G.L.Piggy [at] gmail.com
Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.
I wasn’t around this part of the internet back in 2005, but I came across an online debate between Jared Taylor and Steve Sailer that I found interesting. Commenter icr posited that Jared Taylor isn’t a white nationalist, but Taylor wrote during his exchange with Sailer, “Steve Sailer’s charmingly discursive reply to my defense of white nationalism covers a lot of ground.”
In that exchange, Taylor wrote:
At the same time, I apologize to no one for putting my group first, just as non-whites do. Whites have a duty to their ancestors and an obligation to their children. Duty does not calculate the chances of success, as Mr. Sailer would have us do. Duty calls us to what is right.
My children deserve a country in which they can be proud of their heritage, where their culture is taken for granted, where their history is not treated like a criminal record, where they can be confident their own children will walk in the ways of their ancestors.
What do they say about “deserving”? So many of Taylor’s words are arbitrary and meant to conjure up romantic notions in the hearts of his white followers. Over how large a domain does a white person “deserve” a certain culture and a preservation of a certain heritage? White Nationalists’ goal is impossible. They want to rule over a huge landscape which consists of over 300 million people in a technologically-driven age.
This reminds me of the differences between processes and outcomes. Sailer’s citizenism is concerned with processes – the rule of law, property rights, the freedom of association - while Taylor’s white nationalism is concerned with outcomes which includes a steadfast aesthetic rule.
If we’re talking about the process or the system, this country was not founded on an aesthetic principle. It was founded on processional principles – I assume we’re all familiar with the founding documents. If the rule of law prevails and if the system is sound, it doesn’t really matter which pieces go where. Taylor et al have an eye on the preservation of certain aspects of the culture or the heritage. They want a certain outcome, and they aren’t really concerned with whether or not the system operates fairly and consistently.
This all seems pretty vague as even those within White Nationalism place different value on different aspects of the culture. Their ultimate argument is the rule that white people must always choose white. We should not ever choose idiosyncratically, according to WN’s. As an adult, that’s not a rule I could ever abide by. Even if I might choose those things to which I most closely identify i.e. “white things”, I could never accept such a limitation.