Jared Taylor has replied to my post about White Nationalism versus Citizenism which seemed to be of interest to quite a few. I’ll reply to his short rebuttal in the next day or two. I don’t intend this as a cop-out, but I did not expect my initial post to draw so many comments and so much scrutiny.
Jared Taylor replies:
I’m glad to see that my seven-year-old exchange with Steve Sailer is still getting a little notice. Chuck Rudd has singled out the following passage from my essay for criticism:
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.
Mr. Rudd is right to focus on the word “deserve.” Why, indeed, do my children deserve these things? Because all children deserve these things, but they are not possible in a multi-racial, multi-ethnic country.
For example, how do we teach American history to our children? As the Westward march of progress from Europe to the Pacific or as the dispossession of Indians? Either version is valid. Indians deserve schools that mourn the loss of land and tradition, and extol the sacrifice of those who defended them. Whites deserve schools that celebrate Manifest Destiny. Both curricula should include the same facts—there are no noble lies—but the perspectives are incompatible.
At the same time, whites deserve—yes, deserve—to rear their children in what started out as part of the United States and stays that way rather than becoming an outpost of Mexico or Haiti or Vietnam. And the people of Mexico and Vietnam deserve the same protection from cultural and demographic invasion. I am not asking for my children anything I do not ask for all children.
Non-white countries take stability of this kind for granted. It is only white countries that have policies to reduce the founding stock to a minority, and schools that call their ancestors criminals.
What we have in the United States is inevitable in a multi-racial society of mass immigration that has lost its cultural and racial core. Races have competing interests, and a mixed society means perpetual conflict.
Mr. Rudd is wrong, therefore, to think that white nationalists want to “rule over a huge landscape which consists of over 300 million people.” White nationalists just want to be left alone. They don’t want to rule over anyone. They freely admit the folly of having brought in people of different races to pick cotton or build railroads, but they refuse to pay for that folly by ignoring their own dispossession.
It is no mere rhetorical trick to point out say that white nationalism—any nationalism—celebrates diversity. It celebrates authentic diversity that will survive for generations because it is free from the unwanted influence of aliens. This freedom requires distinct neighborhoods, institutions, and boundaries—and boundaries are hard to draw. But unless whites draw boundaries, they face oblivion.
Like this:
Like Loading...
It’s been a while since I read Jared Taylor. I’d forgotten what a fantastic writer he is, and how well he reframes arguments.
Meh.
There are likely tens of thousands of languages and cultures that have faced oblivion. Others replace them.
This is survival. I would submit that Anglo culture has propagated itself at the cost of many others; such is the way of success. All great powers succumb to immigration, many voluntarily.
What galls *me* is that we’re supposed to be perpetually guilty; that the result is a cynical ploy to acquire more power and goodies for some people at the expense of others. If we want to argue historical affronts, what’s to stop us from only going to slavery? Why not the Norman French invasion of 1066; or the Viking invasions of the 700′s that created the Norman French? Or those bloody Romans? We’re using the Latin script: isn’t that acknowledging our oppressors?
This is all pure power play. Nothing more. The chosen beneficiaries are those chosen arbitrarily, by historical manipulators.
Nothing more.
“We’re using the Latin script: isn’t that acknowledging our oppressors?”
good point.
i made a similar point about the spanish conquering latin america. the incas were doing the same thing to other tribes.
Whites did what all races have done only we did it better. Now we either fight those who want to do to us what we did to them to survive and thrive or we perish. I say we fight just as our ancestors did to survive. We can do no less or we die the cowards death.
This is very good, especially the part about what Indian and white school children should be taught about their respective histories.
It’s good. Very beautiful, alot of words. I like Jared Taylor.
But, the purpose of WN is not construct beautiful arguments, nor to fill volumes of books. It is to secure the existence of the white race and a future for white children.
With this end in mind, I believe JT has wasted his time. It would be alright if it inspired action. It’s not alright if the result is 300+ comments and hundreds of hours of wasted time.
It’s like great, you get it. Then there’s education, training, networking with other WNs. That’s the real work. You don’t get a country just by proclaiming your “rights.”
Think you’re in over your head here Chuck. The man is too smart.
It’s worth noting Taylor’s argument really has two separate parts: the principled part which says whites deserve what other groups take for granted, and the practical part which says homogeneity yields better results than heterogeneity. (Debatable at least on these grounds: http://on.wsj.com/cDc8el)
Just pointing that out as it’s easy to have two related but really separate arguments going and it can make things difficult.
The premise of his argument is that children should be taught lies.
HIs prescription is that groups should live separately, but contiguously, and teach their children how the group next to them is inferior or immoral and the assumption is that this will lead to peaceful co-existence.
For these arguments he gets lauded by the commenters here.
It’s alot like going to the gym and lifting weights. Some academics will write books and articles for or against weightlifting. They use figures and facts. Others just use their instinct, get in the gym and go to work.
I’d rather be “doing” WN than reading about it. Jared Taylor’s work is essentially a gateway. Amren has a message: interracial violence is real, third world immigration is bad. That’s the point. Once you’ve heard it, move on! There are higher levels.
The transition from writing about WN to doing it can be hard. Only PA, stonelifter and carnivore could do it here. For the rest, WN is just entertainment. It’s the future of our people, but it may as well be the Yankees versus the Red Sox.
…and teach their children how the group next to them is inferior or immoral…
He’s saying there shouldn’t be a group next to them. If there is a group next to them, this leads to conflict.
Taylor is not advocating teaching lies, Sumguy. He’s not talking about the indisputed facts of history but opinion – or the question of how to frame the teaching of history. For example:
Fact: White Europeans colonized the Americas and formed new countries there.
Opinion: These colonists were noble and guided by providence.
Opinion: These colonists were rapacious, murderous imperialists.
Both frames, both worldviews, (WN vs. multicultural viewpoints) approach an undisputed fact a different way. Taylor is advocating for an emphasis on the accomplishments of white Americans (and their European motherlands) rather than a curriculum that focuses on denigrating them.
(Note: WN viewpoints and multiculturalism are more two ends of a spectrum of views, rather than the only two options, but I’m going to oversimplify for the sake of discussion.)
…and teach their children how the group next to them is inferior or immoral…
Since Czecho-Slovakia split up (second time, after the collapse of the Soviet empire) I don’t think
the Czechs and the Slovaks have wasted a lot of time badmouthing each other. Even the
now independent republics of the former USSR don’t seem to generate much noticeable anti-Russian hatred/propaganda- even though Putin likes to portray the Balts honoring their war dead as a form of hatred. The recent lack of ADL warnings about nationalism in the Balkans (unless you include Greece) also seems to indicate that things have calmed down in the former Yugoslavia.
Aaron your link doesn’t say that heterogeneity produces good results. The comparison is literally between early pleistocene hunter-gatherers living in tundra covered nothern Europe not engaging in trade and for the most part examples of early civilizations of sedentary peoples.
The whole idea that this supports a multiculturalist modern state is silly, unless you are proposing that the land of Ur was somekind of rainbow coalition. In reality all but the most dedicated “Nordicist” is for a kind of society orders of magnitude more liberal than those communities of people that existed on the cusp of civilization and barbarism.
Places that engaged in a lot of trade were the hubs of innovation, but the same can’t be said of the literal crossroads of trade, which again suggests something more unique about the say Greeks, Romans, Egyptians character as a people in going out seeking trade than it does about people that happen to just experience it.
Sitting on the crossroads of land trade routes doesn’t seem to have facilitated much innovation for the middle eastern middlemen that controlled them for hundreds of years (or at any point in history, as these people have never been great builders, inventors or philosophers). It would be more accurate to say that some peoples have gained innovative benefit from trade, and others have not except as being the beneficiary of the innovation of others.
There is also the whole Malthusian element, and GEVs that set their own boundaries in which to work with setting up artificial Malthusian limits that drove innovation. All in all very lightweight.
Furthermore, I do know how to make a pencil and could do it alone, by my own hand, from scratch. I just couldn’t mass produce them, for profit. The article vastly overestimates how many people are actually involved, and how much know-how was required for the infrastructure of civilization to exist.
@Ryu
“But, the purpose of WN is not construct beautiful arguments, nor to fill volumes of books. It is to secure the existence of the white race and a future for white children.”
Ah yes the vaunted and oft repeated 14 Words. My question is this: with the recent and future advances in genetic engineering, reproductive technology, In Vitro-fertilization, and Designer Babies, does this not all but guarantee the future existence of the white race?
Designer Babies are not some hypothetical future technology, they can already sort sperm, eggs, and implant embryos that have genetic traits such as race, height, and eye color. Within the next 10-20 years scientists will be able to also pre-determine a babies hair color, IQ, athletic capabilities, and remove of heritable diseases. No amount of liberal and blank-slatist hand wringing can stop this. One day parents will be able to tick boxes of what they want their child to be and parents are going to give their children every advantage.
The only issue is that this technology will be expensive and only the rich will be able to afford it. But if so, doesn’t that almost guarantee that the wealthy class will all have children that are as smart as Chris Langan (highest record IQ on the planet) as athletic as Olympic athletes, and looking like Dolph Lundgren, Nicole Kidman, and Giselle Bunchen? Lots of people hypothesize that there will be a class of real life Ubermensch and an underclass of “natural” Idiocracy style Lumpenproletariats.
Science is going to secure the existence and propagation of genes. In my humble opinion, All the rest is territory dispute.
“Think you’re in over your head here Chuck. The man is too smart.”
Whatever. I didn’t find Taylor’s argument to be that compelling. “Deserve” has nothing to do with it. A people doesn’t “deserve” anything beyond what they are able and willing take and defend — be it by persuasion, guile, collaboration or force. At this point, I think the WN ship has sailed. I’m not convinced that anymore than a fraction of a percent of white people want what WNs want. Sure, their living patterns indicate that they aren’t too keen to live around large numbers of NAMs (blacks especially), but they don’t seem to have any issue incorporating NAMs into their social groups who are sufficiently similar culturally, nor do they have any issue living around Asians. The Pew intermarriage study reported that “More than one-third of Americans (35%) say that a member of their immediate family or a close relative is currently married to someone of a different race.”: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/02/16/the-rise-of-intermarriage/ While people do cluster by race to some degree, it’s not the sole criteria for determining group affiliation, nor does it serve as a hard and fast rule.
ryu said: “But, the purpose of WN is not construct beautiful arguments, nor to fill volumes of books. It is to secure the existence of the white race and a future for white children.
With this end in mind, I believe JT has wasted his time. It would be alright if it inspired action. It’s not alright if the result is 300+ comments and hundreds of hours of wasted time.”
Your premise is that his argument is beautiful but ineffectual. I completely disagree. The narrative is crucial to how people think and behave. Whites have been committing collective suicide because the left has hijacked the narrative. Western societies were most confident, successful, and healthy when they lauded their own people, ancestors, history, etc. We went into decline when we adopted the perspective of outgroups and started denigrating our own history and people. The narrative is the most critical piece to the fight that must be won. It is the bedrock, without which you cannot begin to fight. Right now, white people have so adopted the perspective of The Other about their own societies that they reflexively regard as evil anyone who advocates for the mere survival of Whites. Without Whites first believing, as Mr Taylor says, that “[Their] 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.”, you cannot begin the struggle. The belief must come first. This is why Taylor, and others like him, are giants in the struggle. Our level of involvement is to introduce, and eventually habitualize the notion that it is normal (and not deviant or evil) if you are white, to advocate for your own people, as it is normal for all people to want to advance their own group. Only Whites demonize those of their own who advocate for their in-group.
The struggle, for those of us who wish to, is to propagate these ideas outside of precincts where people are already awake. Fight the day to day battles (of ideas) with people we know, in person, or on boards that are filled with multicultists. It’s tedious work, but the more people see that there are others out there that are not cowed by PC lies, and are willing to speak the truth, the more they’ll see that it’s okay to not have to live with the cognitive dissonance that is caused by radical egalitarians’ lies about Whites, or even, if you allow that they are not lies, they are the perspective of out-groups, and therefore, an unnatural perspective to have as a White.
Sorry for the novel length post. I just think that what Taylor does is bedrock work, and diametrically opposite to being ineffectual, though it is incumbent on we foot soldiers to spread these simple truths outside HBD precincts. This is a war of ideas, first. Anything else comes later.
k(yle) –
I’m not endorsing the whole article as saying heterogeneity is the best thing, I just linked to make the general point that groups can close themselves off too much and innovation etc might stall. But we might point at Japan here as a counter example. Was just saying it’s *debatable*.
Ethnically mixed marriages among Serbs, Croats and Muslims were very common in Bosnia in the period before the outbreak of the civil wars:
http://www.other-news.info/2006/06/mixed-marriages-on-rise-again/
Odds is right. Thanks to genetic engineering, none of this will matter in 20 years.
There is no reason WN should be controversial. White flight is real; self-segregation is real. Many Whites already reject multiculturalism in deed if not in word. WNists want Whites to have the political power in the future to do what many already do anyway.