Future Democrat National Committee Chair Keith Ellison Exposed as Blatantly Racist


Why won’t the mainstream media, other than Fox News, report about Keith Ellison’s racist ideology? There is now proof of his racism. The answer seems to be that Ellison is exactly what the Democrats and the Democrat media want. He is who they are now but they don’t want the public to know. That is also who they are now.

Kevin Jackson was asked about it on Fox & Friends by host Steve Doucy on Monday. This follows a release of four columns Ellison wrote under the name, ‘Keith E. Hakim’. As a 26-year old law student, he did less to hide what he is.

Calling him an “ethnocentric racist”, Mr. Jackson said Ellison represents Democrats well. Everything about him isn’t about making America great, it’s about catering to blacks.

“All these things, Steve, point to the desperation of the Democrats. We’re talking about a group of people who have lost an election fair and square. They believed in their heart of hearts that they were going to win because that’s the fallacy of their belief stem is they think they are on the right track. Many of America we’re talking about this for years and certainly over the last year. What’s interesting about this is yet again the Democrats have been talking about we ignored fly over here country. We ignored the blue collar white vote and what do they do, they want to put an ethno centric black racist in charge of the party because that’s going to bring back the blue collar white vote, that shows you the level of idiocy that exists in that party.”

The Daily Caller News Foundation obtained scans of four columns written by Keith Ellison using the name “Keith E. Hakim”. This was while he was a law student. Ellison was around 26 years old at the time these columns were written and published.

In the four columns, “Hakim” advocates cash reparations paid from whites to blacks, calls the Constitution the “best evidence of a white racist conspiracy to subjugate other peoples,” and proposes making a separate country for black people.

The opening sentence in the first column from November 1, 1989, reads, “Years ago, it was slavery and, more recently, the Jim Crow system. But today it appears that the rationale for black people having ‘no rights which a white man is bound to respect’ is crime.”

Ellison then uses a familiar line from the Black Panthers and the Nation of Islam, Farrakhan’s separatist hate group, that the black community is better at keeping drugs off the streets than the police.

The article proceeds to tie the war on drugs as an excuse for oppression of blacks and police brutality in a country with “enforced poverty” keeps the black man down. It has a conspiratorial tone and blames the living conditions in ghettos on whites.

The second column which ran on November 27, 1989, is titled “Minister Farrakhan never claimed to be a ‘Malcolm X.’”

The article discusses the nature of racism, again in a conspiratorial tone, referring to a compromise that was never meant to be sustained but allowed a nation to be formed.

“Racism means conspiracy to subjugate and actual subjugation. That means planned social, economic, military, religious and political subjugation of whites. It cannot be intelligently argued that the Nation of Islam is doing this. In fact, blacks have no history of harming or subjecting whites as a class. On the other hand, whites have it written into their very Constitution that blacks shall be considered three-fifths of a person for purposes of taxation and representation of their white owners. Their Constitution also makes provisions for the return of runaway slaves. Their constitution is the bedrock of American law; it’s the best evidence of a white racist conspiracy to subjugate other peoples.”

Ellison explains that if anyone promotes the interests of blacks (remember the Nation of Islam is a separatist group), they are deemed racist because it disrupts “the slavocracy or white supremacist hierarchy” and it “will come under attack by the white supremacists and their trained stooges.”

He’s not only conspiratorial, he’s paranoid, imagining a grand conspiracy of whites against blacks.

In a rebuttal, another writer, a journalism student, accuses Ellison of anti-Semitism.

Another column, written November 30, 1989, titled,  “Daily editorial staff should feel ashamed,” addresses some conflict with the staff of the Minnesota Daily over the previous column Hakim penned.

“The news media prints only the most sensational bits and pieces, never the whole story. This leaves people believing that the Nation of Islam is some kind of black Ku Klux Klan, and they immediately dismiss all of its laudable work,” Hakim writes in defense of the anti-white, anti-Semitic ‘theology’.

Another writer offers his take in the same issue, “To hear Hakim blather, one might think that slavery was invented and employed solely by Western Europeans (ever heard of the Zulus?). One might think that blacks are a very unique group of humans in that they are incapable of practicing racism.”

Last but definitely not least, is the fourth column, written February 2, 1990, titled, “Affirmative action does not make up for past injustice.”  This article pushes for reparations for slavery and giving black Americans the option of a separate black homeland.

“Since no one but the WASP elite really appreciates affirmative action, I have a challenge for all fair-minded middle- and working-class white people: I will urge black people to abandon white-dominated, integration-oriented, give-away programs, if you urge white people to justly compensate black people for 250 years of slavery, 90 years of Jim Crow and 25 years of neo-Jim Crow.

The settlement could be a straight cash transfer for all the black exploitation. This means just compensation for all the labor hours put in by the slaves and just compensation for all the intellectual and artistic property ripped off by all the Elvis Presleys and Pat Boones. It means compensation for all the money ripped off through sharecropping and just compensation owing to all the black athletes of yesterday, such as Jack Jefferson and Joe Louis. It means back payment of the ‘black tax,’ which is the price hike that ghetto merchants and pawnbrokers charge black consumers.”


“Finally, blacks would have the option of choosing their own land base or remaining in the United States. Since black people toiled most diligently in the southeastern section of the United States, this land, quite naturally, would be most suitable. That means Arkansas, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana and Mississippi. Blacks, of course, would not be compelled to move to the black state, and, of course, peaceful whites would not be compelled to move away.

This is a bargain.

Whites would be relieved of the burdens of the black-faced but white-dominated social programs. Blacks would employ themselves, teach their own children the truth and control their own neighborhoods. Black-white interaction would be voluntary instead of compelled. No more busing, no more affirmative action and, best of all, no more white guilt. White people could righteously say they have ‘settled their debts with blacks. Urban blacks, long alienated from society by poverty, forced segregation and media-vilification, would no longer strike fear in whites. Think of it, whites could reclaim their cities — without dispossessing anyone.

Now the liberals may oppose this reparations program because, of course, they justify their existence by championing so-called lost causes.”

The disadvantages he feels are to deprive whites of their ability to profit off blacks.

One can quickly see why Ellison used an assumed name.

The columns written by Hakim aka Ellison:





Read more on the link.

Likely DNC Chair Refuses Interview to Answer for His Farrakhan Affiliations