am GMT (comment # 13): your above-quoted statement can suggest that you did not.

I suppose I must repeat, and elaborate upon, some non-statistics matters I have stated in several others of my comments posted under a few other Unz Review articles:

I am not Black, but of Finno-Ugric ethnicity (my mother’s ethnicity likely pure Magyar, and my father’s ethnicity likely a mix of Magyar and Estonian).

My sociopolitical/economics position is nonexistent. Politics & economics are bad, dark jokes, much because mostly humanity is psychopathic. I am an atheist who contemns all religion (even personal moral codes). My professions are law (I am a law professor) & medicine. My only quasi-political interest is whether, in a certain social milieu that happens to obtain, a particular problem really exists and, if so, may be solved “better” one way rather not another.

I am a very old, near-hermit misanthrope. My ideals are male wolves, mountain goats, and male Canada geese. I am a Francophile and Sinophile. I worship Johann Sebastian Bach’s music. My sociopolitical/economic dream — just a dream — is a Kropotkinian anarchy of mutual aid. Cf. Leonard R. Jaffee, Empathic Adjustment an Alternative to Rules, Policies, and Politics, 58 University of Cincinnati Law Review 1161 (1990), available likely in every law school lipbrary or, for a price, at HeinOnline, web-page https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/ucinlr58&div=6&id=&page=

When I was 6 and my non-Catholic biological parents thrust me into an orphanage run by the “Catholic Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Children,” a 9-years-old Black boy protected me from White inmates who threatened me near-daily and when I was 21 and 22, I lived in a partial Black ghetto and had a Black roommate (a social worker who held an MA in psychology) and two Black lovers. And I have known and worked with more than a few Black professionals who bore fine minds and produced virtuous works.

In the movie “Hidden Figures,” one is presented also a very respectable strain of Black society. And one meets three Black women whose intelligence and learning were better than the learning or intelligence of most Whites, one of which women, Katherine Johnson, was a brilliant mathematician, whose insights and math work were vital to NASA’sd manned space travel project, insights and math work without which the project would not have succeeded.

[Side-Note:
One comment-poster has insisted theat Ms. Johnson’s math was not special, even rudimentary — just ordinary orbital calculation any engineer could perform. MarkinLA’s comment of June 8, 2020 at 5:10 am GMT (comment # 238) and MarkinLA’s comment of June 23, 2020 at 2:43 am GMT (comment # 387) and MarkinLA’s comment of June 23, 2020 at 2:22 pm GMT (comment # 391) and MarkinLA’s comment of June 23, 2020 at 2:40 pm GMT (comment # 392), posted under Ron Unz’s article “Race and Crime in America” https://www.unz.com/runz/race-and-crime-in-america/?showcomments#comments

After replying twice to MarkinLA, I determined never again to reply to that comment-poster, despite his consistently unsupported, increasingly ad hominem baitings.]

The sure fact is that all the other NASA scientists and mathematicians were stumped, and Ms. Johnson solved the problems the others could not. Watch the movie, which, though suffering some bloated Hollywood romanticizing, shows Md. Johnson’s brilliant feats, the virtue and importance of which NASA has acknowledged.
https://www.nasa.gov/content/katherine-johnson-biography
See also https://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/k-4/stories/nasa-knows/who-was-katherine-johnson-k4
and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katherine_Johnson#Awards , which lists awards Ms. Johnson received
and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katherine_Johnson#Legacy_and_honors , which observes honors accorded her.

Perhaps (I do not know because I am not privy to the calculations) Ms. Johnson did not more than apply a rather ordinary formula to an orbit problem. But, if, successfully, one applies a standard rule in a new way to a problem previously thought not amenable to application of that rule and no other expert imagined such application, then one accomplishes a brilliant feat despite the tool is “ordinary. Such occurs rarely in law.]

Still, nothing (not even anything MarkinLA has presented) suggests that MarkinLA has received any math or science award or honor or even that he or she is an engineer (as he or she claims) or that he or she possesses any substantial math or science skill.

End Side-Note]

Still I have disliked perhaps 85% of the Blacks with whom I have had greater than an instant’s contact.

And I dislike, greatly, Black “culture” — Black “comedy” (which consists mostly of attempts of shocking adults with raging streams of foul language), rap and hip-hop and other Black “music” (except rarely some real, old-time ragtime or blues), pants worn so low they show much of the wearer’s butt and having a crotch so low they look as if the wearer expelled a mass of thick diarrhea and ebonics, the cool tough-guy gait, the endzone “demonstrations” that mar pro football games, the brash idiocy of much of Black Lives Matter antics……

I do not endure even for a 10th of a second any Black’s trying to treat me as if I were a slave-merchant, slave owner, Jim Crow South bigot or Ku Klux Klan member. I contemn affirmative action — the grievous harm of which I witnessed too much during the 26 years of my belong an active member of eight law faculties, including two of the top twenty law schools. [I cannot resist adding the matter that pro-homosexual affirmative action is near-equally harmful — a matter that is relevant because it reflects the same sick anti-utilitarian ingredient of pseudo-progressivism.]

When I was a member of the faculty hiring committee of one law school, I witnessed, and suffered, two instances of what ought to have been merely rare aberrations of law professor hiring process. In one case, the committed interviewed a Black woman who held a non-tenured position in another law school.

Just as I was an extremely “hard grader” of my students (most of whole did not deserve being a law student and would be a horrendous bane to their clients), I was a vicious critic of the scholarship, or lack of scholarship, and argumentation of my colleagues, most of whom hated my guts and feared arguing with me (two of my colleagues having been reduced to tears by my ruthless criticisms). Just so, when the Black woman appeared before the hiring committed, I endeavored to test whether she could survive my questioning.

She held her own magnificently. I urged the committee to recommend her to the whole faculty. Three of five committee-members — and the anti-scholarship idiot bitch of a 320 lbs barely-above-White-trash Dean — sought to reject her. They dug up some faux slime from the hatred of the candidate’s colleague who hated her for her brilliance, even used a very minor speech-impediment against her (an impediment that could not impair the effectiveness of her teaching).

So, I investigated the motives of the candidate’s detractors among my colleagues. They wanted to block the candidate’s appointment because they feared that the candidate’s brilliance would expose their incompetence just as I did.

Three years earlier, another Black candidate was hired. He had been politically savvy enough to avoid scaring my colleagues when they interviewed him. Two years after he joined the faculty, he decided to leave, return to the University of Minnesota’s law school. We had become close friends. Most of our colleagues eschewed being friendly with him. He was brilliant and a fine scholar. I begged him to stay. He said he could not bear the incompetence and rough culture of most of our colleagues. A year later, I gave up and left.

What ought one gather from those two cases? White bigotry’s worst characteristic is that White bigots cannot bear to encounter, and acknowledge, the minds of gifted Blacks, whom White bigots despise markedlyt more than the hate “ordinary” Blacks.

At core, our society’s “racial” trouble consists of two vital ingredients. (1) Like near all other species, humans tend to repel from “the different” and gravitate to “the same.” The tendency is native, instinctual. Just so, e.g., East Asians perceive that Whites smell bad and Whites think Blacks stink and Blacks think Whites and East Asian lack sensuous scent. I confess that I find unadulterated Western and Central African Blacks’ facial and hair characteristics very unappealing. But I expect they think the same of “White” hair and facial characteristics.

So what? We will not have peace and Benthamian-utilitarian society unless we admit such innate biases and then strive to consign their troublous manifestations to a trash dump and endeavor hard, but rationally and NOT sentimentally or with self-denigrating pseudo-progressive sick zeal, at least to coexist fairly and empathically and with sincere intent of supplying, or at least allowing, each other fair chance of happiness and least distress.

Now your question: “Could you please comment further about how you view the impact of IQ on the crime rate in different ethnocultural and racial groups?”

Alas, I cannot comprehend your question —

(a) because if its diction (your term “impact” occurring in “the impact of IQ on the crime rate…” and “ethnocultural”)
(b) because of its grammar (e.g., your term “on” in your phrase “impact of IQ on the crime rate”)
(c) because of the indeterminacy or ambiguity of the reference(s) of your language “the impact of IQ on the crime rate in different ethnocultural and racial groups,” which language causes me to puzzle hopelessly over what your concern may be, and, too, the obscurity of how “IQ” would bear a single “impact” “on” “ethnocultural…groups” (plural) and racial groups (plural)
(d) the indeterminability of whether you mean “within any one of the universe of ‘races’ (or racial groups, whatever “racial group” may mean) or, rather, in one ‘racial group’s’ [or ‘race’s’(?)] conduct within[?] or vis-a-vis another ‘racial group’ [or ‘race’?]

I expect that you believe you knew what you meant and that you believe you meant what you think you said. But your beliefs failed.

March Hare: “Then you should say what you mean.”
Alice: “I do…”… “at least—at least I mean what I say—that’s the same thing, you know.”
Hatter: “Not the same thing a bit ! … You might just as well say that ‘I see what I eat’ is the same…as ‘I eat what I see’ ! ”
March Hare: “You might just as well say…that ‘I like what I get’ is the same…as ‘I get what I like’!”

* * *

Alice: “I don’t know what you mean by ‘glory’.” [Sic]
Humpty Dumpty: “Of course you don’t—till I tell you. I meant ‘there’s a nice knock-down argument for you’ !” [Sic]
Alice: “But ‘glory’ doesn’t mean ‘a nice knock-down argument’.”
Humpty Dumpty: “When I use a word…it means just what I choose it to mean….”

Please try to refine and clarify whatever you may believe was your question. And I shall endeavor to answer.

Maybe you are asking (a) whether, and if so, to what extent or how IQ correlates to crime-commission and, if so, whether the correlation is significant and (b) if such correlation obtains and is significant, whether its magnitude or significance varies significantly ethnocultural-to-ethnocultural (whatever “ethnocultural” is) or “race”-to-“race” [or “race” within group of “races”].

If such is your question, then I must answer that I have not seen a “data”-collection that could premise a valid, reliable answer; and I would not consider seriously a data-set deriven per assumption that humanity is a collection of distinct “races” or that any one supposed distinct “race” was truly “pure,” not mongrel, like me and near-certainly you and all other humans except the few remaining traditional San [a.k.a. Bushman] people fortunately left free to live as the San live for about 40,000 years before the Dutch and English invaded the San habitat.

You appear not to know the legal meanings of “exoneration,” surely not the meaning pertinent to the discrete legal matter you try to put in issue. Rather than expect that your brain can comprehend pertinent judicial decisions, statutes, or legal rules, I shall refer you to a respectable here-pertinent “definition.”

Exoneration refers to a court order that discharges a person from liability. In criminal context the term exonerate refers to a state where a person convicted of a crime is later proved to be innocent.

https://definitions.uslegal.com/e/exoneration/ [My emphasis.]

In some OTHER contexts (NOT criminal law and related post-conviction-relief law (like habeas corpus), “exoneration” bears meanings distinct from the meaning it has in criminal law and related post-conviction-relief law.
* https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Exoneration
* https://dictionary.findlaw.com/definition/exoneration.html

You not to be a lawyer. Should (alas) you be an “attorney,” you ought not to be one, because you would be among the too many pseudo-lawyer, law-degree-holding, bar-admitted, functionally illiterate, insight-and-logic-lacking mechanics who disgrace the profession and hurt clients, the law, and society.

You say I reference statistics (and study results) that are

implausible to a sane man

Weird: The “numbers” (and the studies) are respected universally in the pertinent professions — (a) the general legal and judicial practice, (b) criminal law, criminal procedure and post-conviction-relief law, (c) sociology, (d) criminology. The article [EXONERATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES 1989 THROUGH 2003] — the data and statistical inferences of which have not been challenged — was authored by four experts of the pertinent fields and published in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, which is among the leading periodicals of its field.

I notice that you avoided referencing the four other sources I referenced. Those sources accord with the article you did reference, and those other sources’ authors are respected professionals of their fields, which are pertinent to the legal/statistical matters you try, risibly, to address.

But I confess that I fail to account your insane “definitions” of “sane” and “implausible.”

Taisez-vous, Monsieur Crétin. Et veuillez disparaître.

At core, our society’s “racial” trouble consists of two vital ingredients. (1) Like near all other species, humans tend to repel from “the different” and gravitate to “the same.” The tendency is native, instinctual. Just so, e.g., East Asians perceive that Whites smell bad and Whites think Blacks stink and Blacks think Whites and East Asian lack sensuous scent. I confess that I find unadulterated Western and Central African Blacks’ facial and hair characteristics very unappealing. But I expect they think the same of “White” hair and facial characteristics.

So what? We will not have peace and Benthamian-utilitarian society unless we admit such innate biases and then strive to consign their troublous manifestations to a trash dump and endeavor hard, but rationally and NOT sentimentally or with self-denigrating pseudo-progressive sick zeal, at least to coexist fairly and empathically and with sincere intent of supplying, or at least allowing, each other fair chance of happiness and least distress.

America’s Blacks continue to resent (understandably) their ancestors’ enslavement by American Whites and the conduct of Whites of the Jim Crow era, conduct that has not ceased, though it has diminished.

With good cause, many poor ghetto Black youths feel hopeless soon as they learn and comprehend the history of the legal system’s horrendous treatment of their kind. That treatment has NOT been confined to ordinary “law enforcement” activity, criminal judicial process, and “correctional” systems created to “reform” convicts and deter “recidivism.” It has extended to many cases of Blacks arrested and sentenced to years of hard, chain-gang labor for charges that were not even actually criminal. Even now-days, people — poor Blacks, more than others — are jailed for not paying debts. The jailing is premised on asserted “contempt of court.”

The seminal case is Bailey v. Alabama, 219 U.S. 219 (1911), https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16688171331174227306&q=Bailey+v.+Alabama,+219+U.S.+219+(1911)&hl=en&as_sdt=6,38&as_vis=1 .

In the Bailey case, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed Bailey v. State (Alabama Supreme Court, 1911), see page 75 at
https://books.google.com/books?id=ockKAAAAYAAJ&pg=PR1&lpg=PR1&dq=Volume+161+cases+argued+and+determined+in+the+Supreme+Court+of+Alabama+1908-1909+Supreme+Court+of+Alabama&source=bl&ots=YFchV9edxq&sig=01adx6lIBRCsGXpHRpQAq_besQc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjZ-pugh_LYAhVN_mMKHRcmDkMQ6AEIJzAA#v=onepage&q=Bailey&f=false

The Alabama Supreme Court had upheld an order denying habeas corpus to Alonso Bailey (a Black), convicted by a Montgomery County Alabama justice of the peace. The charge was violation of this statute:

Any person who, with intent to injure or defraud his employer, enters…a contract in writing for the performance of any act of service, and thereby obtains money…from such employer, and with like intent, and without just cause, and without refunding such money…, refuses or fails to perform such act or service must…be punished by a fine in double the damage suffered by the injured party, but not more than $300, one-half of said fine to go to the county and one-half to the party injured…. And the refusal or failure of any person who enters into such contract…to cultivate such land or refund such money…without just cause shall be prima facie evidence of the intent to injure his employer…or defraud him.

[Emphasis and ellipses added by me.]

Bailey had entered a contract that provided that he would do farm-work for 12 months and be paid $12.00 per month. The contract provided also that he receive a $15.00 advance that would be amortized by deductions from his monthly salary. Bailey received the advance.

Bailey became ill or just too weary to work out the contract. He failed to report for work. He could not replay the $15.00 advance. Because of the statute, he was presumed (without actual evidence) to have INTENDED, when he entered the contract, to defraud his employer.

The court sentenced Bailey to pay a fine of thirty dollars and the costs, and “in default thereof to do hard labor for twenty days in lieu of said fine, and one hundred and sixteen days on account of said costs, to make restitution to the plaintiff Riverside Company (the employer, a plantation owner), which you injured and defrauded.” Riverside Company was the employer, a plantation owner.

Virtually penniless, Bailey faced performing hard farm-labor for one hundred thirty six days — and more — for the plaintiff, Riverside Company, without pay, and in conditions rather like the work-detail Jews suffered at Auschwitz.
http://www.encyclopediaofalabama.org/article/h-1346
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45a/618.html
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02887267
http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=2&psid=3179
https://www.google.com/search?hs=cS1&q=pictures+of+1900s+Alabama+peonage+workers&tbm=isch&source=univ&client=opera&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjyy5zlzeHnAhV6HjQIHQfND8MQsAR6BAgHEAE&biw=1024&bih=736

The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Alabama Court’s decision. The Supreme Court held that Bailey’s sentence and the Alabama peonage system violated:
(a) the U.S. Constitution’s13th Amendment (which abolished slavery and involuntary servitude)
and
(b) the U.S. Congress’s Act of March 2, 1867 (Rev. Stat. §§ 1990, 5526), which provided that “all laws of any State, by virtue of which any attempt should be made ‘to establish, maintain, or enforce, directly or indirectly, the voluntary or involuntary service or labor of any persons as peons, in liquidation of any debt or obligation, or otherwise,’ shall be null and void.” In holding so, the United States Supreme Court observed:

What the State may not do directly it may not do indirectly. If it cannot punish the servant as a criminal for the mere failure or refusal to serve without paying his debt, it is not permitted to accomplish the same result by creating a statutory presumption which upon proof of no other fact exposes him to conviction and punishment.

The peonage system used a phony criminal law to force Blacks to work for years without pay for plantation owners, mining corporations, and other private firms that thrived on free, forced hard labor of Blacks. Even today, Blacks have not forgotten such Jim Crow quasi-slavery devices. The peonage system was not the only such slavery device. Some devices were less covert — even rather transparent.

New Jersey banned importation of slaves in 1788, but forbade free Blacks from elsewhere from settling in New Jersey. In the first two decades after the Revolutionary War, many northern states rapidly abolished slavery. But slaves were widely used in New Jersey’s agriculture and at its ports.

New Jersey was the last Northern state to abolish slavery. An 1804 New Jersey statute & subsequent laws freed children born after the law was passed. Blacks born to slave mothers after 4 July 1804 had to serve lengthy apprenticeships to the owners of their mothers. Black women were freed at age 21, but Black men were not emancipated until age 25. After 1846, slaves born before those laws (of 1788 or 1804, supra) were considered indentured servants apprenticed for life — even if their lives ended decades after the Civil War.

Though at first New Jersey allowed free Blacks to vote, the legislature disenfranchised them in 1807, an exclusion that lasted until 1875. By 1830, two-thirds of the slaves remaining in the North were held by masters located in New Jersey. New Jersey “abolished” slavery in 1846; but the abolition-statute qualified the abolition by redefining former slaves as apprentices who were “apprenticed for life” to their New Jersey masters.

So, in New Jersey, slavery did not truly end until decades after 1865 (decades after U.S. Secretary of State Seward confirmed, in December 1865, that the 13th Amendment had been ratified). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slavery_in_New_Jersey#Abolition_of_slavery

Such history (the peonage system’s illegal imprisonment of Blacks and Black slavery and its continuation even in the North decades after the Civil War ended) — THAT history will die hard among American Blacks, as will American Blacks’s gnawing, even understandably angry, resentment of that history. Combined with the frequency of false prison sentences imposed on Blacks, that history explains much Blacks’ disdainful disregard of criminal laws.

Am I suggesting that we forgive actual Black criminals their crimes? Absolutely NOT — just as I do not endure a Black’s angering at me or treating me contemptuously or impolitely. But Whites owe Blacks, and THEMSELVES (Whites’s own self-interest), their (Whites’) endeavoring to help Blacks assimilate and feel accepted and hopeful — help Blacks so much as they (Whites) can, reasonably, and non-self-diminishingly, AND without giving Blacks antiutilitarian give-aways (like afirmative action benefits), which denigrate and discourage Blacks and often put them in painfully awkward positions and create or reinforce existing White resentment or disdain of Blacks.

The Black Lives Matter movement began for sound reason. It has strayed horrendously into a rabid, irrational, dangerous pursuit that will either reverse the Black population’s legitimate socioeconomic gains or thrust Whites, thence all of society, into a world worse than that fantasized in George Orwell’s novel 1984 and Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World.