RSS
This article is adapted from a speech Jared Taylor gave to an activist group in September 2023.
I’ll start with a story I once heard about William Pierce, the founder of the National Alliance. Years ago, he gave a talk to a group of “normies” about the importance of racial consciousness. He got resistance to his ideas, and he countered with what he thought was a crushing, decisive argument. He said that if America kept blundering down its current path, whites would go extinct. The response was: “Who cares?”
Pierce was thunderstruck. He wasn’t prepared for whites who seemed not to care about their own survival.
Pierce was right to be thunderstruck. Tribal loyalties are part of human nature. History is the story of contending tribes that care more about their survival than about anything else. Humans are so tribal, we even build strong attachments to groups that have no meaning. The students at the University of Louisville and the University of Kentucky are essentially indistinguishable from each other, and yet there is a ferocious athletic rivalry between the two schools. At game time, people who could easily have gone to either school become warring tribes.
In Britain, soccer fans are famous for physically attacking supporters of the other team/tribe. Cities and companies have rivalries. The Olympics and the World Cup are orgies of national/tribal loyalty.
Most people instinctively take their own side. Moroccans don’t have to be taught to root for the Moroccan team. But when it comes to race, whites are the perfect example of the poet Robert Frost’s definition of a liberal: someone who can’t take his own side in an argument. A man can be a Packers fan, a Green Bay city booster, a proud American, a loyal Rotarian, and even a member of the Sons of Norway, but show no loyalty to the white race.
We are unique. People of other races take racial loyalty for granted. It may be that this instinct is not as strong in us as in other races, but it is surely there, even if it has been smothered beneath years of anti-racist propaganda.
With your indulgence, I will play Sigmund Freud. As you recall, that old fraud never did any psychological research at all. He just looked into his own mind and “discovered” the id, the ego, the superego, the Oedipus complex, the Electra complex, and much other craziness. He then announced that what he found was universal.
I will now do something similar. Let me take you back to 1960, into the mind of eight-year-old Jared Taylor, where I will look for something universal. Some of you know that I grew up in Japan, where my parents were missionaries. They were liberals — early integrationists — who believed that all people of every race were children of God. I had never met a Negro, as we called them in those days, and probably had never had a single thought about Negroes.
Well, on June 20th, the black American Floyd Patterson knocked out the Swede Ingemar Johansson to win the world heavyweight boxing title. There was a picture in the newspaper: Johansson flat on the canvas; Patterson standing over him. I didn’t know much about boxing but I knew you didn’t win by taking a nap in the ring. I was flabbergasted. I was 100 percent for Johansson, even though he was a Swede and Patterson was an American. I didn’t care about the American; I wanted the white man to win. I don’t think I cared, especially, that Patterson was black. I would have rooted for Johansson against a Turk or a Guatemalan.
I remember asking my father whether there weren’t any of “our” guys — white people — who could knock out Patterson. Dad said no, Patterson was the best boxer in the world. He didn’t seem to be bothered. But I was. It was just plain wrong that the top boxer wasn’t one of “our” guys. I had a natural, instinctive racial consciousness.
I went on to absorb my consistently liberal environment, through high school, college, and into my 30s. During that time, I don’t think I thought even once about the Patterson-Johansson fight. I believe I had forced that memory — which would have been embarrassing — completely out of my mind. It was only in my 30s, after I had arrived at a dissident understanding of race that I remembered rooting for the white man. If I had stayed a liberal, I think I might never have remembered that early flash of racial loyalty. And, today, I would say that was a flash of something universal; years of anti-racist propaganda had smothered it.
Why did it take so long to see the light? In retrospect, I liked being a liberal egalitarian. I liked thinking that I was not just right, but morally superior to “conservatives” and especially to “racists,” whom I assumed were selfish and mean-spirited — not that I knew any, of course. This is an important part of liberalism.
Ten years ago, I read an eye-opening book called Pathological Altruism. It is full of insights, but one of the most memorable was about righteous indignation. Apparently, the feelings of moral superiority and ecstatic self-righteousness stimulate the same part of the brain as addictive drugs: the nucleus accumbens within the basal ganglia. It seems that people can become addicted to the feeling of moral superiority to the point that their brains are hijacked and rewired, just as with drugs. The craving for righteousness becomes so powerful that it short-circuits the reality-testing mechanism of the prefrontal cortex, making addicts impervious to facts. That sounds like today’s “woke” fanatics, doesn’t it? I had to kick a mild form of addiction.
I wonder if white people aren’t, by nature, more susceptible to this kind of addiction. Please recall Frost’s definition of a liberal. Not to take one’s own side in an argument can seem like an exquisite form of generosity — of noble fair-mindedness — so long as the personal costs aren’t high. This is what we see with liberals, who fight like tigers for handout programs that spend government money — not theirs — and for policies such as integration or open borders, from which they can escape to their expensive white neighborhoods.
Please recall that white people all around the world ganged up on Rhodesians and South Africans — and white Southerners in an earlier era — and badgered them into giving up systems that preserved civilization. And felt wonderful about it. Can we imagine Chinese or Indians from all around the world ganging up on China or India, demanding that they end long-standing policies? No. This is what white people do.
And within their own societies, whites make every excuse for non-whites, accommodate them to the point of absurdity, and are prepared to give away their birthright to strangers who often despise them.
I associate this kind of misguided “generosity” — pathological altruism — with what are the hallmarks of Western Civilization: the rule of law, free speech, monogamy, chivalry, and more recently, one-man-one-vote and environmentalism. All these things grew up in the West. Among non-whites, they are imitations with shallow roots.
What do they have in common? A recognition that the rights of others are — at least theoretically — just as important as our own. The rule of law means that I may be the richest, toughest, most powerful brute in the village, but I have to follow the same rules as everyone else. The rights of the weak are — theoretically — as important as the rights of the strong. Free speech and universal suffrage come from the same principle. I can’t shut you up even if you insult me, and I’m not supposed to have any more power at the ballot box than anyone else.
Monogamy is almost exclusively European; even kings are supposed to get only one woman. Everywhere else, the big man gets all the women he can support. Europeans recognized that other men need wives, too.
Chivalry is exclusively European. Everywhere else, women are sex slaves and beasts of burden. No other society ever put women on a pedestal. Europeans recognized that women — whom men can dominate, rape, kill with their bare hands — deserve not just protection but even adoration.
Europeans traditionally make war with a kind of chivalry; killing prisoners and non-combatants is taboo. Even people who were just trying to kill you have rights. This is not universal. Every historical account agrees that American Indians killed or abducted women and children, and tortured captured warriors to death. Often, they left it to women to invent the most painful and lingering ways to do it. During the French and Indian War, both the French and the British tried — usually unsuccessfully — to persuade Indian allies to fight by European rules.
In War Before Civilization, Lawrence Keely writes that outside of Europe, “surrender was not a practical option . . . because survival after capture was unthinkable.” He adds:
The reason for this no-prisoners policy was seldom articulated . . . . In many cases it was simply tradition, a practice so common and universal that it needed no explanation. For example, during the Zulu War, a British officer asked some Zulu prisoners why he should not kill them, as Zulus always killed British that fell into their hands. One prisoner answered, “There is a very good reason that you should not kill us. We kill you because it is the custom of Black men, but it isn’t the White men’s custom.” Impressed by this appeal to the power of custom, the officer spared the Zulu prisoners. (page 84.)
Good sportsmanship is like chivalric war. The victor does not gloat; he respects his opponent. “Trash talk,” swaggering, and back flips in the endzone are corruptions blacks have introduced — and which some whites have copied.
What is environmentalism but a concern for people not yet born and for species with which we share the planet? It started with white people, and everyone has come along reluctantly, if at all. We want to save the whales; the Japanese want to eat them. We jabber about greenhouse gases while the Chinese keep burning coal. As for protecting other species, Chinese will tell you that “the only thing with four legs we don’t eat is the dining room table.”
All these aspects of Western Civilization reflect a kind of generosity, a realization that life is not always “me first.” These practices are the result of centuries of conflict and trial and error. They are no means universal even among us, but they began with us and are part of our nature.
Among fellow Europeans, they are good things. They are the basis of trust. Europeans could build complex and uniquely successful societies because we could trust strangers. Unlike societies based on clans and tribes, we could assume that most people played by the same rules of reciprocal honorable behavior.
Years ago, I visited a former teacher, in central Massachusetts. He bought milk directly from a small dairy. The dairyman had a shed by the side of road, where he left a refrigerator stocked with milk. Customers left money in a cup — not even a locked box — and took milk. That’s possible only in a high-trust society. And it’s efficient. The dairyman and his family didn’t have to be there. I’m sure that system is long gone.
I once visited a friend in rural Nebraska. He told me that no one ever locked the door to his house. In fact, it was unneighborly to lock the door; someone might get caught in a storm and have to take shelter.
When I lived in New York, a visitor from Brazil marveled at self-service newspaper vending machines. You would put a quarter in the slot, and that would unlock the door to a full stack of papers. Take one and close the door. The Brazilian said that would never work back home; people would put in a quarter and take all the papers. I wanted to know why; you need only one paper. He said it was almost a matter of principle. Some people might give papers to their friends, but part of it was the impulse to take more than you paid for if you can get away with it.
There is another white trait that makes us an easy touch: An unwillingness to give offense, even when it’s necessary. Not very long after I began to understand race, a friend who was more thoughtful than I told me something I never forgot. He said that a nicely dressed black lady had come by his house one day and said she was thinking of buying a house in the neighborhood and wanted to know what the white residents would think. My friend told her that most whites would say it was fine, but they didn’t really want her. He said that if she moved in, he would do her no harm, but he would treat her with icy indifference. She did not move in. I remember thinking how harsh my friend had been, how hard it would have been for me to speak to her in that way, but my friend was right: Whites must defend what they have. They must be able to overcome their resistance to giving offense and say — about their clubs, their neighborhoods, their nations — “This is for us and not for you.”
My ancestors have been Southerners for generations. My grandparents — born around 1900 — certainly understood the limitations of blacks, but it was rude — bad manners — to talk about them. And that, I believe, is why when Southerners opposed integration, they made silly arguments about states’ rights, not the futility of expecting blacks to act like whites.
When school segregation was threatened by the Supreme Court in Brown v Board of Education, Southerners defended their way of life strictly on Constitutional grounds rather than talk about race differences. Legally, they were right: The 14th Amendment, which the NAACP claimed forbade segregation, did no such thing. Thurgood Marshall made a sociological case about “harms and benefits,” claiming that segregation hurt the feelings of blacks. This was not even a legal argument, and his “sociological” data were dishonest, but in one of the most blatant cases of Supreme Court back-channel malfeasance, the Court unanimously ruled that school segregation was illegal.
It was only after this surprise ruling that desperate Southerners made race-based arguments against integration in the now forgotten cases of Stell v. Savannah and Evers v. Jackson (1963 and 1964). The best race scientists of the day — also mostly forgotten — built an overwhelming scientific case based on studies of average IQ and the ability to plan ahead. The NAACP made no attempt to refute the evidence. This time, its case was strictly legal: The Supreme Court had already ruled, so facts were irrelevant.
The presiding judges were completely persuaded by the scientific arguments. Judge Sidney Mize in the Evers case wrote that the evidence that had been presented to the Supreme Court in Brown was “unworthy of belief” — a “misleading concealment” of the truth — and that “the facts . . . ‘cry out’ for a reappraisal and complete reconsideration” of the case . The Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal and that, so far as I know, was the last time race science was argued before a court for the purpose of setting policy. (William Shockley’s 1984 defamation case against The Atlanta Constitution touched on race, but not in a systematic way.)
Even when their nations’ futures are on the line, whites cannot bring themselves to speak harshly about others. In 1965, the white minority government of the British colony of Rhodesia unilaterally declared independence and set off years of international condemnation and black insurgency. In 1977, Prime Minister Ian Smith came to the United States to ask Henry Kissinger for help in putting down the insurgency. Smith also visited the Washington Times, where my friend Sam Francis was working as an editorial writer. Francis told me that, just as he had with Kissinger, Smith asked for help keeping the white regime in power because his opponents were communists, not because it would be a disaster to turn the country over low-IQ blacks. Francis was dismayed that Smith never brought up the already overwhelming evidence for the genetic contribution to black/white IQ differences. Francis speculated that Smith must have thought such a conversation would be bad manners.
Likewise, in 1994, when South African whites voted in a referendum to turn their country over to the African National Congress (ANC), I can find no record that supporters of the “No” vote ever raised the question of black IQ. Why did they not bring in scholars such as Arthur Jensen, Richard Herrnstein, and Linda Gottfredson to explain the scientific basis for something that most South African whites must have understood from experience? The racial argument — powerfully buttressed with data — should have been central to South Africa’s explanation to the entire world of why whites had to remain in power. I don’t think it is an exaggeration to say that good manners — consideration for the feelings of others — helped destroy Rhodesia and South Africa.
I remember attending a conference with the great psychologist Richard Lynn, in which there was a discussion of the unwillingness of whites to defend themselves. “We may be,” he said, “the first people to be defeated because we were just too nice.”
Let us imagine a visibly identifiable minority living among blacks that was as disagreeable and violent a drain on their society as blacks are on ours. It would be impossible to snooker blacks into thinking that it was somehow their fault. There would be harsh repression. Likewise, no race but whites lets blacks manipulate them into thinking they are, collectively, anything but a torment. Chinese are unmoved by accusations of “racism.” In a typically silly but not wholly inaccurate article on the most anti-black countries in the world, the top offenders were India, China, Jordan, Israel, Korea, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, and Thailand. Another listing of “racist” countries included Sri Lanka, El Salvador, United Arab Emirates, Myanmar (Burma), Iran, Qatar, and Serbia. These nations can take their own side in an argument; they look out for their own people.
Only white countries pay any attention to demands for reparations for slavery. Muslims took vastly more slaves from Africa than whites did, but why are there no black populations in the Middle East? Owners worked the men to death or castrated then. Muslims took black concubines but killed mulatto children. In Arabic, the word “abd” means both “black” and “slave.” Black con artists know very well they will get nowhere with Muslims.
In the United States, if even blacks can take advantage of whites’ generosity and altruism, how much easier must it be for clever people from India, the Middle East, and Asia? They routinely peddle allegations of “racism” and the mythical benefits of “diversity” to get ahead.
The gullibility of whites seems to know no limits. Only whites could possibly live through months of BLM rioting and believe this was the anguished cry of an oppressed people. Only whites could imagine that police somehow provoke blacks to commit crimes. Only whites — imitating blacks — would say of the people who protect them from black and Hispanic mayhem, “All cops are bastards.” Only whites stop enforcing laws against vagrancy, disorderly conduct, public defecation, shoplifting, fare-beating, littering, etc., because these are “crimes of poverty” that blacks commit more often than whites. And only whites then impassively watch their cities turn into stinking, depraved, crime-plagued tent cities for degenerates.
Europeans follow our example. For decades, there have been headlines like this: “Europeans overwhelmingly against immigration: Poll.” And yet Europe’s rulers and especially the bureaucrats in Brussels ignore the popular will and jabber about “humanitarian concerns” and “treaty obligations.”
The French got their first race riot in 1979. Their rulers learned nothing. Immigrants just kept rioting, with especially nasty uprisings every five or six years. This summer, France got 19 days of rioting, with violence in more than 500 cities and villages. There were two dead, 800 officers injured, 6,000 cars burned and more than 1,000 buildings destroyed or damaged. Every New Year’s Eve, despite nationwide warnings and mass mobilization of police, Muslim immigrants go on an orgy of car-burning. If they manage to burn only 1,000, that is considered a success for the authorities.
Arabs don’t belong in France. What could be more obvious? But the only mainstream politician to put it that bluntly is Eric Zemmour, a Jew from North Africa.
In Britain as well, it seems that only a politician of Indian origin, Suella Braverman, dares speak frankly. In a speech this week in the United States, she said that immigration is an “existential” threat to the West, and that governments that cannot control borders will “not endure.” She called the current refugee system “absurd and unsustainable” and said that the UN treaties that started it should be scrapped. Perhaps Mr. Zemmour and Miss Braverman are, by their very natures, more willing to speak bluntly about what must be done to protect societies they have adopted as their own.
Eastern Europe has been better at keeping out Muslims and non-whites, but even there, only Viktor Orbán of Hungary — and even he, only occasionally — says openly that Europe must remain white.
When will whites take their own side in this argument?
A big part of the problem, of course, is leftist media domination. In 2019, I was in Estonia, a nation that has mostly kept immigrants out. I was mesmerized by BBC Television beamed into my hotel room. BBC had just hired its first “LGBT correspondent,” a black man. He cavorted from one degenerate but alluring scene to another, wreathed in smiles, giving off an aura of polished wealth. How long can even Estonia resist constant battering from the rich, glamorous West?
As Gregory Hood notes, we don’t have state-run media; we have a media-run state. Most big media are fluffers for the Democratic Party. National Public Radio gets about a third of its money from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. That’s tax money. But has even one NPR employee ever voted for Donald Trump?
The power of media explains how homosexuality suddenly became stylish. In 2003, it was still a crime in 14 states when the Supreme Court made it legal everywhere. Just 12 years later, in 2015, the court forced same-sex marriage on the country. This could not have happened if media had opposed these changes rather than clamor for them.
Most people don’t think for themselves. They believe what they hear from prestigious sources. And yet, despite virtual monopoly control of big media, our rulers are terrified of us. If what we say is so awful and wrong, we wouldn’t be able to persuade anyone, would we? But of course, despite one of the most sustained censorship campaigns in history, people keep coming our way because we are right. Once people understand race, they can unravel countless mysteries; things that made no sense suddenly become clear. That is why so few people move from race realism to liberal egalitarianism. Once your eyes are open, it is hard to close them.
Of course, there are not enough of us. Determined minorities can turn societies upside down, but we can’t do that yet. For our ideas to triumph, there must be more of us. Today’s orthodoxy is so absurd that many whites wake up on their own, and we must have a movement ready for them when they are ready for us. But most will not wake up on their own. We must reach them. And that is why the fight for access to the internet and social media is so important. That is why Elon Must has to defy to ADL and make at least one major platform a real home for free speech. If we are so effective despite censorship, imagine what we could do in a free market of ideas.
The purpose of many of our organizations is therefore to preach the gospel, so to speak; to change people’s minds. But we are more than missionaries. We are revolutionaries. We want to set some of the regime’s most sacred principles on their heads and turn American doctrine on race inside out.
However, if I am right about white people — if we are a uniquely fair-minded and generous race that can easily be tricked into pathological altruism — how does that change our message? We must be the most unthreatening, even lovable revolutionaries in the history of revolutions.
No crazy clothes. No funny haircuts. No violent slogans. Our message is for wayward brothers and sisters, for our fellow white people. And to change their minds, we must be people they can like and admire; we must never be people who scare or repel them.
Also, we must always remember that you cannot reach white people by appealing directly to their own interests. That works for everyone else, but not for us. Do blacks care whether it’s fair to tax today’s white people to pay for reparations? Do the Chinese care if we destroy our economies trying to go carbon neutral while they pollute the planet?
White people are different. When we talk to them, we have to emphasize fairness. We have to put the spotlight on the hypocrisy and double standards others use to exploit us. We must show whites what every other group takes for granted but that is denied only to us.
Clearly, the people most likely to listen to us with an open mind are so-called “conservatives,” who have not swallowed the wildest “progressive” positions. However, on race, they are no different from liberals. They are just as unable or unwilling to take their own side. Therefore, an appeal to deluded whites need not distinguish between liberals and conservatives. The same arguments are likely to work as well — or as badly — with anyone. We might as well appeal to all whites as if they were liberals, because most “conservatives” are just as ignorant and terrified. We need allies wherever we can find them.
However, in any approach to whites, we have to do something that is very hard. We have to accept that whites, even liberal whites, are acting in good will. I know a lot of you disagree with me, but I’m right and you’re wrong. Liberals — the overwhelming majority of white liberals — are good people. They truly believe they are on the side of the angels, doing their best to do what is right.
I don’t presume to speak for George Soros or Al Sharpton, but ordinary people who listen to National Public Radio — and I know many — don’t want more crime, they don’t want American schools to fail, they don’t want more people on welfare, and they don’t want white people to go extinct. They are deluded, they are closed-minded, they are stubborn, and they are wrong. But they don’t get up in the morning and say to themselves, “How am I going to torment or discredit white people today.” Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi don’t do that either.
Think of it this way: Do liberals ever make the slightest attempt to understand us? No. Never. The SPLC and NPR tell them we are scum and they believe it. They are lazy and they take mental shortcuts.
But tell me: Do you ever try to understand white liberals? It takes a lot of work to understand a liberal. It’s a lot easier to take mental shortcuts and think they are scum.
That’s a luxury we can’t afford. We have to understand them if we are going to persuade them. We have to take their professions of good will at face value. It’s hard, but it has to be done.
Yes, we are in a fight for our lives, just like our ancestors at the Battle of Tours and the Siege of Vienna. But our fight is different. Our ancestors had a simple strategy. Kill the enemy or die trying. I wish it were that simple for us. I believe every man in this room would march laughing to his death if that was what it took. That’s not what it takes.
Our job is harder. Our job is not to kill the enemy. We have to convert the enemy, seduce the enemy. And for that we have to meet our white brothers and sisters on their own ground, take them at their word. Understand that they are sincere, that they are part of the great, generous Western tradition of taking the other guy’s rights as seriously as we take our own.
And don’t forget: We have basal ganglia, too. It’s easy to get a thrill when we think the people who disagree with us are evil scum. We can’t afford to become addicted to righteous indignation. That makes us the center of things; that puts our feelings first. It distracts us from the job we have to do.
That means that in order to get our fellow white people to wake up and take their own side in this life-or-deal struggle, we have to be more generous, more forgiving, and much more patient than they are. Even when they are insulting and contemptuous.
Think of it this way: Will you listen to someone who thinks you are scum? Will his facts or his arguments persuade you? No. If we are to persuade our people, to open their eyes, they must believe we are not their enemies. We want to save them. We want for them what is good and true. We want them to be like us. And they will never be like us if they think we despise them.
This is the great tragedy of our cause. So many of our most determined opponents are our own people. We must approach them with the hope that somewhere within them is still that spark of racial consciousness that was glowing inside the mind of little eight-year-old Jared Taylor. That spark has been smothered by years of anti-racist insanity, but our job is to find that spark, blow on it gently, patiently, and, yes, lovingly, and turn it into a raging fire.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
“But tell me: Do you ever try to understand white liberals? It takes a lot of work to understand a liberal. It’s a lot easier to take mental shortcuts and think they are scum.”
I gave up trying to understand them along time ago. By the way we use the word liberal, I don’t think this is correct. They’re for all intents and purposes ,communist. The play book is the same. Typical rich kids who think they know better than you, just like Karl.
They’re fanatics and you can’t argue with fanatics. No matter how many times the conservatives favorite joo Ben Shapiro “owns” some dipshit leftist, you won’t be changing their minds.
Look at all of the Whites we’ve seen over the years who lose a daughter or a son due to some black lunatic , what do they always say? We forgive them and we will pray with them so they too can go to the big paradise in the sky. They’re insane.
It doesn’t matter WHY they’re this way, they just are. It’s no different than trying to understand why a pack of Hyenas attacks lions, they just do, it’s in their nature. When Mr. Taylor states his case about black crime and backs it up with solid facts and evidence what do they do? Racist, racist, racist.
Conservatives must understand they’re the enemy, but then again conservatives are the enemy as well since they have no problem with the browning of America. They say it’s about ideals, not race. I think we know this is a lie. They’re just coming here for a better life, well of course they are. I’d like a free stay at the Ritz Carlton and free food and medical care too. But since I have White privilege I won’t be getting any of that. Rest assured I will be paying for it.
Society has reached the point of development where the spectacle of its own self-destruction is an aesthetic experience of the highest order.
Pava LaPere and Jason Billingsley case in point.
I am currently in Ethiopia (from Canada), the country of my birth, which I left as a ten-year-old following a regicide which threw in decades of Communism for good measure. I have many theories about this, but one of them is what I believe it is the “liberal” mind of the ruling (for centuries) ethnic group, the Christian Amhara (the Amhara are exclusively Christian). I write here that the Amhara are the world’s first liberals (here, posted as KPA
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/006967.html#ethiopia at View From the Right).
This was 700 years ago! And a some years later, the “Ethiopian” Muslims began their devastating Jihad, which the Amhara defeated, and confined to the sourthern province of the country. Muslims are NOT Amhara, nor will they fight for Ethiopia, when their territory is at stake.
So, there is something in the minds/mindset of this group of people, which even now, has its elite deny its group’s exclusivity (it dare not even think of its superiority), and crazily believes what other groups do not believe, that everyone can be Amhara!
It didn’t work 700 years ago, when Europe was busy delineating its borders.
I finally take it to be arrogance, and guilt. The arrogance of great success (Ethiopia without the Amhara would be nothing), and the guilt of god-like projection (tainted with arrogance, again) to “save” those who are not so blessed as it is. This is of course of perversion of Christianity, which is what I think European and American whites are suffering from. And I see many other similarities.
Is it, if the alternative is losing your job, your career, your social circle, possibly your freedom, which is much more likely outside the US with what’s left of our First Amendment? When the dead child is a sunk cost (that, I wonder about…)?
To a degree I agree with you we don’t need to fully understand “liberals,” we’re not going to persuade them this side of a preference cascade when they’ll do it themselves and which for example would allow the victims of negroidolatry to speak the truth. On the other hand see Sun Tzu, if we’re going to defeat which I believe has to be our goal—they certainly won’t leave us alone, see the Rhodesian and South African examples—then it’s essential that at least our leaders do so, and that we follow them on that.
For a very good, academic but readable explanation about what makes “whites,” really mostly northwest Europeans pretty much inside the Hajnal line, so subject to pathological altruism and more, see Kevin MacDonald’s latest, Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition: Evolutionary Origins, History, and Prospects for the Future. Our host is on the right path with that.
Get a new job.
Get a new “social circle” if need be.
Move to a different city, county, State or country if need be.
There’s no excuse for the cowardice, evil, and moral confusion of “praying with” or “praying for” someone who murders your child — let alone urging leniency for the murderer. The precious life of my irreplaceable child is a “sunk cost”, so just go along and be “nice” and “forgiving”? Disgusting. Suicidal Christian idiocy, most likely.
Be gentle and loving in your efforts to convince the progressive, says Jared. But one would be going against what is, for all practical purposes, a religion. Thus, it is necessary to imagine trying to convince a serious, dedicated churchgoer, or even a priest or rabbi, that his religious learning and beliefs and rituals are wrongheaded, and should be abandoned. Ingrained, trained, long-practiced beliefs are extremely resistant to change; a famous, trustworthy medical study found that changing an established regimen of medical methodology so as to adopt new knowledge requires 17 years.
You somehow left out the “Get a new career” detail, which of course is the big one. Moving to many of the possible vaguely attractive different countries may also be foreclosed if you get canceled.
You can’t even say “Get any job, even one who’s vocabulary includes ‘Would you like fries with that?’” for the Left in the US is infamous for going after anyone down to that level of job. You’re basically advocating literal suicide for someone who wasn’t planning ahead for this sort of thing, which of course also includes reducing the chance your children will get killed by the Left’s pets.
Part of this is the comprehensive uselessness of the Right in the US, they simply don’t take care of their own; compare most recently to the machete to the neck of a reporter “teacher” who just landed a new gig.
Hershel Smith of The Captain’s Journal (if you visit, don’t comment because he’s a poor at English comprehension ally killer, another aspect of the problem) noted the Colonial community system was an integral part of our success in the American Revolution. Many men who went to fight could have some confidence their family would be taken care of if they were killed or disabled. Why I keep harping on the preference cascade option, for it’s the only way I see us winning for the forseable future, with the Right we have today.
> Look at all of the Whites we’ve seen over the years who lose a daughter or a son due to some black lunatic , what do they always say? We forgive them and we will pray with them so they too can go to the big paradise in the sky. They’re insane.
No, they are brain-washed. It’s the influence of turn-the-other-cheek Christianity. It’s hard not to think that was not foisted on us purposefully by Greatest Allies long long ago.
There’s not shaking the Christian influence at this point. But perhaps we regain the influence of Crusaders who later were sainted?
Islam is not a religion unto itself, but rather a heresy. It should be treated as such!
Anglo customs and institutions have been expanded to all races, thus it’s harder to point to what would be lost if whites disappeared. The Fourth of July and Thanksgiving are celebrations of Anglo history, but are celebrated by all races today. Prestigious colleges like Yale and Cornell that were historically all-white will go on even without Anglo whites, indeed they largely have done so already, and are now populated mainly by intelligent Asians, Hispanics, Jews, and others. Even the foods of European immigrant groups have been fully integrated into American cuisine and can be cooked by members of any race now.
White ethnicities as a whole tend to be generalists, so the impact of whites’ going extinct would have a wide breadth. I think what would be lost if we went away is the “glue” role that whites provide in modern, multiracial America. If your goal is to have one country containing large populations of blacks, Mestizos, and other races, each with extremely different strengths and weaknesses on average, it helps to have a very well-rounded race like whites around that can get along at least to some extent with all races.
Yes, it is always insane to support lies over truth when you know better. Grow a fucking pair or white genocide is already complete. If you won’t even speak in your own defense, it’s over. Jews won decades ago. We’re the last generation and there’s no point even pretending to LARP about fighting back.
Wake the everloving fuck up and say the words, coward
However one may feel about the Jews, one must admire their devotion to The State of Israel. If only our fellow Whites were as devoted to Apartheid South Africa. Then, things would have been very different.
JT, as usual, misses the (((point))) completely:
it’s 70+ years of Jew’ing
that have turned Whites into
self-liquidators.
Not all Christianity is of the bend-over-and-grab-your-ankles variety. There were men like Charles Martel, who kicked Muslim ass, and women like Joan of Arc, who kicked English ass. It seems like the more suicidal type is a more recent aberration. I blame the clergy. Destroy them, and Christianity has some fair chance of righting itself.
I could go for this nicy-poo stuff if I thought it would work, but it won’t.
How do I know this? Because it is other whites who are attacking whites and getting them fired from jobs; it is whites who refuse to acknowledge the violent nature of blacks – they simply ignore the everyday slaughter of whites by blacks (both in the US and in African countries). The whites are fine with jailing and killing/torturing protestors – see Jan. 6.
So, about 1/2 of the commie liberal whites are just fine with jailing and financially destroying other whites who think differently from them.
These whites are bolshi-communists, and they cannot be reasoned with. These commies want whites who are different from them dead. This condition is not a lack of understanding between opposing white groups. If they had an ounce of the fairness that Taylor ascribes to whites, they wouldn’t be banning conservatives from life, they wouldn’t think that the J6-ers deserved to be in prison, they wouldn’t be snitching on their neighbors for whatever, and they wouldn’t be fine with the destructiveness and violence of blacks.
Historically, commies have murdered millions of people in their commie revolutions. We all know that.
Tucker Carlson discussed a biography of some Pyotr Wrangel, a Russian who fought against the commie takeover of Russia. Wrangle returned to Russia after the 1917 war and saw how his country was disintegrating with large numbers of women wearing some pink thing to symbolize their support for the bolshis; even women of high society and members of the Romanov family were wearing this tag. Well, we know how that all ended, with 10 million Russians slaughtered, including the Romanov Family.
We are at the same point in the US. Our white commie opponents want us dead. There is no talking our way out of this. It’s unfortunate that so many are simply ignoring or even supporting the destruction that awaits. Just like in Russia.
Why such an easy touch?
Couldn’t possibly be because Whitey has morphed into a Dumb, Docile, Deracinated, Feminized Fck’tard… COULD IT??? 🤔
When whites are gone, the golden goose is gone. Whites have been the golden goose for the entire world, yet the non-white world lusts for their (the whites’) destruction.
Everyone else on this earth is far more tribal and racist than whites. It will be mad max in the western countries as whites disappear. (it’s already getting there, what with all the rioting/looting in the US and in formerly European countries).
Neither the Chinese, Muslims, or Indians are going to want to play nice with blacks or Sth Americans; the blacks and Sth Americans will do well if they avoid being enslaved by the Chinese.
So, in the former western countries, they will all disintegrate, just like the way cities and neighborhoods in the US slowly disintegrate when blacks takeover. Whatever infrastructure the whites left in S African, Zimbabwe, etc., is already disintegrating.
The world will return to the dark ages. Or maybe the elites in some countries, like China, Arab Emirates, India, Sth American countries will do fine, but the rest of the masses are screwed, just like they were before the US came along and showed that a middle class could exist.
It is true that only white people take it upon themselves to campaign on behalf of the welfare of other races, or indeed on behalf of anything, such as for example battery farming, that does not directly affect them, or their family or clan.
Other races living in the West pay lip service to this kind of advocacy, at least for now, but only because they know that it is expected of them, and it is shallow and really motivated by self interest. Even non-white people have remarked that white people are unique in this respect.
I have mentioned before that the young doctors who volunteered to go to West Africa to fight the Ebola outbreak in 2014 were all white, despite the fact that 40% of graduating doctors in the UK are of South Asian heritage.
I remember visiting a clinic about three years ago where there were photographs displayed on the wall concerning the charity efforts of volunteers to support the local NHS. All the volunteers were white.
Environmental groups are generally a sea of white faces. I wonder whether the more militant of such groups, such as Extinction Rebellion or Just Stop Oil, recognise that as white people become a minority even in their own historical homelands then the causes they advocate for will no longer have any support so this is their last chance to bring about change.
After witnessing ANTIFA attitudes and actions, I have to agree.
Christianity? It’s nice in a lot of ways, but…
Even Islam spells out your obligations. Christianity demands you just sign a blank check.
China will not have a problem using neutron bombs on Africa to stop the black birth rate.
Go to any country in the world and it is White people rescuing and caring for animals. No other race gives a rats ass.
Is Stoddard book coming true?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rising_Tide_of_Color_Against_White_World-Supremacy
Well, except china/japan.
Exactly. You’ll never see Japanese and Koreans at odds, or Tamils and Sinhalese, or Watusis and Hutus. They recognize their common racial interests. But at Gettysburg, Johnny Reb shot at the white men in front of him, rather than the thousands of black boys behind him, spitting in his food. No loyalty at all!
It doesn’t exist at all in other races.
White isn’t a side. Hungarian and Estonian are. They have flags. They have anthems.
David Hines of the American Conservative argues that this stuff will not stop until the people doing it suffer real pain as a result of doing so. Perhaps we need a good cop/bad cop strategy here. But the bad cop part is necessary.
Exactly. No other race conserves wildlife unless taught to do so by White biologists. The chinks for example eat everything, they hold life in a low regard.
Blond hair, blue eyes, and White skin are all genetically recessive traits. The other races know this. This is precisely why they are tempted to breed us out of existence. Notice, all the pressure placed on us to accept Homosexuality and Race Mixing. (((They))) know these will destroy us!
How pathetic are White supremacists as their reign of terror over humanity ends. Of all this bathetic clap-trap, the LIE that China pollutes while poor, widdle, Whitey does nothing is pretty much the worst. China produces goods consumed in the West, so those are Western pollutants. And China produces more renewable electricity than any other country, has more EVs than any other country, and produces the hardware of both for the world, while the West, led by the USA, wastes TRILLIONS on arms.
Don’t talk about the members of any ‘race’, as if they are all the same. Stupid does not do it justice.
“A big part of the problem is leftist media domination.” And what about Jewish domination of the media? Taylor never even goes near this subject. That is why he is not to be taken particularly seriously and why his essays get so few comments here on The Unz Review.
This is my complaint against the “hate Christianity” people. Especially white “hate Christianity” people.
There are some (like me) who are natural allies against the (((scourge))), yet these people are so ignorant of the types of Christians that they simply put them all in a box. It is the height of stupidity, and simultaneously, the success of the jew who has brainwashed them into ostracizing ALL Christians.
So, the basic fact is that these white saviors are willing to keep typing that they want a white country, but just don’t want white Christians as a part of it.
In other words, these white saviors are in total agreement with the jews that want whitey dead. Isn’t that a hoot? White “hate Christianity” fools are the jews’ ally but are too stupid and hard headed to understand, much less admit it.
While it is true that Western Civilization has been primarily responsible for human advancement, it must be understood that relatively few made these advancements with high intelligence and other positive traits. The majority are stupid on a stick.
Perhaps a few made those advances in European civilization. Can you point to a significant contribution made in breakthroughs by people hailing from the sub sahara?
The people railing against Christians as Christians are doing just what the Jews have raised them to do. That’s really all there is to it. They think they get traction with an easy scape-goat, they don’t understand the power of the Christian religion and they don’t understand that the collapse of Christianity is the real cause of European collapse.
I agree, and I’d like to add that English language proficiency seems to be well-correlated with a nation’s turn to the left, at least in Europe where English is the prestige language.
We’re not a hategroup. It’s okay to be white is a message of love. And it was so effective that the Left had to make it illegal.
Depending on the definition of liberal, I may agree or disagree. People who are essentially apolitical but vote Democrat because they vote based on their emotions might qualify as acting in good will. But professional pundits are in it for self-interest. SELF-interest, not the interests of other white people. It makes perfect sense to me that way, since any one individual white person has a lot to gain by joining the Democrat party machine, even if it is a net negative for the rest of us.
No, but what is your point? My comment was about Western Civilization.
James Burnham in his classic Suicide of the West notes that modern liberalism was motivated by many irrational impulses.
Several years back a term came into common use on the various Race Realist websites: “Crystal Methodism.” Crystal Methodism is the pseudo-religious “high” that people get from proclaiming egalitarian positions, even when it means the destruction of their own civilization.
This is part of the dilemma in countering egalitarianism. It’s not just an ideology but a physiological-psychological state.
White people today are in a situation similar to Europe during the Wars of Religion (16th to 17th century) with a conflict between irreconcilable worldviews. But it is a very odd war, one in which only one side is fighting.
The critical thing is to wake up enough pro-Whites to become a political force.
The problem is that there is a dominant White Trash Culture of terrorism, treason, spying on American citizens, hacking, medical fraud, Munchausen Syndrome, charlatanism, pyramid schemes, political propaganda, or more accuartely put, pathological lying, crimes against humanity, false flag wars, financial fraud, pyramid schemes, and the high white on white crime rate that I have been a victim of.
For me, it is the White Trash Culture that would and has prevented me from feeling connected to whites based solely on skin color, and then there is also the fact that I disagree with most whites philisophically because they believe in determinism, which I completely reject because it is stupid, insane, evil and simply not true. It is belief systems other than that too, that I do not share in common with many whites and their authoritarian personalities that try to limit topics that can be discussed or beliefs that can be held. I refuse to waste my time on people like that. Adding a tribe of white trash, evil, perverted. predatory, corrupt, retarded authoritarian, control freaks to my life is a liability that I cannot afford.
Frankly, I hope that the blacks kill them.
And who owns the media and the politicians, Mr. Taylor? Who hates us whites with all their black little Jew hearts (Oops! I gave away the answer.)
The majority couldn’t be as stupid as a stick with the productivity and wealth they created.
Notice how western civilization productivity/creativity/wealth creation generally cannot be imitated in other nations. No matter how much $$$$ westerners pour into the coffers of the loser nations (and they pour and pour and pour), and how much they train, educate, and support the loser nations, the loser nations simply can’t reach the productivity/wealth production that essentially define western nations. No matter how many goats and chickens the goodhearted people of western countries donate to the loser nations, they are still incapable of moving foward.
Not even China, with its burgeoning wealth – gratis of western traitors, is able to recreate what the US did with a strong middle class. And forget about India, African countries, Muslim countries, and Sth American countries – they are all riddled with poor people with a few wealthy at the top.
And the west was creating wealth well before it “exploited” all of these loser countries. The loser countries wouldn’t have any idea what to do or where to start when it comes to producing and inventing.
Just look at Africa where they’ve run off or murdered the whites; these areas are now going backwards in time, reverting to the crappy conditions that existed prior to white “supremacy.”
Further, it takes some brains to be able to understand, build on, and use the western innovations that you say were created by few.
Pffft.
The populations of China, India, and subSahara Africa are in the billions. All of Sth American and Northern America only reach about 550 million.
You simply cannot discount the impact of that many people on the earth and blame it all on whitey.
Jared Taylor means well ,but I completely disagree with him on trying to understand the white liberal mindset and then trying to convert them. Liberalism is a mental disorder than can’t be cured, it’s a self-destructive mindset that can’t be reversed. It’s nature’s way of getting rid of genetic defectives. People with this mindset mostly won’t have children and their attitude toward violent non-whites will get them extirpated.
The politeness that people had until recently about avoiding speaking about racial differences is pretty well gone. The only reason that white people still avoid the subject is because they’re scared about legal repercussions whether there are laws governing one’s views on the subject or not. The legal system has become so murky that most people really don’t have a clear view about what is legal anymore and just avoid going into areas or subjects that they’re not sure about.
This vagueness or lack of understanding about the extent of one’s personal rights are is of great service to the enemy as white people police themselves and don’t dare talk about controversial subjects to others. Only when one is willing to push freedom of speech and personal liberty to the limit will one know how much freedom he has. It takes a brave person to do this and this type of person is about one in ten thousand.
Kevin MacDonald is wrong. Jared Taylor is wrong. It is not pathological altruism. If it was, they would treat poor Whites as they do browns and blacks. But they don’t. Old White veterans are kicked out of housing while they let in 20 year old Pakistanis.
Sorry Kevin and Jared, try again.
My, my, my, Jared sounds like a missionary. Oh wait…..
Jared comes from a family of missionaries and he’s trying to spread the gospel just like they did. It’s not working Jared.
The problem with Jared, and it’s painfully glaring, is that he is limiting his perspective based on his liberal family and where he lives. Jared lives in the richest county in the US. He is surrounded by wealthy Whites with meticulous lawns and their “in this house we believe…” signs. Jared wants to believe they are good people because to believe otherwise is to burst his little bubble. It’s a cope and he’s not letting go.
I grew up poor and lived around non-Whites. It was not a safe and comforting childhood. My one goal was to make money and get as far away from non-Whites as possible. All my White friends moved to the suburbs, but we stayed due to poverty. My friends knew what it was like living in the city because they experienced the crime. Not to the extent I did, but they experienced it. And the perpetrators were always black or brown and they knew it. There is a reason their parents worked day and night in order to be able to move away.
Today, with social media I can see what my liberal friends and family members present to the world. And as you can imagine, virtue signaling is top priority. They live in all White neighborhoods but then talk about systematic racism. They voted for Obama simply because he is black. They “orange man bad” every conversation. They would be appalled if they knew I was a race realist. The difference between us is that I’m honest about it.
So, are these liberals I know good people like Jared likes to think? No, they aren’t. Do these friends and family members help others? Not really. Only if it’s convenient for them. Do they allow honest discussion? Not a chance. Do they review alternate perspectives and analyze for reasonableness? Nope. Do they ask me why I think what I think? No, because they know the truth and don’t want to admit it.
Do I think it helps to call them scum? Well, not to their face.
Do I think their minds can be changed? Not by me or anyone race realist.
What will change their minds? The eventual brutality brought upon them by non-Whites. And by then it will be FAR too late.
A black person severely beating a White liberal will do far more in changing their minds than a thousand Jareds can over a thousand years. Even then it’s tough to crack that nut.
If you don’t speak up when a black or brown butchers your White child, when the fuck will you speak up!?
If nothing else, shut the fuck up and don’t regurgitate their anti-White “[Insert criminal race] are [Insert White geographic group] with better food” propaganda like that fucking spineless POS Tibbetts. May he burn in fucking Hell.
That is the stupidest comment I have heard in years. Civilization advances as a whole where all the component parts must be able to comprehend advancements and understand how they work. No other societies can come close to matching the advent of Western Civilizatiin, which tells you a lot about the quality of the “component parts” in the west.
Its just like the knee-jerk blame Boomer movement, when the most anti-jewish control people I know are boomers.
You evidently didn’t read or comprehend what I wrote:
While it is true that Western Civilization has been primarily responsible for human advancement, it must be understood that relatively few made these advancements with high intelligence and other positive traits. The majority are stupid on a stick.
It takes minimal intelligence to work on an assembly line or do manual labor. At the same time, those types of jobs were very instrumental in the great growth of Western Civilization. The people of science and engineering were the true drivers of productivity growth in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The necessity of common labor has dropped precipitously, destroying millions of people’s livelihoods.
No, the stupidest comment is your following one.
Line workers and common laborers have no idea of the science and engineering involved in their products. Their contribution to Western Civilization was hard, monotonous, low-information work at low pay.
The average US citizen has very little knowledge of anything of value nor the desire to learn anything of value.
I’m not sure we’re saying pathological altruism is the only cause, I certainly am not although I may not have made that clear. I’ve discussed without getting into the details the holiness spiral that has trapped a lot of Whites into extreme public xenophillia even when the “other” kills their children.
But how much have you read on “pathological altruism”> As Kevin MacDonald and many others explain (his book starts on the “how did this come about” but ends with “today”), the general phenomena involves punishing in-group “cheaters.” Poor Whites are exactly that in the Left’s world view, which I’m pretty sure I don’t have to explain here.
Leftists are the sort people who were enthused about John Brown’s Raid. The Yankees were proto-Leftists. Make no mistake. As were the foul-mouthed Quakers. When you see a relative of a relative who curses you out just because they saw you, when they don’t know you. That’s Leftism. When Berkeley graduates take leadership positions in your department, and scowl at anyone they know to be outside of political orthodoxy. That is the Left.
No, they don’t care about rising crime, or schools failing, or welfare, or white people going extinct, and they loudly proclaim in so many ways they don’t care. It’s not laziness. They want to belong to the socially dominant group. The winning side. It’s not about morality, though some may have some confused ideas about morality and illusions of benevolence.
We are their class enemies because we are not Jews or servants of the Jews. They are servants of the Jews, the Jews are their patrons, whether they consciously know it or not, whether they are ignorant bigots or whether they have a genuine fascination with all sorts of intellectual pursuits, at the base of their “orientation” is their wanting to belong to the dominant power in society. They may not consciously perceive the judeo-masonic power, yet they all support it and they all wink and nod at its crimes. (like the theft of the last election, mass censorship, the covid hysteria, etc).
YesYesCircle: “Jared lives in the richest county in the US.”
It has to be admitted he’s done very well for a guy who doesn’t have an actual job. Did he ever have one? Not that I’ve ever heard. Evidently grifting pays rather well. At least, if you do it right.
YesYesCircle: “A black person severely beating a White liberal will do far more in changing their minds than a thousand Jareds can over a thousand years. Even then it’s tough to crack that nut. ”
The emphasis on persuasion in this article is the weakest of its many weak points. Persuasion has failed as a strategy on the racial right going all the way back to the 1950s and George Lincoln Rockwell. Why keep trying a strategy that obviously doesn’t work? For that, it seems to me, Taylor has no answer.
As long as people keep sending him money for recommending it though, I can see why he would want to stick with it.
Monsieur Poulin : If you look at the history of Christian Europe, you see much evidence to support your point, I agree. But if you read the Gospels, you will find absolutely nothing that supports self-defense, never mind “kicking ass”. Most of the parables have a moral that is very close to suicidal; that is, they advocate an indifference to one’s well-being that is radical. How can anyone stay healthy if he doesn’t care what he puts on? How can anyone prepare for his family’s expenses if he gives everything and follows Jesus? The miracle of the Catholic Church was to take the Gospels and somehow dull their obvious point; otherwise Christianity would have been very short-lived.
It’s not just easier. White liberals ARE scum. If it looks like scum, and sounds like scum, and smells like scum, and feels like scum, you don’t need to acquire a brain infection via are-what-you-eat by licking them to find out.
They’re also small fish. We have bigger fish that need frying.
However, they are also mostly limit testers. You don’t deal with them by being kinder, more considerate, more conscientious, more caring, more lenient, less assuming. They are the epitome of “give inch take mile”.
You deal with limit testers by chopping their overreaching f***ing hands off and moving on. You’re already a yard over the line, time to pay the piper.
Both of you are wrong and stupid.
Everyone has to know and agree on the basic generalities whether or not they know how or why or where. These basic generalities are truly things of value, they are the connective flesh and mediative blood of what a society or civilization is.
Beyond that basic communism (in the literal rather than the dishonest nomenclatural sense a-la “Communism”), nothing is of value to every person.
A factory line worker derives great value from knowing exactly how and when the line moves, what is on it, what needs to be added to it and how, what are omens of quality problems or mechanical malfunction or dangerous conditions. Nearly everybody else derives nothing of more than ephemeral value from knowing any of that.
The same goes for doctors of any given discipline no matter how basic, even mathematics or language. Beyond basic common levels of literacy and numeracy, most people don’t give a shit, nor ought they, they have other jobs with other problems and nary shall they and tensor math twain meet.
The same even goes for history and religion. There are things that are important for everyone in a group to know, and beyond that everything is conditional and case by case. “Anything of value” is anything that improves their particular quality of life and/or efficiency or quality in what they do as a part of society or before God.
Yes, I suspect you’re antitheist. It’s a particular kind of compensatory arrested development, whether innate or acquired, a little higher displayed IQ to compensate for a missing something. There are nearly no “atheists” above about 150 IQ, it’s only overrepresented in the cadre just enough above average to imagine they’re on top of the world without being anywhere near. The indication I’m working off of is your hypo-critical nom de guerre.
Every particular thing has natural consequences, whether good or ill.
So that bit about selling your cloak if you don’t have enough swords was offense, as in the Great Commission was an offensive campaign where using violence, albeit to defend yourself so you maybe could continue it, was OK, but not so outside of that?
Was Peter not an “ass kicker” who was the rock upon which the “church” was to be built? (I think I heard the use of “church,” especially with its soon developed connotations, is suspect?) Yes, die by the sword, but did Jesus tell him to stop the violence altogether? He did know he was sending many of them on a suicide mission, which is congruent with your claims.
(Note was raised Catholic, a church that necessarily could not use extremely rare and expensive hand copied books to directly teach a non-literate population (I’ve read the average early church would have copies of Psalms and Proverbs, plus one other rotating I think book). And I’m certainly not arguing in favor of today’s majority of First World “Christians.”
So real study of the Bible is not something I’ve done, and I am not likely to be able to make any good replies to my points which mostly recapitulate some made by Protestant RKBA types. Like Hershel Smith of The Captain’s Journal, note previous warning about him….)
Taylor, you’re parents were Marxist-Zionist schizophrenics working for the Anglosphere Empire, but ultimately for ZOG, because kikes had hijacked the Anglosphere Empire via the ((Cousinhood)) in a big way around the Victorian era, and then incited the Marxist-Zionist world wars and revolutions during the (ongoing) “Jewish Century.”
I’m sad to say that you, Taylor, have fallen into the same Marxist-Zionist schizophrenic state as your parents suffered, just as have so many in the Anglosphere. They leaned Marxist, you lean Zionist.
Some people with Zoglodyte parents escape their retardation, but most do not. It looks like you too, sir, have become a mini-kike who will see, hear, and speak no evil about your big kike masters.
“Antisemitic” Christendom is the solution to what ails you and what ails all Zoglodytes. That’s necessarily going to mean removal of the kike Moneychangers who pay you and who paid your parents, and its reimposition on your sick and weak voodoo Zionist psyche and soul. Obviously, the same goes for Marxist degenerates, too.
That came out of Christian civilization–which kike Empire/ZOG pays you to denigrate, and which has degenerated under ZOG.
If he’s in with ZOG, as you are, then he’s no “Jew,” though he may be Hebrew sand scum, part and parcel with, for example, the cut throat Saudi Zoglodyte sand scum who did 9/11 in conjunction with the Mossad and Deep State in order to incite a world war against “Islamofascism.”
This is what ZOG does. This is its scorpion essence. This us why the reimposition of Christendom needs to take place NOW.
Schizophrenics like you, Taylor, are serving ZOG from the right, while your Marxist confederates serve ZOG from the left, just as your schizophrenic parents did.
There is no way you could know that. Logic leads one to believe the higher the intelligence, the less belief in religious dogmatic bullshit. Religion is a crutch for the weak of character and mind.
You are a troll, full of crap.
No jackass. The whole of society must be able to comprehend and they did. That is why they built the civilization you bumbling idiot.
No you drupe. People have to buy j go into civilizations direction and they do by being part of the process. Learn to read.
How can one admire the literal children of Hell?The Satanic Jews pervert and destroy White nations because they hate our Lord Jesus.Taylor is so stupid and corrupt because he blames Whites when he must know it is the Jew behind it all.Christian culture is not the cause of our dire situation,nor is White decency and kindness.We are under siege because we are made in the image of God and love Him and His Son and the Holy Ghost.The Whites who betray their own are the product of an evil wave from Hell,the physical manifestation of which is Jewish.Whites resisted and were beaten down,I have lived it.When Whites fight back the full force of government is against them.Thus Whites are the majority all those years but not in control.The Jews are behind it all and Jared Taylor be damned for covering it up.Christ is coming back soon and all well be made right,that we can depend on.
We should have been devoted to Apartheid South Africa, though.
Jared did have a career in his 20’s and 30’s. According to him he has invested well. My guess is that he bought property in NoVa in the 80’s and 90’s. Also, he was in Tech and probably invested there wisely. So I don’t think he lives off a grift.
I think he is naive as hell because he was raised by extremely naive, religious liberals.
Part of the problem with whites is that they have more Fix-It genes than other people on the planet. Especially white men. If something doesn’t work, a white man is going to try to fix it so it does. It’s this trait of whites that made them so successful in a Darwinian sense. However, it is also the downfall of whites.
Black man: Wah! My life is so messed up!
White man: It is? I’ll fix it for you, then.
Whites cannot stop trying to make things better for other people. This was a useful trait when whites were confined to small band societies in northern Europe trying to survive the Ice Age. The Fix-It gene probably involved out of this environment, because it helped enough people survive that the whole group was able to keep on reproducing offspring and successfully raising the next generation. It’s the reason why the best managers on the planet are always white males.
However this trait becomes pathological when it is applied to unworthy people, like blacks who will never get off welfare, and who view whites as an adversary.
YesYesCircle: “So I don’t think [Taylor] lives off a grift.”
I wouldn’t be so sure about that. It’s apparent in comments on this site and others that his demographic appeal is to elderly white men without family. I think he accepts not only donations from them, but bequests too. It wouldn’t take many such bequests from deceased fans to make him a considerable fortune. Maybe even only one, if he got lucky.
YesYesCircle: “I think he is naive as hell because he was raised by extremely naive, religious liberals. ”
Probably that’s part of it, but then again, if he were too extreme, it would be off-putting to the old guys he’s marketing this stuff to, many of whom are fanatic Christians and/or law-and-order types who see the existing power structure, including its police enforcers, as something they want to uphold. I think he’s aware of how ineffectual his so-called persuasion is, but persists in it anyway because anything more would be too radical for his audience. To me, this says he cares more about not alienating potential donors than he does about his race. As I say, persuasion has failed as a tactic since at least the 1950s. There’s no reason to think that’s going to change.
Seems like a lot of the Anti-White stuff is being pushed mostly by other White, Media, Teachers/Professors, Politicians etc. Probably because Whites don’t fight back, like a bully in a school goes after those who don’t fight back, same principle, if someone fights back the bully leaves them alone and looks for someone else
Unbelievable.
Yet those ‘line workers’ and ‘common laborers’ could easily fix cars, plumbing, electrical in their own homes. And they were determined to provide well for their families. Providing for their families and caring for their children is very impactful – as one can observe the destructiveness of broken families.
Further, they used to be paid well enough to have stay-at-home wives, pay for a house, send their kids to college, etc.
I can’t believe you would think so little of workers.
Why is the White Man such an easy Touch? The true puzzle is why are the jews so diabolically obsessed with destroying white gentiles! Jared Taylor is a false prophet for our cause. Anyone who refuses to address the Jewish question is diverting our attention from the real cause of our dilemma, and the solution to unraveling the Gordian knot in which we are entangled.
Not all could do those things. And the vast majority can’t now…things are more complicated.
I never said or hinted that they were not good, decent family members.
The main reason that is no longer possible is families want nicer, more expensive homes with a two-car garage and two cars to put in them. Further, they wanted more expensive cars, color TVs, expensive vacations, and so on.
Damn, few children of line workers and common laborers went to college.
It isn’t that I think so little of them; I just refuse to glorify them.
BRAVIIIISIMO! Excellent article! It would be even more persuasive if narrated by Jared Taylor HIM-self. His voice, and cadence, is the musical equivalent of “no funny haircuts”. Many Liberals would be exposed to this well thought out points just to hear Jared’s voice. The narrator of this article (available at amren) does a good job but sounds a tiny little but stern, and thus intimidating, while Jared’s voice is delightful, inviting, and high class.
Myself I had been aware of ethnic points of view all my life but I wasn’t completely convinced until I reaf Richard Fuerle’s book.
Christianity glorifies martyrdom and self sacrifice. People raised in that ideology take it to heart and can become well meaning cultural saboteurs.
The idea of pathological altruism suffers from some many practical and theoretical problems. For once, it is not a tenable theory in light of both evolutionary and historical factors.
Altruism that is inconsequential of evolutionary fitness is always going to select against itself. And it will inevitably start selecting against itself, once the genes and epigenetic factors associated with altruism start favoring individuals that do not contain a mostly identical set of genes. Now, this is arguably in line with what we see here right now. But it does not make sense given the historical cirucmstances where Europeans predominated over others and did so over explicitedly imperialistic and chauvinistic reasons. The latter implies a recent origin of the issue, arguably no later than the middle of the 19th century.
The pathological ‘altruism’ observed in Europeans is more likely the result of “group-think”. In an often vain attempt to secure their own socio-economic place, people naturally gravitate toward doing what everyone else does. An instance that has gone wrong here and is now harming the ‘biological’ interests of Europeans. The question that now remains is to identify the factors that has caused people to start exhibiting group-thinking that harms their own biological “interests”, e.g. preserving a clearly defined group of individuals with mostly identical gene sets. This is in my opinion quite an easy task.
“A big part of the problem, of course, is leftist control of the media.”
Replace the word “leftist” with “Jewish” and you’d be accurate. The left never had the money to take over the media. Only the Jews did.
“Leftism” in the U.S. is Jewism.
It is not motivated by social justice. It is motivated by hatred of whites of Christian heritage — a hatred that goes back to Christ telling the Jews that their father is the devil; a hatred that goes back to white Romans destroying the Jewish Temple in 70 A.D.
Another problem is your claim that whites just need to be persuaded that they are wrong in not defending their own race and then everything will be fine.
Most of them already know they’re wrong, and they don’t care.
These whites, and the Jews who encourage them, cannot be lived with by whites who do care about their race. They are the enemy, and nothing should be conceded to them.
When it comes to altruism and the Christian idea of “turning the other cheek”, these have to be understood within the context of high-trust societies that exclude outsiders.
In Genesis, God creates the “nations” (peoples, races) and divides them. The Tower of Babel is an attempt to mix them into one nation. God rejects that mixture and destroys the tower. I have no reason to believe that Jesus (who is God) changed his mind about this.
Biblical Christianity does not advocate multiculturalism or race mixing. Only apostate churches do.
Part of the falling away from Christianity in the West is the acceptance of racial and religious aliens into Western societies. This has been promoted heavily by the Jews, who have been able to corrupt most churches with their money and ideas.
White advocates are right to blame churches for weakening and corrupting the white race. But they are not right to blame Christianity for doing so.
America became great because of Christianity and the U.S. Constitution. We were a high-trust, prosperous society that upheld individual rights and freedoms. But this could only work for as long as God’s prohibition against racial exclusion was in force. The failure to exclude Jews and repatriate blacks back to Africa once independence from Britain was achieved doomed the United States.
Now we are facing the consequences.
“Yet those ‘line workers’ and ‘common laborers’ could easily fix cars, plumbing, electrical in their own homes.”
I don’t know whether or not Realist is Jewish, but he has the Jewish mind virus of contempt for those who perform physical work.
>”The feeling of moral superiority is literally a drug”
>Spends a good portion of the article basking in his racial feeling of moral superiority.
The reason whites lose are not their virtues – whether those are real or not – but their weak-hearted hypocrisy. As long as you are afraid to admit “Jews and their dark-skinned goons control us through simple fear and violence” (something for which the last 9 months provided ample evidence, and something at which their local troll representatives revel), and keep repeating to yourself that your people are just too dang nice to see through the tricks, you will remain controlled through fear and violence.
There’s lots of online whinging about the Jews. Uncle Jared has the most anti-Jewish statement on the whole interweb on his website: In the guidelines for commenting, they say basically: free speech about any other ethnic/religious group, but because they are so powerful and cranky, please keep quiet about the Hebrews. That is just a roundabout way of saying that they run the show.
I am an example of a former darkie refugee enthusiast converted to race realism.
It was a snide remark from some Nigerians that changed my mind. We were speakers at a conference on alternative media. I asked them to give us some details of why they had to flee their homeland. I was hoping for an adventure story of heroic resistance to the Government and having to flee with the secret police chasing them. No chance. They smirked at me, and said that it was “too dangerous” for them to say anything about it. I knew immediately they were lying. I carefully observed all other darkies I had contact with, and with critical eyes, was able to spot the smiling hatred some of them have for us.
If we can help Our Guys to see that “quite a few” of the darkies hate us, that will make a difference.
Jared also does good work in reducing fear of speaking out amongst Our Guys. If Jared can make fun of blacks, then I can do it too. And if Ron Unz and Gilad Atzmon can make fun of Zionists, so can I.
BTW, he is now allowing some discrete criticism of Juice: I’ve seen references to Chosenites and even the JQ on the Amren site. I think the unofficial rule now is, as long as you don’t actually spell out the J word, and use some polite euphemism, you can mention them.