The Tribe To Emulate

The Asians are often called the “model minority” in America. This is based on the fact that they have very low crime, very low welfare dependency, low social dysfunction and high academic achievement. Some mentally unstable Asian females have tried to rail against this as racist, but Asians make terrible social justice warriors. That and only a lunatic could construe what is an obvious compliment as racism. The thing is though, they are not the model minority. The most successful minority is the Jews.

If you are in an African tribe and your people are thinking about moving to the West, the group you would want to emulate are the Jews. They have figured out how to wildly succeed in all sorts of places, always as a tiny minority. This is in despite of some very serious efforts by majority populations to keep the Jews from succeeding. Then there was the bit of trouble in the middle of the last century. Asians can’t hold a candle to the Jews in this area. In the US, Jews have become the ruling class.

Steve Sailer has picked up on something that has been an internet meme for some time and that is “Jewish privilege.” This used to be a gag in response to the cries of “white privilege” by Progressive lunatics, but it is slowly becoming a legitimate topic for public discussion. Whether or not you buy into the whole “privilege” argument, the point is Jews have been wildly successful in America. The question that should follow is why? What group qualities have worked for Jews that are unique to Jews in America?

Now, this is usually where people will starting mentioning Kevin McDonald and The Culture of Critique. The more empirically minded will bring up the landmark study of Ashkenazi intelligence, by Gregory Cochran, Jason Hardy, Henry Harpending from a dozen years ago. Neither of those are going to help your African tribe make it work in the West. That’s like the Koreans reading the Talmud looking for the secret of Jewish success. A better approach might be identifying a few qualities and copying them.

One is something Steve Sailer picked up on during the short-lived Larry David flap. It used to be that Jews were obsessively self-aware. Thaddeus Russell touches on this in his book, Renegade History of America. Jews used to obsess over the quirks and flaws of their people, and tirelessly harangue the tribe about the flaws. Shame is taboo these days, oddly enough. but it makes for an excellent self-policing mechanism. In fact, it used to be the default way in which the American ruling class policed itself.

Related to the self-policing instinct is clannishness. A lot of alt-right people criticize Jews for being clannish. They call it nepotism, but they really mean clannish. There’s no doubt that Jews throughout the diaspora have always worried about what is good for the Jews, so much so it is a cliche. The thing is though, unlike, say, Arabs, Jewish clannishness defends the tribe against all threats, external and internal. Arabs will protect complete idiots, who cause the tribe trouble. Jews don’t do that with their members.

This is something that all identity politics should adopt. Going back to the African tribe at the beginning, if they have a member, who brings shame on the group or simply cannot pull his weight, the best course is to cut him lose. If you have talent and you are Jewish, the tribe is an enormous asset. if you’re a mediocrity or a loser, being Jewish is not going to benefit you in the least. Clannishness as a reward encourages loyalty, but it also boils off the losers who drag down the group. Along with shame, it makes for a better tribe.

Another quirk of the Tribe that could help any tribe is the unwillingness of Jews to self-marginalize in society. The Ultra-Orthodox do this, but they are the exception. Generally, Jews engage with the society in which they reside and are willing to engage at the highest levels. Gypsies in Europe, in contrast, live on the fringes. Asians in America tend to gravitate to a little Hanoi or a Chinatown. Jews don’t do that and when forced into a ghetto, and we have the word ghetto thanks to the Tribe, Jews resist it and try to engage.

This is not just something Jews have done in America. Italians and Irish are notable examples of groups that would not stay in the ghetto. Unlike Europe, America has never had a lot of rules about this stuff. We did not inherent Europe’s class structure. Still, the winning hand everywhere is to not settle for a quiet little corner of society. The winning formula is to embrace the greater culture and carve out a place in the center of it. The trouble last century in Germany not withstanding, it has worked very well for Jews.

Going back to the shame issue, there is a Jewish quirk that is a huge advantage and that is a form of shamelessness. That is, Jews are never ashamed of their efforts. You see this with the neocons. Guys like Bill Kristol have no problem walking around in public, despite the things he has done to the country. Anthony Weiner was out and about, even after he was caught in the “bing-bing-bing.” It’s not always an asset, but having the conscience of a burglar makes it easier to overcome failure and keep plugging.

The genesis of this post is a conversation I had with a black guy from Zimbabwe. We fell into conversation about his country and one of the things he said was that his people are the Jews of Africa . He thinks his people should come to America and follow the same path as the Ashkenazi. I did not think to ask if he was Lemba, but that’s my hunch. His general point was that inculcating certain group habits that have worked for other groups, is a good way forward for tribes, be they in identity politics on the African bush.

Clown World

I was talking with someone the other day, who I know well enough to talk about current events. I don’t talk about my politics with anyone in real life, but I will chat about current events in the cable chat show sort of way, always careful not to take the wrong side. If I’m around a gang of Progs, for example, I make sure to sound like an NPR listener, if I’m forced to speak about current events. The person I was with is what you people would call a Boomer normie. He watches Fox News and voted for Trump, over Hillary.

I forget what we were discussing, but he said, “Do you ever get the feeling that things are spiraling out of control?” He went on to point out that his parents thought the world was going to hell when his generation was going crazy, but he did not think they ever lost confidence in the country. They were just sick of the kids and communists. His last thought on it was “It just feels like no one is in control anymore. All it is going to take is someone to pull on the right thread and the whole thing comes unraveled.”

I did not have a response, as that’s the sort of topic that leads to saying banned things in public and you cannot be too careful. Even when around people I’m pretty sure think the bad thoughts, I’ve made a habit of keeping my mouth shut. I figure it is good practice for when they start coming door-to-door like they are doing in Europe, looking for people who post truthful things on social media. It will probably never happen in America, but you can never be sure, so I only speak freely around certified hate thinkers at hate conferences.

All that said, there does seem to be a constant state of crisis about things now. I don’t remember that being true during the Obama years, even though there was that constant sense of foreboding over economics. The near death experience faced by the financial system in the Bush years is the reason. My sense is most people, even Cloud People, think we just got very lucky. The mortgage meltdown was just one of the tremors before the credit volcano explodes and covers the world in useless debt.

It does feel different now. Part of it is the Prog panic over Trump. You cannot engage in mass media without seeing someone shrieking about the latest Trump crisis. It’s not the shrieking that is unsettling, it is the ham-handedness of it. The NeverTrump loons like Bill Kristol and Jonah Goldberg are so transparent and phony, it makes most people wonder if we are ruled over by sociopaths. It’s not the constant state of panic in the media that is unnerving to be people. It is what the panic is revealing about our ruling class.

That’s just one aspect. The troll culture is another. Americans are increasingly getting their news through social media. That means they inevitably run across guys like Mike Cernovich. He’s just one of many professional trolls who are slowly casting themselves as legitimate news reporters. It’s not what they post, so much as how much they post that gets them attention. They are a shotgun blast of bullshit, hyperbole and self-promotion that fills the space. A million Geraldo Rivera’s have taken over social media.

It’s not just the fringe trolls. Mainstream soy-boys are now hired to generate click-bait for mainstream news sites. Most people reading this remember when the Boston Globe was a readable newspaper. No more. Idiots writing about gun confiscation are just dull-witted attention whores. He even brags about it. The thing is, guys like him would not survive the first week of the civil war that would ensure if the government tried a gun grab like he proposes. Congress would be forced to hold session in Canada or Hawaii.

There’s also the clown world aspect to it. Americans go on-line and learn that the US Army has now lifted a ban on the mentally disturbed. That’s right, they are letting “people with a history of “self-mutilation,” bipolar disorder, depression and drug and alcohol abuse” join the Army. Imagine yourself or your son in a unit with guys, who cut themselves or struggle with thoughts of suicide. If you are a normie, you look at that and think they have already let crazy people into the Army and now they are in charge.

On the other hand, it is just another day in clown world. Not so long ago, men who dressed as women – and the trans thing is always men dressing as women – were expected to keep that stuff private. If they could not control themselves, then they were shunned or even institutionalized. It was just assumed that people who think they are trees or space aliens or Filipinos trapped in a white guy’s body are suffering from a form of madness. Today, they are celebrated as heroes of the culture, by the people in charge.

That may be why people think things are spiraling out of control. It’s not the lunacy, it is the pace of lunacy. It seems to be accelerating. In one generation we went from “Maybe one day a black guy can be president” to having an exotic weirdo with a Muslim name in the White House and his supporters making war on the native stock. One day, comics are making gay jokes as part of their act and in the blink of an eye, Canada is throwing comics in jail for upsetting lesbians. The clown world spiral is accelerating.

In the 60’s and 70’s, the narrative had two sides. The Prog version was that young whites wanted to open society up for the smattering of non-whites, particularly blacks. The alternative narrative was that white society came under assault by cosmopolitan communists who used the youth movement to attack white society. Both sides relied on a civil war framework to describe that age. Both sides assume some sort of resolution where a middle ground is the result and everything gets back to normal.

That’s not the vibe of today. It feels like America is a fleet of ships lashed together for so long that no one remembers why they are lashed together. As the ropes begin to break, no one is trying to repair them. Instead. people are severing them so everyone can drift apart and go their own way. In the process, various madmen are setting fire to other boats and cackling like lunatics. Those who want to keep things together, just because that’s the way it has always been, are starting to think it is time to cut everyone loose.

Maybe that’s the best result for clown world. Whatever America was a generation ago or five generations ago, it is no longer that. It is soemthing different and something increasingly untenable. Too many people want off the ride. To return to the previous metaphor, it used to be the responsible thing was to restrain the crazies from cutting the lashings. Now, the responsible thing may be to cut the cords that bind clown world together, before something much worse happens.

Peaceful Separation

There are a limited number of ways to peacefully govern a multi-racial or multi-ethnic society. There’s the hard separation that existed in the North before the Civil Rights Movement. The South had a soft segregation. The old way of stating the difference was that whites in the North were willing to treat blacks as equals as long as they did not have to live near them. In the South, whites were willing to live near blacks, as long as they did not have to treat them as equals. Both are now forbidden to mention in public now.

America has settled on Proportionalism for the last half century, as a way to navigate through the impossible task of keeping the peace between blacks and whites. Now that tens of millions of foreigners have been added to the mix, what was a pretty good situation in the 1980’s has become increasingly untenable. Thirty years ago, most people, black or white, were optimistic about race relations. That’s clearly not the case today and people are starting to wonder if it is even possible to make it work.

That’s what makes this New York Times op-ed so interesting. The conventional way to read it is as more of the same blame and shame the Left has done for decades. The writer is supposed to be the sympathetic character and the whites are the bad guys in the never ending drama. The writer spends a lot of time listing the sins of white people and how that makes him feel. The thing is though, the way it is written leaves the impression that race relations are hopeless. This bit at the end strikes a dark note.

For African-Americans, race has become a proxy not just for politics but also for decency. White faces are swept together, ominous anxiety behind every chance encounter at the airport or smiling white cashier. If they are not clearly allies, they will seem unsafe to me.

Barack Obama’s farewell address encouraged us to reach across partisan lines. But there is a difference between disagreeing over taxes and negotiating one’s place in America, the bodies of your children, your humanity. Our racial wound has undone love and families, and ignoring the depths of the gash will not cause it to heal.

We can still all pretend we are friends. If meaningful civic friendship is impossible, we can make do with mere civility — sharing drinks and watching the game. Indeed, even in Donald Trump’s America, I have not given up on being friends with all white people. My bi-ethnic wife, my most trusted friend, understands she is seen as a white woman, even though her brother and father are not. Among my dearest friends, the wedding party and children’s godparents variety, many are white. But these are the friends who have marched in protest, rushed to airports to protest the president’s travel ban, people who have shared the risks required by strength and decency.

What has become common, when blacks are trotted out by Progressive to lecture us about race, is that they make the case that they will never be satisfied with the efforts of whites. A close reading of this essay reveals that the writer is not unhappy with the social structures of race. He does not like white people. There’s no way he can be happy in America, living among whites, as long as whites continue to act white. This is the state of things. Blacks can never be happy and whites can do anything to change that fact.

That’s not a problem that can be resolved to anyone’s satisfaction. When America was 80% white, it worked OK for Progressives, as it let them guilt the rest of the country into going along with the liberal agenda. As America approaches majority-minority status, this is entirely untenable. Ekow N. Yankah, the writer of that piece, is living the dream. He has an elite position in an elite profession. He gets treated like royalty and lives an upper class lifestyle. He’s also an African immigrant. If he can’t be happy, no one can.

The thing is, the people commissioning these sorts of pieces have to see the implications of what elite blacks are saying. American has done everything humanly possible to make it work for blacks in America. They have to see that white America is completely out of patience with this stuff. If you’re a plumber worried that you could be replaced by an indentured servant from over the horizon or you are an office worker worried about the robots, Ekow N. Yankah’s complaints just sound like ungratefulness.

The inevitable end game with race relations as America careens into majority-minority status is separation. The question is what kind of separation and whether or not it will be peaceful. Ekow N. Yankah is an accomplished guy with lpads of talent. Africa could use a man like him. Maybe the people in charge are pushing these sorts of essays, because they know what’s coming. It helps prepare the ground for the inevitable. Or, maybe they locked in the past, and they just don’t see what’s coming down the tracks

Let’s hope it is the former.

Ask Me Anything Answers

I thought this was a probably a dumb idea, but maybe not. Many more questions than I expected. Lots of topics I rarely discuss, so I have a lot of good ideas for future posts. A few people warned me about answering certain questions. They may be right. There are a lot of weirdos in the world. Many of them have internet access. it’s all fun and games until some nutjob goes from internet stalker to real life stalker. So, here’s the first batch of answers. I’ll get to the rest in another post. I have to go through all the e-mails too.

Edit: I decided to put the next batch at the end of this one. I’m getting a bit tired of typing so we’ll call this one closed.

If you were a tree, what kind of tree would you be?

This is one of those gags that started before my time. I never knew the origin of it. I’m guessing it started in the therapy movement in the 60’s, but I could be all wrong. Maybe it was a legitimate thing people asked job applicants. To answer the question, I guess a birch tree. They seem pretty happy.

You refuse to face the JQ, but you listen to TRS. What is your opinion of Mike Enoch?

I don’t write a lot about the JQ, but I have been candid about my opinions on Jews in America. I’m Ok with being a heretic on the issue and a bit incoherent on it. I just suspect that Jews in America are starting to undergo the same sort of re-evaluation of their place in the emerging America as the rest of us. I’ll just wait to see how that unfolds before settling on a firm opinion.

As to Enoch and the TRS people, I think they are funny and creative. I like ethnic humor and they do it well. I also think Enoch is a smart guy with some interesting ideas. To be honest, I was a little down on him after the Cantwell arrest, but Enoch has stood by Cantwell long after most people would have moved on to other stuff. That speaks to Enoch’s humanity and I find that admirable.

If you buy a new car do you have a safe place to store it?

Not really and that is one issue. The car idea has led me to think about moving somewhere better. I have one more move in me so that is taking up more space in my head now than the car search.

You have mentioned that you lift; do you follow one of the well known programs (if so which one)?

I’ve tried all the different programs and I’ve found the basic 5×5 suits me best. I’ve never lifted for vanity sake. I actually enjoy it. I like adding just a little more. Age is making that more difficult. I’ve had to contend with injuries the last 18 months, but I’m getting back at it now that I’m healthy again.

I have heard about the Alt-Right and the near alt-right Philosophy (which I mostly agree with) I have heard about their philosophical Goals… sometimes people disagree about what they are, but in general they are an acknowledgement that ‘progress’ has been going in an insanely retrograde direction socially and economically for decades. I agree with this.

But REAL Goals? What are the REAL Goals?

I don’t call myself alt-right, mostly because the definition is a little vague. Derb’s talk the other day makes that point, I think. The people leading this vague cultural movement don’t always agree with one another about tactics and priorities. I posted about that the other day. I think at this point, the only goal shared by all of these groups is to legitimize white identity, in the same way that black identity, Hispanic identity, Jewish identity, and so on, are accepted in public discourse.

I could be wrong. I’m not the spokesman for the alt-right.

Are you going to man up and admit you fagged out regarding your sidereal squat on Scientody, et al? You are feeling more and more like a Gen-X grandad, one boot below a 60 minute spot.

I had to google “sidereal squat” and the first result suggested sidereal is a Hebrew word meaning star or possibly unicorn. As far as I know, this is my first exposure to that word. That makes the rest of the question less clear, so I’m at a loss.

Look. My only bit in this ridiculous drama is this. If you say everything is open to revision, you’re saying there is no truth. If you want to say most things we assume to be true are open to revision, I’m right there with you.

Quick preface then question. I get the impression that you may think the constitution is outmoded. If that assumption is correct, and then assuming this country as we know it inevitably collapses, what kind of government would you install and what would it’s parameters be?

I think the original document has been replaced a long time ago. It’s not just the amendments. The way the court has built a body of law around the document has rendered it meaningless. When the court can declare gay marriage a natural right, they can make constitution say anything, which means it says nothing. More important, judges no longer pretend to do otherwise.

What comes next? It depends who wins. Constitutions are written by the winners, usually based on the lessons of the war that put them in charge.

Are traps gay?

The first time I heard this term, it was in the context of cross dressers. I just assumed that cross dressers were gay, but apparently not. The British guy who used to comment here explained that there is a whole sub-culture around dressing up as women, cartoons, famous people, etc.

Whenever this comes up, I think about this tranny I’d see at the coffee shop in the morning. Xe was black and about 6’4”. Built like a linebacker. Xe would be in heels so xe was even more imposing. Watching people’s reactions was great fun.

What are the best blogs that you read. Give us 3 to 5.

Audacious Epigone is a daily read for me. I read Sailer every day. I check in on Greg Cochran daily, even though he does not post daily. His commenters are great. The list of links at the top is pretty much my daily rotation for a variety of reasons.

What is your day job?

I spend all day watching people work and then talk about it with other people who watch people work. No kidding.

If you could point to one single formative event that pushed you from Buckley conservative/Reaganite/Libertarian conservative into the dissident right, what would it be? 

I was in a bar in Boston, a working class Irish bar, and Pat Buchanan came on the television. A somewhat drunk Irish girl started hissing about Buchanan being a racist. Her boyfriend agreed and added that immigration is good for America. Seeing people cheer their replacement made me realize that what Conservative Inc was selling was hemlock.

I figured that a dose of the Clintons would wake up the GOP and the conservative movement. I was all wrong about that. Then I figured the Bush debacle would do the trick. Nope. I think that’s when I threw in the towel and came the conclusion that Conservative Inc and the GOP had to be destroyed if we were to get a sane country again.

If NAP is for pussies, what do you recommend?

This is one of many reasons I don’t get along with ideologues. They have no sense of humor. I like to joke around and keep things light. Most libertarians drink vinegar for breakfast.

If you were to travel through time to visit Madison at the convention and inform him of the result of his experiment, what advice would you offer him? 

Pick your own cotton.

What is your favorite time and place in history?

I don’t know. It changes a lot. I’m getting into early Greek history lately. I guess they call it proto-Greek history. If forced to choose, the run up to the Great War and the inter-war period are the most fascinating. We’re still living with those events.

What is the most interesting country you have visited? I know you did a piece on Iceland a while back. Anywhere else take your fancy?

I’ve been lucky. I got to see all of America first. Then Canada and Mexico. This was by accident, but it means I have just scratched the surface on foreign travel. I think you appreciate travel more when you’re older. I had to re-visit some places of my youth to fully appreciate that fact. I like weird stuff so Iceland is at the top at the moment. But, there’s a lot more out there to see.

 

If you had the ability to amend the US constitution, what amendment would you add? Or remove? (Note that you can do both at the same time, like the 24th.)

I think an amendment that limits the time a citizen can collect a check from the Federal government would be a good idea. Exempt the military and social security. You get ten years. After that, you get no more checks. The idea is to drive the government class back out into the private sector.

I’d remove the amendment enabling the direct election of senators. That’s been a huge mistake as the states no longer have a voice in the federal system.

Thoughts on the traditional workers party

I read their platform on a podcast. Perhaps my memory is wrong, but it seems they have revamped their platform since then, but most of it is sensible. Some of it strikes me as ill-conceived, but in the main, they sound like Democrats from 50 years ago.

Why do you continue to live in Baltimore?

That’s a good question. I live outside the city now so it is not terrible, but Maryland is not a great place to live. I just hate moving. I would be better off in Virginia or even the Carolinas as I travel there for work, but I hate moving.  Plus, Baltimore being such a mess gives it a cache now. It makes me seem more interesting than I am.

You alluded once to being at best an agnostic. Why do you give a damn what happens to this country, or this planet? Why bother yourself with any of this? Why not just make your money and then move to Switzerland and enjoy it?

I don’t think I have ever called myself agnostic. If I have, I was just being lazy. I’m not sure what that has to do with national loyalty, but I’m going to assume you think I should be selfish and not care about this stuff. Well, I ask myself that question often. Doing this blog has meant having to deal with some major asshats. I’ve also got to engage with some first class people too. Life is trade-offs. For every Thinskin, there is an Audacious Epigone or a John Derbyshire. In the balance, I’m blessed.

I am still having fun with it. When I stop having fun, I stop doing it. It’s that simple.

If you were a skilled hypnotist, and you were left alone in a room with Trump for an hour, what would you program him to do?

Appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the Clintons.

Do you have a hobby? Collect anything?

I’ve never been a collector. You need a lot of patience for collecting and I don’t have it. This thing has, in a way, become my hobby. That and cycling, which still enjoy.

Favorite type of pizza crust style and toppings?

I will eat any form of pizza, as long as it does not have onions or peppers on it. I could eat pizza for every meal, every day for weeks on end. Pizza is proof that God wants us to be happy.

Your thoughts (likes/dislikes) on the Ace Of Spades Blog?

Man, I used to read him every day. I can’t remember the last time I checked out his site. He used to link to me. Maybe it is the circles I travel, but Ace has fallen off my radar. This is the first mention in a long time. I always liked his stuff, but for some reason I drifted away.

How do you think the race problem in this country gets resolved and when does it happen?

I think in the coming decades, the idea of a slow re-segregation will become the default for whites. It will not be explicit, but it will be assumed. We’ll see laws passed to allow private discrimination and freedom of association. That’s my hope, least ways. The other option is something like what’s happening in South Africa.

I would be interested in your thoughts about the government’s management of money supply and interest rates.

I used to be a hard money guy. Then I was convinced that the cyclicality was an unmanageable problem so I drifted into the basket of commodities arguments. Base money on energy, for example. Reading James Rickards, I’m in the camp that thinks credit money is a strange new thing that no one really understands and no one knows how to restrain. People like to say there is nothing new under the sun, but credit money appears to be a new thing.

It will not end well, I suspect.

Anyway – was curious if you’ve read any books from Ted Kaczynski? Primarily “Technology Slavery” (which included his 30,000 word manifesto) and his most recent one from last year called “Anti-Tech Revolution.”

I’ve skimmed his manifesto. I recommend it. Look. The guy was crazy, but he was also a genius and he had some brilliant observations.

What has your development arc looked like, as a writer? That is:

  • – Education as an essayist
  • – Style guides you favor
  • – Tools you use
  • – Professional experience you care to discuss

I have no formal training in writing. I went to Catholic schools so keeping it simple was beaten into my head. I like plain language. If you look back at this blog, I was terrible at first. I was doing the cut, paste and comment act. I hated it so I started writing short essays each day, mostly to get better at writing. I figured that was a good way to combine some fun with self-improvement.

The only reference I use is google and Strunk & White. The Grammarist is also useful. I’m not a strict constructionist when it comes to grammar. I know the arguments, but I think writing should flow. Strict adherence to grammar often impedes that flow. Ideally, a good essay reads like a song. At least that’s why I like.

Why do you keep confusing math with science?

I have ten e-mails with some version of this so I picked the shortest. I think I stumbled onto a sub-cult that is new to me. Derb used to talk about how ID’ers would play all sorts of word games in their efforts to subvert science they did not like, namely evolution. I suspect there is a connection so when time permits I will explore this a bit more and post about it.

Let A Thousand Honkies Bloom

When I was at the American Renaissance conference, the striking thing to me was the number of smart and level headed people I met. Just about everyone I met had some college, read books and was familiar with the Western canon. Not everyone was a scholar, but everyone I met was refreshingly open minded. Even the young guys were genuinely curious about the world and our times. I mentioned to Audacious Epigone that it was like an academic conference, except everyone was smart and a heretic.

The fact is though, most everyone there was from the same cultural and philosophical place. If you are a fan of American Nations, the crowd was mostly Midlanders, but there were a good number of people from Yankeedom. If I had to guess, the Tidewater was the third most represented nation. My bet is the least represented region of the country was the Appalachia. I did not quiz all 400 people at the event, but I I have a good ear for American regional accents and I did not hear too many hill people or Southerners.

When I cruise around social media, the one thing that strikes me about the alt-right is its Yankee vibe. It is a very northern honky phenomenon. It’s also a very suburban phenomenon too. I’ve made the point for years that libertarianism was a suburban white boy ideology. Most of the guys calling themselves alt-right grew up in the suburbs and started out in life as libertarians. It’s why the alt-right has a greater focus on the JQ than the race issue or even immigration. Jews are simply more numerous in the North.

America is a big place though and there are lots of places where the bourgeois burgher is the weirdo. You see that with the divide between guys like Hunter Wallace and some of the alt-right people over optics. Posts by Wallace here and here, if you are interested in the topic. The gist of it is the alt-right guys think the Southern Nationalists are embarrassing, because they remind people of the old school Southern racists. The Southern Nationalist think many of the alt-right are LARP’ing poseurs or hypocrites.

The thing with whites in the South and Appalachia is that race and heritage are the towering issues, which is not something people from Yankeedom understand. They won the Civil War and got to impose their culture on everyone else to their satisfaction. People outside of Yankeedom care deeply about preserving their culture, which is a unique subset of America. They are also far less concerned about the JQ stuff, as the only Jews they see are on television. It’s just not an issue for them.

It’s not just a North-South thing. People in the Midwest, the hilariously named “cuck belt”, have their own issues. The effects of globalism probably score higher with them than race or ethnicity. Immigration, on the other hand, is the symbol of globalism and resonates more with honkies in Ohio, than with alt-right guys in New York. It’s in the Midwest where the sense of alienation is strongest. Popular culture, politics, and economics are controlled by people who no longer look familiar to the average white Midwesterner.

Of course, the West and Southwest are ground zero for immigration. It’s not an accident that the three most important voices on the issue are based in California. Steve Sailer, Victor David Hanson and Mickey Kaus are Californians. If you have spent your life in Los Angeles, race is not an issue that concerns you. Immigration, on the other hand, is all consuming. It is the most important issue in California politics for over three decades. The same is true to a lesser degree all over the West and Southwest.

The reality is that the emerging identity politics will inevitably have a regional character to it. It’s also going to have a class character. Richard Spencer gets some grief for being a snob, but he’s just a guy from the gentry class. Steve Sailer is white bread middle-class, because he is from the white bread middle class. The Southern Nationalists are going to be working class guys. America has never had a rigid class system, but class still exists and every American is a product of their social class to some degree.

The point of this is that we are on the cusp of a new era. We have had identity politics for a long time, but whites have not been a part of it. That’s changing as the nation’s demographics change. Even as we lurch into majority-minority status, America is a big country with lots of regional differences. It is a land of nations, with unique local cultures, that persist despite the efforts at homogenization. The white identity that emerges will reflect the local culture. That’s just going to be another feature of the new America.

That means the people talking about this stuff will have to respect this reality in order to understand it. More important, the guys into the advocacy side of things are going to have respect the fact that what works for them may not work everywhere. There’s also the fact that cultural movements are inevitably lots of trial and error. Like memes that go viral on-line, for every good protest idea there are thousands that fizzle. In the fullness of time, these regional white identity groups will figure out what works for them or they go away.

We live in an age of firsts. We are the first country to be ruled over by people desperately trying to commit cultural and demographic suicide. We are the first people, with a significant element that celebrates the extinction of our race. These are events so outside the norm of human history, there are no examples in the past to rely upon for guidance and solutions. No one knows what a majority-minority America will be like. No one knows if it is sustainable. What’s coming this century is entirely new.

Let a thousand honkies bloom.

The Deadend Men

When I was a young man, starting out in the world, I took a graduate class on proto-Marxism. I was just a freshman, but the professor was satisfied that I could handle the material, so I was waved into the class. My main interest in taking the class was to get a look at real communists. The Cold War was in its denouement, so I thought I’d better get a look at some real Marxists before the whole thing collapsed into a carnival of finger pointing and embarrassment. It was one of the best courses I had in college.

The two big lessons I carried away were that ideologues always believe their thing transcends time and space. They cannot imagine that there will be a time when their tool set of ideas is no longer relevant. The other thing that seemed obvious, is that observable reality is not enough to shake someone from their ideology. The professor was well aware of the problems inherent in Marxism, but he had committed his life to it. To abandon Marxism, to even seriously question it, would be like erasing himself from life.

I’m reminded of that every time I scan conservative sites like National Review, the Federalist or even The American Conservative. They continue to talk about what they call conservatism as if it is a timeless set of truisms that are universally applicable. The fact that the conservatives of today would have been viewed as alien weirdos by the conservatives of just 30 years ago, is completely lost on them. The fact that the world is an entirely different place than 30 years ago goes unnoticed.

Read a post like this one from National Review, and the thing that jumps out is the fact that these guys still don’t know what’s happening to them. Conservatives have convinced themselves that Trump is Nixon and the current tumult is just a replay of the years between LBJ and Reagan. Rather than look at what is happening in the world, they are treating this period as an interregnum. The Progressive tide that peaked with Obama is receding. Next comes the conservative wave to carry them to the promised land.

There’s no mention of immigration or the changing demographics of America in the article, so that means there is no mention of race either. Look through the source document and it reads like a policy paper put out by people who have been asleep for the last 30 years. It also is written in the grad school jargon that sounds convincing to men who have had no exposure to the dreaded private sector. Apparently, conservatives are convinced that the “way forward” for their thing is to pretend that nothing has changed since 1988.

Conservatives keep getting up on the same horse, an image of Reagan on their shield, prepared to dash into the nearest food co-op, in the name of ordered liberty. The fact that the food co-op closed down years ago and their horse and shield are paid for by a 501(c)(3) tax shelter, supported by a billionaire oligarch, makes no difference. Even the fact that their trusty side kick, the libertarian Sancho Panza, is now hanging out on Gab, posting identitarian and Pepe memes, has had no effect on them.

When Prophecy Fails is a classic work of social psychology, from which we get the concept of cognitive dissonance. It is the study of a UFO cult in the 1950’s led by a charismatic named Dorothy Martin. She predicted the end of the world would occur on December 21, 1954. That did not happen, obviously. The study is about how the group handled this reality. One of their observations is that the group drew closer together and became more committed. They even began to proselytize about their beliefs being correct.

Conservatives seem to be going through something similar. They went into the final years of the Obama presidency with a narrative about how the next phase of their thing would unfold. Their “principles” said they needed to embrace multiculturalism, globalism and open borders. That was the future. Then Trump came along running on the exact opposite of those things. His victory was the nullification of the narrative. Instead of accepting it, they seem to be committing themselves to an renewed version of the narrative.

It’s tempting to write off Conservative Inc as just a bunch of cynical grifters. There’s certainly an element of that to it. Guys like Jonah Goldberg are living one percent lifestyles peddling outdated nostrums and ideological nostalgia. Most, maybe even all of them, don’t see themselves as useful idiots of the donor class. They really believe the conservative jibber-jabber. They think the world has not changed a bit and it is the same old fights over the same old issues. All they need to do is repeat the magic words one more time.

Conservatives, like the dinosaurs seeing the comet streaking across the sky, do not understand what is happening to them. Even as the signs of change become more obvious, they cling to the old ideology. They have a lot in common with those old Marxists of the previous generation. Even when the futility of Cold War conservatism is explained to them, they just can’t accept it. To accept that politics and economics are downstream from culture, means erasing themselves from the ideological map. They just can’t do it.

So, it will be done for them.

Mencken Club Diary Part II

There were three reasons I decided to attend Mencken. One was just curiosity. I’ve been a reader of Paul Gottfried since I was a kid, so I was curious about the sort of people who follow his work. I also wanted to meet Derb again. I’ve been a big fan of his for decades now. I also wanted to hear his views on the alt-right. He was part of a panel devoted to that topic on Saturday. Of course, the normal social stuff was a motivation, as well. You always end up meeting fellow travelers at these sorts of things.

The session on the alt-right is what I was most interested in seeing. John Derbyshire is one of the few in the older generation who seem to get that the alt-right is not a club or even a defined movement. At this point, it is mostly a collection of aspirations, observations and critiques. The second speaker was Keith Preston, who was unknown to me. I was very interested in what Professor Gottfied had to say about the alt-right. He has spent his life in right-wing politics and philosophy so his opinion is important.

John was first up and he used Vox Day’s 16-points blog post as the framework for his talk. He made the point that Vox is by no means the leader of the alt-right or the voice of it, but a representative sample that is useful for analyzing the movement. His comments about item number eight were laugh out loud funny, to the empirically minded. What John was doing was introducing the general ideas of the alt-right to a crowd that is not spending their evenings in the meme war. He did a good job presenting the broad strokes.

The next guy up was Keith Preston and I think it is fair to say he is not a fan of the alt-right, but he is not dismissing it either. He took some shots at some of the crazier elements flying the flag, but he gave a good long overview of all the different groups that get lumped into the category alt-right. Preston reminds me of Fred Reed, before Fred went crazy. There is an almost forgotten tradition of Southern populist skepticism that works very well when critiquing political ideologies. As a result, his review of the alt-right was well done.

The final speaker was Professor Gottfried. His talk was interesting for a number of reasons. One is he does not like Richard Spencer very much. He thinks Spencer is just playing make believe and is a bundle of unforced errors. He also said Spencer hates working class people. This is not the first time I’ve heard someone say some version of this. Gottfied did not say it, but the accusation is that Spencer is a dilettante. Having been around enough trust fund guys, I get why people think that, but I don’t share that opinion.

Gottfried’s main theme about the alt-right is that they are not well run and not good at presenting themselves on main stream media outlets. He used, as an example, someone who either writes for Spencer now or used to write for him. Gottfried said the guy was a racist and therefore an embarrassment. He got quite worked up over this point and said you can’t have a political movement without moral standards. Purging racists should be the absolute minimum standard for any political movement.

Gottfried is trying to replay the purges that landed him and the rest of the paleocons outside the institutions. He wants a do over. That’s something you hear from the older crowd a lot and I understand it. There’s a lot of bitterness as to how things played out in conservative politics over the last half century. I don’t blame a guy like Gottfried for looking at a guy like Jonah Goldberg with contempt. Gottfried wrote the book on fascism, but Goldberg got rich off the crackpot idea that Progressives are the real Nazis.

The truth of the matter though, is mainstream conservatism failed to conserve anything, other than the some well paid positions in Progressive media. The reason is they lost the culture war. In the 1960’s, when the Progressives decided to finish what they started in the 1860’s, the Official Right buckled. Instead of fighting to the last man, they agreed to the new moral paradigm, with regards to human relations, that the Left wanted to impose on the rest of the country. When racism became a sin, conservatism became one two.

That’s what the paleos don’t get. There’s no stopping the white replacement project and the systematic erasure of our culture, until the Progressive moral framework is brought crashing down. I’m no spring chicken, but I fully endorse the youthful antics employed by the alt-right. Putting up posters like Identity Europa does on college campuses, helps build a counter culture and draw in young people. The ad hoc guerrilla marketing campaign of placing “It’s OK To Be White” signs is lethal to the people in charge.

Sure, some of it backfires. Despite what anyone says, Charlottesville was a clusterfuck for all involved. In this sort of movement though, you have to take risks and accept some losses. Let’s also not forget that Charlottesville is why the Hispanic KKK ran that hilariously stupid ad in the Virginia governor’s race. It’s not always easy to know if an action worked. Going off the hot takes of Sean Hannity is a good way to keep losing, like the generation of paleos now carping about the alt-right.

One of the crazier things Gottfried said, is that the alt-right is creating a war between whites, when it is claiming to defend whites. He then went onto say that the reason things are such a mess in America is that Christians did it to themselves. I’m a heretic on the JQ issue, but man, that was hard to take. Anyone vaguely familiar with the arguments of the alt-right would know exactly what the response would be to that. I’ll just say it is an example of the vast cultural divide between the Old Right and the alt-right upstarts.

I have a lot of respect for guys like Paul Gottfried, so this should not be read as a condemnation of him or the paleocons. I think in the fullness of time, they will be remembered fondly for having kept the fires burning, despite having been un-personed by the Buckleyites and neocons. The alt-right owes everything to these old guys, even though many of them made the trip from libertarianism. Richard Spencer got his start because of guys like Gottfried and Taki Theodoracopulos,

The difference is the new guys categorically reject the current moral order. If that upsets the Fox New types, so be it. Politics is a pointless enterprise, if rooting for your own team is expressly forbidden. Taking over institutions does nothing, if the price is embracing the morality of the Left. The Old Right always defined itself as defending the existing culture and institutions. That made sense when those things were worth defending. Today, those things are a cancer on our people. They must be replaced or we will be replaced.

Mencken Club Diary Part I

I got to the hotel hosting the Mencken event a little early, so I went to the bar to have a beer and kill some time. This was my first Mencken event and I was having second thoughts about the whole thing. I figured it would be an older crowd, which is fine, but I suspected it would a very libertarian crowd too. I don’t have a lot of patience for libertarians, under the best of circumstances. It had been a very busy week for me so I was especially cranky and I feared I would be something less than my charming self.

As I had my second beer, I was thinking about how best to say “the non-aggression principle is for pussies.” I noticed a middle-aged women at the other end of the bar. She had been at a table, tapping away on her tablet. She relocated to the bar and was making an effort to get my attention. She was sporting a Mao cap, which is popular with cat ladies, so I ignored her, had another beer and played with my phone. Maybe if she had been better looking or I had a few more drinks in me, I would have done her the favor.

The reception was a little like God’s waiting room, assuming the Jews really are the chosen people. The room was old and very Jewish. There was a youngish guy over in the corner, who looked relieved to see me walk in, as that meant there were two people in the room paying FICA taxes. We chatted for a wile and I learned he is a devout libertarian and came to the Mencken event primarily to see Tom Woods. He seemed earnest, so I resisted the temptation to tell him about my plan to send libertarians to work camps.

The formal reception was a sit-down affair with a dinner and drinks. I was relieved to meet some younger people, who share my politics. They were mostly millennials, but one guy was gen X. We were the kiddie table. Keith Preston was at our table and he is an interesting guy. I don’t share his politics, but he is not one of those doctrinaire ideologues, who thinks he has figured it all out and now has to spread the gospel. He’s genuinely curious about what’s going on in the dissident right. He’s a good dinner companion.

That is the value of these events. Going back and forth with strangers using fake names on-line has its value, but meeting and talking in real life has value too. I only had some vague notion about Preston, based entirely on his site. Chatting over dinner and then hearing him speak, I now have a new appreciation for what he is doing. At the same time, I saw him nodding more than a few times as I was making my case for the new counter culture. If not for sitting at the same table, we would remain strangers to one another.

Another big benefit to these things is that you find out that there are more of us out there than is reported. Two of the guys at the kiddie table are college professors. Another is an attorney at a big firm. I know from the comments here, and the e-mails I receive, that a lot men in the professional ranks are “our guys” but they keep quiet about it. That’s a necessary thing, but it also means it is easy to feel like a stranger in the world. Having dinner with a gang of smart, like minded professionals is an antidote to the sense of doom.

At the same time, spending time with a bunch of old guys is an eye opener. Most of us experience our politics on-line, through blogs, social media and videos. The people at the Mencken event experience their politics from network news, the cable chat shows and paper magazines. A lot of what we take for granted, they don’t know exists. What they do know about the emerging counter culture, they don’t fully understand. It’s not simply an age thing. Its that there is a necessary bit of self-ghettoization on out side.

Age is a part of though. Paul Gottfried kicked off the evening with a speech about the state of the Right. He made the point that the average age of Fox News viewers is 60-something and National Reviews readership is around 70. Then he made the error of assuming that reflects the demographics of the Right. The fact is, Stefan Molyneux has vastly more resonance with people under the age of 50 than a Sean Hannity. Sites like 4chan and Reddit have greater political reach than all of the cable shows combined.

Tom Woods, the featured speaker of the night, actually tried to make that point. He talked about how he has built a business on new media, but I don’t think he won any of them over. He also spent a lot of time trying to differentiate between left-libertarianism and right-libertarianism. There’s always been warm relations between paleos and Rand Paul style libertarians and he was well received by the Mencken folks. He’s a good speaker, so I did not run out of the room screaming, even though the whole thing had a 1980’s vibe to it.

Finally, the most important benefit to attending these real life gatherings is that you get to socialize with other like minded people. The kiddie table ended up in the bar, drinking and telling stories. I learned that one of the college professors is connected with a bunch of people in this thing. I also learned that a couple of the others are readers. That’s always an interesting experience for me. I often forget that real people read this stuff. For me at least, the camaraderie and brotherhood is motivating. It gives purpose to my efforts.

I’ll get into the event itself in another post, but people in dissident politics should begin to embrace these events. Co-opting existing institutions is how the New Left won the culture war 50 years ago. It’s a good model to follow. If alt-right people start populating local clubs and organizations, even If it is in a low key way, it helps build the movement. The first step is meeting people at events like Mencken. Two of the guys at my table are local to me, so now we can socialize and conspire locally. That’s how movements grow.

Suicide Cult

I have a friend who was a reverend in the Episcopal Church. He is technically still in the church, but he has decided to find another vocation. The main reason is that most of the people running the church are women, along with a high number of homosexuals. The result is the people running the church care more about social justice and their genitals than anything else. Like most of the mainline Protestants churches, the Episcopal Church has become a circus of degeneracy and general lunacy. As a result their pews are empty.

That said, you can learn a lot about the direction of the Cult of Modern Liberalism by watching the mainline Protestant churches. They are so desperate for attention, they tend to give the game away by going overboard in the latest Progressive fads. Their internal war on heterosexual white men has been going on a long time now, long before the rest of the Progs decided to make war on the honkyman. This story out of Virginia shows the true nature of the statue toppling stuff and its ultimate goal.

Leaders at the church that George Washington attended decided that a plaque honoring the first president of the United States must be removed.

Christ Church in Alexandria, Virginia will take down a memorial marking the pew where Washington sat with his family, saying it is not acceptable to all worshipers.

“The plaques in our sanctuary make some in our presence feel unsafe or unwelcome,” leaders said, a reference to the fact that Washington was a slaveholder.

“Some visitors and guests who worship with us choose not to return because they receive an unintended message from the prominent presence of the plaques.”

“Many in our congregation feel a strong need for the church to stand clearly on the side of ‘all are welcome- no exceptions,'” they concluded.

A memorial to Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee will also come down.

These churches are big on the “all are welcome” stuff. They hang banners outside their empty churches with this slogan, usually decorated with rainbows. My suggestion is the alt-right toughs should take pics of themselves dressed as Hitler, posing in front of these stupid signs. That would make for a hilarious social media campaign. The fact is, the only people welcome in these hell holes are Progressive nutters and sexual deviants. As is always the case with The Cult, the opposite of what they say is usually the truth.

If you have any doubts about any of this, take a look at the roster of clergy running this church. The rector has two last names, suggesting she is keeping her options open. A good rule of thumb is that a woman with two last names is a nut. That’s probably why she hired a tranny as a youth counselor. Her second in command is a former actress, a profession known to attract the stable and virtuous. Two more women fill out the priestly class of this old church. It’s not hard to see why they are waging jihad on George.

That’s the thing with these churches. They are run by social justice warriors who see the church as a vehicle to inflict Progressive morality on their congregations. You can be sure that no one in the church gave a damn about George Washington. These hens spend all day clucking about what they read in the New York Times or heard on NPR. They came up with the idea of evicting the father of the country, because they wanted attention. It is virtue signalling, but their idea of virtue originates outside the Episcopal Church.

Of course, this was always the end point of the Rebel Flag burning and statue toppling. It is the thing everyone knew all along. It may have started as a tantrum by Cloud People aimed at the Dirt People, but it was going to end as a orgy of self-abnegation. These people hate their own kind. They hate their ancestors. The reason is, they hate themselves and the way to erase themselves is to erase their past. Progressives dream of the day when they no longer exist and any memory of them is gone too.

God speed Christ Church.

Civic Religion

Proponents of the propositional state often make the claim that America is held together by a civic religion. Usually, but not always, the argument in favor starts with the first line of Lincoln’s Gettysburg address. “Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.” The emphasis is on the bit about all men being created equal, from which flows the ideals of political liberty, equality before the law, democracy, etc.

It’s wise to start with Lincoln, as there is no evidence that the Founders were fond of the idea or even aware of it. Rousseau coined the term in 1762 and many of the Founders would have read his work, but there is no evidence they embraced the idea. In fact, they largely rejected the idea of a unifying state, as a cultural force. Their words and actions contradict the modern interpretation of “all men are created equal” so it is impossible to argue they intended it as currently interpreted. Lincoln is a much better starting point.

That said, it is doubtful Lincoln or anyone alive at the time would have embraced the idea of civic religion. The first guy to talk about America having a uniquely religious quality was Alexis de Tocqueville, but he did not think Americanism was a civic religion or anything close to it. He thought America’s uniquely Christian nature is what allowed for a diverse people to form a single nation. For a 19th century American, especially in the aftermath of the Civil War, the idea of a unifying creed would have been laughable.

The earliest mention of America having a unique civic life, held together by something resembling a religion, is by Chesterton. He wrote that America was “the only nation founded on a creed” and was “a nation with a soul of a church.” This observation was probably not unique to Chesterton. Europeans have always viewed Americans as being moralistic and impractical, with regards to the affairs of state. This is something our rulers encourage. Just look at the war on terror. It’s entirely framed in moral terms.

The fact is, the idea of a civic religion and an American creed is a fairly new one. The guy credited with promoting it is sociologist Robert Bellah. He formalized the concept in a 1967 article titled “Civil Religion in America.” According to Bellah, “Americans embrace a common civil religion with certain fundamental beliefs, values, holidays, and rituals, that transcend their chosen religion.” It’s what allows a diverse people to fight under the same flag, cooperate economically and maintain a multi-ethnic society.

As is often the case, theories of history require the wholesale rewriting of history. That’s what has happened with the civic religion claims. The most generous interpretation is that this new civic religion was born after the Civil War, as a result of the North defeating the South. The “new nation” that came out of that was formed around this new creed. That’s not unreasonable, but it also disconnects us from the Founding and the Founding documents. What it means is that the Constitution is largely meaningless.

A less generous reading is that this was part of a marketing campaign by certain elements in 1960’s America to de-legitimize the dominant American culture. After all, this was the peak of the cultural revolution when the New Left had embarked on its long march through the institutions. It was also around this time that Congress began to fling open the borders and invite the world into the country. If America is not a nation of Americans, but a concept, why not invite in the world, so they can learn the concept too!

The ahistorical nature of the civic religion is not troubling to the believers because they simply want to believe, as long as the civic religion serves their purpose. For Buckley conservatives, libertarians and others, the language of the civic religion is useful as an argument against the Progressive ruling class. It lets them stand in opposition on moral grounds, but also accept defeat, without violating their principles, which they claim are rooted in their Americanism. It is the political get out of jail free card.

The bigger problem with this civic religion stuff is the problem with civic religions in general. If they mean anything, they end up in a blood bath. The reason is a religion has rules that are non-negotiable. For example, you cannot be a Catholic and support abortion on demand. In order to be a member in good standing, you have to be in line with the teachings of the religion. Otherwise, you are a sinner, and maybe even a heretic. No religion can tolerate heresy among its members and remain an active religion.

In theory, you can quit a religion and join another one. Or, you can simply not participate or maybe just do the barest minimum to keep everyone off your back. You can’t realistically quit your country and join a new one. You can’t become agnostic as a citizen. Similarly, the leaders of the civic religion cannot easily exile you for heresy. The result is usually concentration camps or worse. That’s why all other efforts at building a civic religion have ended up in wholesale murder. It is the only practical way to handle dissent.

There is another problem with the civic religion idea, that is particular to America. This has never been a country with a single culture or even a single people. The founding of the colonies was by distinct groups of English. New York City was not even founded by English. If you read the book American Nations, it does a pretty good job of describing the different cultural groupings of the country. Imposing the cult of Lincoln on the nation sounds good to the ruling class, but it has never sat well with the rest of the nations.

This cult of Lincoln promoted by our betters has another defect and that is they are compelled to impose it on the world. This seems to be another problem with all civic religions. The French exported radicalism around Europe. The Soviets exported Bolshevism around the world. The American empire is the story of imposing the American creed on every nation of the world, always against their will. Civic religions, like all religions, don’t seem to play nice with other religions, seeing them as competitors.

That’s why America has gone from a republic full of active Christians to a “meritocracy” at war with anything resembling Christianity. A century ago, Progressives were Christians, who were Progressive reformers. Then they were Progressives, who could also be Christians. Then they were just Progressives. There was a time when “liberal Catholic” was a real thing, but no one can chase two rabbits at once. Eventually, the American civic religion won out and is now being imposed on all of us, by force.

The best you can say about the supposed civic religion of America is that it is what the ruling class uses to keep the plates spinning. There is something to say for economic progress and domestic peace. It is not, however, natural or normal, and therefore it must eventually yield to reality. That’s what we are seeing today. Americanism is a luxury item for an America that was 80% white and free of economic and political inequality among the white population. That’s not today so the civic religion is losing its salience.