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.

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.

A Foundation of Nonsense

Math and science are built upon axioms. Very simply, an axiom is something that is always true and assumed to be true. An example is the reflexive property in algebra. A number is always equal to itself. Axioms are the building blocks, from which new truths are discovered. A proof is an inferential argument for a mathematical statement, using other previously established statements. That means a proof can be traced back to the original, assumed truths, those axioms that are the foundation of mathematics.

This is how we accumulate knowledge about the physical world over generations. The proofs based on those building blocks are eventually incorporated into the building blocks of math. The theorems and proofs multiply, slowly building up the stock of things that are known to be true. Calculus was built upon algebra and physics was built upon calculus and so on. It why a student can quickly go from zero to trying to discover new truths about the world. They inherit a supply of things assumed to be true.

This accretive process of increasing our stock of knowledge is not limited to math and science. It is the way human societies evolve over time. We start with basic truths about the human condition and the realities we face as a society. Over time we acquire new knowledge, by building on what we know or that which we think we know. For example, Libertarians rely on the concept of homo economicus. This asserts that humans are consistently rational and self-interested agents pursuing their ends optimally.

In theory, at least, this is the basis of democracy. One side builds a set of policies and proposals, allegedly based on the assumed truths. The other side does the same thing arriving at different policies. After a vigorous examination of the competing claims, a consensus is formed around one solution. If it works out, then that becomes part of society’s truths, from which new problems will be addressed in the future. That’s not really how it works, but people believe it. It is axiomatic that democracy works this way.

What we know to be western liberal democracy, assumes certain things about humanity to be true all the time. The blank slate is the most obvious example. Everything about our politics and culture assumes that humans are infinitely malleable. From school policy to prison reform, public policy is based on the assumption that people can be whatever they choose, because they have free will and a blank slate that can be erased and re-illustrated at any point in their life. You are what you make of yourself.

It’s how our rulers arrived at the idea of importing millions of foreigners. Those foreigners can be re-purposed into tax paying westerners, through education and enculturation, to pay the pensions of the native stock. Those Somali goatherds can be plopped down into Minnesota and over time, develop all of the habits of the average Minnesotan, just by emulation and proximity. Race laws are all based on the assumption that you can train people to stop noticing racial difference and therefore, end racism.

Of course, science is putting the lie to the blank slate. Genetics is everyday filling out the truth of the human condition, which is that we are the result of our coding. The thousands of mating decisions, made by those who came before us, are what make us what we are as people. Everything from our height to our sense of humor is baked into our DNA. Our health outcomes and our life outcomes are the results of that coding. Not surprisingly, the closer our coding is to others, the greater the similarities.

While no one is prepared to say free will is a lie, at least not publicly, no serious person accepts that we are infinitely malleable. The argument that you can change your personality is as nutty as saying you can make yourself taller or younger. This reality used to be a building block of Western thought, but was “discredited” by the blank slate theorists, but it is now being reestablished by genetics. In other words, one of the main building blocks of modern social democracy is about to crumble.

That’s a big one, but it is not the only one. Both Freudian and Jungian psychology still cast a very long shadow over western culture. Freud is no longer taken seriously, outside of his historical importance. The idea that your emotional state is the product of childhood sexual trauma is a click less realistic than phrenology. Jungian psychotherapy is also being overrun by neuroscience. Few people still think they can talked out of their madness anymore. Instead, pharmaceuticals are used to treat diseases of the brain.

It’s not just the quackery. The moral philosophy that underlies our political philosophy is similarly built on a foundation of nonsense. The Enlightenment thinkers all started by considering man’s natural state. It was either a harmonious communal existence or a brutal war like existence. From both starting points, they worked forward to build a model how man went from the state of nature to what was then civilization. The resulting moral philosophy is the basis of our political and legal philosophy today.

Property rights, the rule of law, the relationship of man and state, these are all based on those assumptions about man’s natural state. Libertarians and so-called Conservatives take the Lockean position that society is built upon the social contract. Those on the Left assume Hobbes was right and order must be imposed on society. Marxists further accept the materialist claims about the nature of man. All of the iterations and flavors of political ideology are rooted in one of those two broad assumptions about humanity.

Those assumptions are all wrong. We know that much now. Better archaeology and anthropology is helping illuminate the pre-history mankind. Evolutionary biology is also helping explain the fossil and archaeological record. Genetics, of course, are re-writing the map of mankind, explaining how we spread across the globe. What we are finding out is that man, in his “natural state” was not what Hobbes imagined nor what Locke imagined. Man’s “natural” state is much more complicated and much more local.

The implication should be obvious. Like psychology, as the underlying assumptions give way to new knowledge, the conclusions built on those axioms must give way as well. If tomorrow we learn that two plus two is not always four, everything we know about the world stops making sense. If everything we thought we knew about humankind and human civilization turns out to be wrong, we suddenly don’t know a whole lot about how we should organize ourselves, other than the old rules are probably not going to work.

It seems today that Western societies are painfully re-learning things that were common knowledge a few generations ago. The old axiom, fences make good neighbors, was replaced with “diversity is our strength.” Every time a swarthy fellow blows up in the public square, we inch a bit closer to the realization that diversity is a nightmare. That’s the part we see. The part we don’t see, at least not yet, is the crumbling of the foundation stones of the modern West. That foundation of nonsense is giving way to biological reality

The Future of White Nationalism

At American Renaissance, I was introduced to an old guy from VDare, who seemed to experience the world strictly through the search functions of his phone. Someone told him about my site and the first thing he did was search for the site name and “white nationalism” to see if I had opinions on the subject. His first hit was a post where I called white nationalism the dumbest thing going. He tried giving me the business about it and I gave it right back to him. I will forever be off the VDare Solstice card list as a result.

In fairness to him, he was a good sport about it. In fairness to me, my criticism of white nationalism is mostly about aesthetics. The term is not a new one. That means it comes with baggage and that baggage is not easily overcome. When most Americans hear “white nationalism” they think of snaggle-toothed rustics, wearing wife beaters and jorts, complaining about the coloreds. Getting modern whites to overcome the cult of anti-racism is hard under ideal conditions. Having Cletus as your sales rep makes it impossible.

That’s something the white identity people need to accept. For generations, Progressives have tightly associated racism with the South. The good white/bad white thing that John Derbyshire discusses is based entirely on this image. Bad whites shop at Walmart, like domestic beer and hate black people. Despite the fact that blacks have been moving back to the Old Confederacy for decades, black culture holds that the South is still aggressively racist. It’s at the core of the statue toppling and confederate flag burning manias.

Even if you can somehow get past the image problem, white nationalism is not some new concept developed by the alt-right. It has a history and it has a lot of veterans of its prior iterations. Those people are still kicking around. The web site Storm Front, in addition to being an FBI honey trap, is the home of the old White Nationalist guys, who used to follow guys like David Duke. If you borrow the language and symbols of these guys, you are inviting them and their ideas into your new version of white nationalism.

There are two problems with this. One is many of these guys were not the best people or the most stable people. Stepping way outside the moral framework is never easy, but it is a lot easier if you’re crazy. It’s also easier if you have nutty ideas that no one takes too seriously. Even the most generous evaluation of White Nationalism 1.0 says it was mostly a reaction to the cultural revolution of the 1960’s. It never came up with a plausible way forward politically or culturally. It was mostly old racists who just liked to complain.

Again, even if you manage to rehabilitate the language and symbols, you can’t get past the fact that prior efforts were a failure. A pretty good rule of life is that failure is assured if you follow in the footsteps of previous failures. It’s why adopting Nazi symbols is stupid. The Third Reich was most notable for being a disastrous failure. Associating your thing with failure is just bad marketing. It also tends to attract people who find some sort of satisfaction in losing. New Movements need need language and new symbols.

Putting all of that aside, prior iterations of white nationalism always suffered from the fact they were reactionary. At their very best, they could only offer a critique of the prevailing order. They had nothing to offer as an alternative, beyond demands to wind the clock backwards. Reactionary movements always fail in the long run for the simple reason that yesterday can never follow tomorrow. Even if everyone agrees the current arrangements are not working, what comes next is never a return to the old order.

There’s something else that prior white nationalists movements never got right. They assumed that a majority white nation was a given. If they could just get a majority of whites on their side, they would win the political battles over race. America is 70% white at the last census and will be majority-minority in a few decades. The issue today is not about keeping America white. That horse has left the barn. The question before us today is how whites will survive as a minority population in a majority-minority country.

That means the math is not about 50% plus one. Whatever comes to define white identity in the age of identity politics will have to appeal to and serve the interests of the vast majority of whites. That can’t just be a visceral hatred of non-whites. Whites in America are mostly from west of the Hajnal line, which means low clannishness. Old fashioned tribal signalling against the next tribe is not going to work. What comes next has to be an ideology that promotes a positive identity offering a promising future.

That’s probably the most encouraging thing to come out of the Charlottesville protest over the summer. The people involved began to appreciate the need to build new symbols and use new language. Even guys like Andrew Anglin are pushing his people to drop the Hitler images, beyond obviously satirical stuff. Mockery of taboos and irreverence for social norms has a place, but it can’t be the focus of a political movement, if it is going to draw in the skeptical. The white identity people seem to get that now.

The irony here is the New Left went through a similar problem. Before they were able to start the cultural revolution, they existed as an ad hoc counter-culture. The old commies from the CP-USA days tried to glom onto it, but the new radicals correctly saw that as a bad idea. They eventually purged their ranks of the old guys and their old ideas. Now, the cultural movement that seeks to destroy the New Left and the Baby Boomer culture is going through a similar process as it organizes itself.

Crime City

Recently I was searching around for publicly available police data and found that a surprising amount of data is available to the public. Often it is very portable, letting the curious download raw data from government systems. Many cities have built out API’s so you can get live feeds from their systems. I found a treasure trove of raw arrest data from the City of Baltimore. Like a lot of cities, they have exposed their database of arrests to the public. The data only goes back to the beginning of 2013, but that’s a lot.

Since the first of day of 2013, Baltimore City police have made 152,103 arrests as of September 30th, 2017. That works out to an average of 87 arrests per day. That does not sound like a big number, but according to studies, the average time awaiting trial is close to 40 days. The number of people being held in the city awaiting trial is about 8,000, on average. Put another way, about 1.3% of the city’s population is held at any one time, awaiting their turn in the criminal justice system. That does not included convicts.

Just in case you are thinking about being arrested in Baltimore, here’s the daily breakout.

Of course, the break down by race is what you would expect in Baltimore.

Interestingly, there were only 1428 arrests for murder and attempted murder. They don’t code the crimes in an easily understood way. I simply searched for all arrests containing the word murder, which included attempted murder. Netting out the lesser charge and the total is just 252 arrests for the crime of murder. In the same period, 1382 homicides were committed in the city.  It appears arrests for attempted murder is where they start with murder cases. That or the murder total would be much higher if the locals had better aim.

Here’s the racial break down of murder related arrests.

The black share of arrests for murder related offenses should be viewed in addition to two other statistics. Baltimore is 63% black according to the last census and 29% white. This means that blacks are over represented in the arrest data for murder related crime. Whites are under represented. It should be noted that Hispanics are counted as white, but the city has a small Hispanic population. Even so, whites are significantly under represented. This is a pattern that turns up in all homicide studies, even in majority black cities.

The other factor is the victimization data. Murder is almost always a personal crime so the murderer usually knows the victim or they live in the same area. Even in a city like Baltimore, where one block can seem like a different country from the next block, most violent crime is personal. That means most times, the murderer is of the same race as the murdered. Looking at the victimization data, the number of black murder victims over the same period tracks the arrest pattern, as far as the racial breakdown.

Here is the racial break down of the murder victims.

The victim numbers let us net out the Hispanics from the white total, but Baltimore does not have a big Latino population, so the numbers don’t change much. Given the white flight to the suburbs, the city’s white population is probably closer to 25% in this time period, but the white crime share is around 5%. On the other hand, Blacks are 65% of the city’s population and 90% of homicide related crime and over 80% of all arrests. Put another way, if you removed the black population, Baltimore would resemble Salt Lake City.

Finally, here are the arrests by age.

Here’s the arrests by interesting cohort.

The Fear of Disbelief

I was looking for something I remembered Sailer posting about and I stumbled upon this post from Tyler Cowen. The post is from eight years ago and it is something I found interesting. I did some searching around in his blog to see if he had bothered to revisit the issue and the search came up dry. Cowen, who is one of those guys who likes pitching himself as a step outside the crowd, has avoided the topic for close to a decade, suggesting it was around this point when the subject was declared heretical.

Another thing I found interesting, amusing actually, was that Cowen succumbed to the claim that there is greater genetic diversity within racial groups than between them. While it is true that there is greater variation between individuals, than between groups of individuals, it does not invalidate classifying individuals into different racial groups. Traits common to one group, even in great variety, may not exist in another. Cowen was falling for what is informally known as Lewontin’s Fallacy.

Of course, what screams from the post is the hysteria induced in people like Cowen, when they are sheered between observable fact and prevailing dogma. On the one hand, their brains force them to look at reality. On the other hand, their fear of the morality police makes them want to shriek in terror. Cowen is a gold plated phony, but he is not a dunce. Even way back in 2009, the evidence was clear. There are bone-deep differences between the races that go beyond physiognomy. It’s right there in the mountain of IQ data.

People can be forgiven for not going against their betters. Even spergs like Cowen want to believe in the prevailing orthodoxy. You see that in the end where he writes “racism itself is far, far more harmful, whether in the course of previous history or still today.” That’s the sort of thing a true believer writes, when he is thinking of maybe writing something heretical, but then grows frightened of where it could lead. That whole last paragraph is so carefully worded, it reads like it was written by a committee.

It’s not just the smart guys who are tormented by this stuff. Most normal whites get weepy when they see a guy like Sheriff Clark or Allen West say the sorts of things honkies say in private. It’s confirmation. When you see a gorillion re-tweets of something a conservative black posted, it’s not hard to imagine the relief normies felt when they saw it and the joy with which they passed it along. A couple of generations of whites have been raised up to think of blacks as mystical moral arbiters. Black approval is the highest honor.

There’s also the old noblesse oblige hook. Smart people like to think of themselves as having a duty to guide the less smart toward the correct opinions. A guy like Cowen is not wealthy and he is largely dependent on the state for his livelihood, like most libertarians. Nevertheless, he imagines himself as a member of an intellectual elite, charged with training the next generation and providing intellectual guidance to the ruling class. Promoting the blank slate silliness about the evils of racism feels like his moral duty.

On this point, there is a strange phenomenon that I have witnessed. It is not a lot different than what happens in a church when a long standing member quits because they no longer believe in God. There are members who will try to talk the guy out of it, telling him that they too have lost their faith, but they continue attending services to maintain the tradition or support those who to continue to believe. I’ve never seen this work. Every person who has quit their church did so in their mind long before they left the pew.

I suspect something similar goes on with our betters. They know that even entertaining heretic thoughts can be trouble. They have seen enough old white guys throw in the towel, like James Watson or John Derbyshire. They know that once that seed of doubt gets lodged in the head, it grows into a mighty oak of doubt. Then comes struggle, apostasy and finally banishment from the community of good thinkers. It is better for strangers to think you are a moron than to have your friends and colleagues say you are immoral.

Most people reading this probably belonged to the universal church of biological denialism at some point in their life. It has been dogma for a long time. Probably every white person has felt the warm glow of seeing blacks succeed at white things or showing their appreciation with public acts of patriotism. The opening ceremonies have become American’s favorite part of the Olympics, because it is where they see well behaved non-whites wearing the stars and stripes and looking proud to be Americans.

Race denialism, as John Derbyshire calls it, has been part of the official canon for generations now. Biological denialism have been official dogma for as long as I’ve been alive. Belief is easy when everyone else believes the same thing. Disbelief, however, is inevitable when belief is at odds with reality. When no matter how hard you try to make the belief real, it is thwarted by reality, doubt is the only option. That’s where most whites are now. The question is, what will they believe in next?

Sargon of Blockhead

The reason that Buckley Conservatism completely failed to halt the advance of Progressivism is that the Buckleyites eventually came to accept the moral framework of the Left. Libertarians have gone down the same road, embracing the morality of Progressives, while trying to find a way to carve out a place for individual liberty within that moral framework. It’s why the differences between libertarianism and what passes for conservatism are trivial now. They both operate in the same narrow space.

A good way to illustrate this is with this interview Carl Benjamin conducted with Jared Taylor. Benjamin is a British provocateur who goes by the handle Sargon of Akkad on social media. He describes himself as a liberal, but to Americans that should be understood as libertarian. His views are consistent with what you see from the Reason Magazine types. That means he embraces the libertine social polices of the Progressives, but he likes getting cheap stuff from Amazon without paying sales tax.

He is also an incandescently obnoxious troll, who goes out of his way to pick fights with people on-line. His go-to move for years was to post gay porn into the twitter feed of people he was trying to provoke. He used to spend his days attacking alt-right people on twitter with this tactic, but they largely ignored him. He’s also made a habit of going after feminists, who always take the bait. He styles himself as an intellectual, but he is just another shallow end of the pool libertarian, afraid to venture into deeper water.

In the video, Jared Taylor makes the reasonable point that race relations in America are at a standstill because blacks are fundamentally different from whites. Compulsory integration over the last 40 years has done nothing to improve the lives of blacks and nothing to improve relations between the races. If anything, relations are worse now. The logical solution is to junk the compulsory integration and let people do what they do naturally, which is self-segregate. At some point, a peaceful divorce will be arranged.

In theory, libertarians like Benjamin should embrace freedom of association. After all, what can be more basic to personal liberty than the right of association? If you can stuff your body with illicit drugs, because you own it, you should have the right to put your body near whomever you like. That means having the right to not be around people you don’t like, for any reason or no reason at all. Places where you need to get permission from authorities to be around other people are called prisons.

But, there are no modern libertarians who embrace this as it runs afoul of official orthodoxy on race. Progressives have declared private discrimination to be a mortal sin. You see this in the interview at about the 10 minute mark. Benjamin starts spinning around like a top, trying to re-frame Taylor’s point as compulsory segregation. When that does not work, he then says that everyone he knows loves diversity and they want to forget about the whole race and ethnicity stuff. In other words, there is no need fro freedom of association.

This is why libertarians have been forced to embrace egalitarianism. This let’s them wriggle free from vice of freedom and anti-racism, by claiming that systematic social inequity is the cause of racial differences. Therefore, fixing the social problems will let everyone be treated the same and the gaps between the races will close. Everyone will embrace diversity and multiculturalism. This is now orthodoxy with “conservatives” like Ben Sasse, as well as most libertarians.

At about the 20 minutes mark, Benjamin gives the game away entirely by trying to tie the bogeyman of Richard Spencer to the reasonable arguments in favor of freedom of association made by Jared Taylor. You can see the wheels turning as he tries to square his own self-righteous disdain for guys like Spencer with the reality that Spencer is to the right of him on the issue of personal liberty. Benjamin rattles on a few minutes trying to square that circle, but then gives up and changes the subject.

That’s where is gets a bit amusing as he makes the ridiculous claim the Islam has somehow managed to overcome tribalism. This would be quite shocking to the practitioners of Islam in the Arab world, who have been in waging tribal warfare since the birth of Islam. Sure, Islam has no racial component, but the practitioners certainly do. This is the same with Christianity and Judaism. The same is true of sports and gardening. Just because tribes can have much in common, does not make them any less tribal.

Libertarians and conservatives have the same problem. They have been forced to embrace the moral framework of Progressives. Benjamin starts from the bedrock assumption that racism is evil and that race is an artifact of a prior age. From there he tries to reach classical liberal conclusions, but that is an impossibility as classical liberalism inevitably runs afoul of Progressive morality. This is why Progressives have been able to roll the opposition. They set the rules so the results are inevitable.

Benjamin lacks the intellect to grasp this reality, so he flounders around trying to self-righteously condemn race realism, while smugly pretending to be outside of Progressive orthodoxy. He is a big admirer of himself. Because there is no way to make his brand of libertarianism work while embracing things like anti-racism, he’s reduced to having personal squabbles with heretics. He was unable to do that with Taylor so he just came off as a smug blockhead, which is a pretty good description of the modern libertarian.

Race Realism

The Israeli politician, Abba Eban, once said, “Men and nations behave wisely when they have exhausted all other resources.” A form of this is attributed to Churchill, but there is no evidence he ever said it. References to the apocryphal Churchill quote started appearing in the 1980’s. Like Twain and Voltaire, Churchill gets credit for a lot of pithy sayings, simply because people believe he would have said them. Regardless of the origin, the assertion is true. Men go to great lengths to avoid the right answer or wise course.

We see this with race. Three generations ago , when social reformers and political leaders looked at the condition of the black man, they were presented with three possible explanations. One was biology, the reason most people accepted for the differences between blacks and whites. The other was some form of magic, like God blessed the white race or cursed the black race. Few people thought that was right. The other choice was culture. The laws and institutions of the nation were rigged against the black man.

It has long been understood by pollsters, marketing men and test designers that when given three options, people will look for the least likely of the three and eliminate that first, so the choice is a binary one. That’s what happened 60 years ago. Magic was eliminated as a possible choice, which left biology and culture. It is also well known that people will always choose the option they want to be true, over the one they wish were not true, despite a mountain of evidence in support of the latter. That’s the inspiration of that quote.

Three generations ago  our rulers decided that the reason blacks were so far behind whites was culture. They set about changing the laws, creating programs to address past sins, modifying institutions to accommodate blacks and lecturing whites about the sinfulness of racism. The last black to be the victim of Jim Crow, for example, is 75 years old this year. We are reaching the point where no living person was the victim of legal segregation. The majority of blacks now have never experienced real racism.

Blacks would contest that last line and they would have a point. The other day, there was a news story about a white not being properly worshipful of a black. It is these sorts of outrages that perpetuate racism in America. All kidding aside, no black under the age of 50 has had their race used as an impediment to their success. In fact, being black is now an enormous asset for a black person with anything on the ball. The demand for competent blacks far exceeds the supply and prices have responded accordingly.

Despite all this, the achievement gap between blacks and whites remains unchanged in measurable areas like education and household wealth. In some areas, like crime, illegitimacy and substance abuse, the gap has grown larger. The gap in SAT scores are higher than ever, despite attempts to alter the test to close the gap. For three generations, our betters have rearranged every aspect of American society in an effort to alter the realities of race in America. The results are more of the same.

The only rational conclusion is that culture is not the cause of the black – white gaps we see in American society. At the far right of the curve, sure, better social conditions for high IQ blacks have made an enormous difference. For the overwhelming majority of blacks, however, the culture war has been a battle among whites over how much money, in welfare benefits, will be transferred from the white middle-class to blacks. They are no more able to compete in American society than they were when this all started.

That brings us back to the original options. Between culture, biology and magic, our betters, and most Americans, were sure it had to be culture. Now that three generations of social engineering have disproved that argument, we’re left with biology and magic. Our betters, unwilling to accept the reality on the ground are now arguing that the real cause of the racial gap is magic. They don’t call it magic, but that’s what they mean when they chant phrases like “white privilege” and “unconscious bias.”

In fairness, our betters are not embracing oogily-boogily because they believe it. It’s that they cannot bring themselves to embrace biology. Everything about the prevailing orthodoxy depends on the blank slate being true. Even the slightest doubt will cause the whole thing to come crashing down. It’s why kooks like Cordelia Fine get awards for writing books that claim biology is a social construct created by a cabal of pale penis people to oppress women, if women existed, which they don’t.

All human societies need order, otherwise they look like the Mad Max hellscape of places like Somalia. Order requires authority and that comes when the people being ruled over accept the people and system that provides order. The king is not going to be king very long if no one accept his right to rule. Similarly, people will not tolerate a ruling class that is populated by madmen denying reality. This is, in effect, what brought down the Soviet Empire. Even the beneficiaries of the system could no longer pretend it made any sense.

That’s what is happening today. The reality of race is undermining the moral authority of the system. Everyday, more and more white people wake up from the dream of race denialism. It’s why, despite the lack of sane leaders and a coherent strategy, the alt-right thrives. Whatever their flaws, they are right about the reality of race, which gives them credibility in an age when the ruling class has none. Ironically, it is the weapon of race that gave birth to the current arrangements and it will be race that is its undoing.

Cheering For My Team

Yesterday’s post could have been much longer, as there are many angles to the modern American skins game. In the fullness of time, there will be many books written on the subject or at least using it as a launching pad in analyzing the late America collapse. One point of entry is belief. People are believing machines. They will organize themselves around a set of beliefs, even if those beliefs are insane. That is what we are seeing in modern America. Christianity has faded, so something new filled the void.

That something new is a grab bag of ideas borrowed from Cultural Marxism, hung like ornaments on the burnt out husk that is Christian universalism. That is modern Progressivism. Cultural Marxism, by itself, has never made much sense, but inflated with the zeal of universalism, it is a very powerful force in modern society. It certainly does not make a lot of sense and it does not offer anything as pleasing as an afterlife, but for the true believer, it fills the void that Christianity once filled.

That’s most obvious when it comes to race. Progressives are endlessly chanting that race is not real. They are also endlessly chanting that racism is the most dangerous evil spirit in their hierarchy of evil. Most of what is going on today is based in their belief that whites are racists, simply because whites have acted to benefit whites. The trouble for Progs, though, is that this contradicts their support for non-whites. Everywhere you turn, non-whites are out flying their team’s flag and cheering for their side against the honky.

This New York Times op-ed is a good example.

I was 13 when the black woman I was rooting for on “American Idol” won. After black women failed to reach the top spot in the first two seasons, Fantasia finally did. With vocals straight out of a church choir in North Carolina, she deserved it.

All the black people I knew — my mom, classmates and acquaintances — were so proud. We celebrated this moment together. Fantasia’s victory on one of America’s most watched television shows at the time wasn’t just a win for her: It was a win for us.

Yes, we all recall the long struggle for equality on TV game shows.

Issa Rae, a co-creator and the star of the HBO sitcom “Insecure,” stood on the Emmys’ red carpet on Sunday and proudly proclaimed to a Variety reporter who asked which people she was cheering for, “I’m rooting for everybody black.” When I heard that, I jumped up and shouted: “Same, Sis! Same!” Because that’s what I’ve been doing all my life. And apparently many other people have, too, because Variety’s video went viral on Twitter, garnering more than 16,000 retweets and countless reshares up and down my social media timelines.

Ms. Rae told the reporter what so many black people have told their family members at dinner, their friends on group texts and their black co-workers over water cooler talk. As many obstacles as we face in our lives, there are times when we need to see one another win.

But what so many people missed in her comment is that expressing black pride is not the same as being racist toward whites.

Of course not. Only a blue-eyed devil would think such a thing!

Ms. Rae’s critics don’t understand that when it comes to racial pride, the playing field is not level. Black pride does not carry the power to shut others out as white pride does. And that’s the difference. Hollywood has a long history of privileging whiteness, from who gets to greenlight movie ideas to whom studios target for consumption. While white people have the luxury of turning on any given channel and seeing themselves reflected with nuance and depth onscreen, black people haven’t been so fortunate.

One byproduct of Progressive race mongering has been that blacks are now just swarthy toddlers. They assume they are entitled to whatever they desire at the moment. Mx. Finley just assumes she has a right to your stuff and right to live near you. At the same time, she is sure that her status as a sacred person means she gets to have stuff to herself, just for black people. Why wouldn’t she? All her young life, she has been pushed along by the guiding hand of the skins game. She points, demands, and a honky gives it to her.

As Steve Sailer points out, the basis of the skins game now is a blood libel. Because your ancestors were mean to non-whites, you just have to shut up and take whatever abuse non-whites heap on you. That includes the humiliation of pretending that airheads like Mx.Finley are saying anything of value. It means pretending that Genius T. Coates is not a puerile blockhead with the reasoning skills of a sixth grader. It is not enough to write the check.No, the honky has to grovel while delivering it.

This is the fire that fuels the Dissident Right. You can pass this lunacy off to the zealous crazies who read the NYTimes, but it’s not going to fly with the average honky. Instead, they will be open to the alternative, the one that flatters them and gives them a reason to be proud. The racism Progressives fear, the dark force they are sure lurks in the heart of white men, is their own creation. American Progressives cannot stop making war on the honky so it is inevitable that the honky will make war back.

In this war, I’m cheering for my team.

The Racial Cliff

America has a race problem. For as long as anyone reading this has been alive, this is something that our betters have preached from their various pulpits. By race problem, they have always meant that the bad whites keep finding ways to keep the blacks down and that it is the holy mission of good whites to root out racism by bad whites. Many whites, good and bad, have accepted this as true. It’s why the diversity project has thus far received limited push-back. Only stupid racists refuse to celebrate diversity.

I have been on earth for half a century and I have never known a time when whites did not tip-toe around blacks. Even during my underclass youth, whites watched their tongue around blacks. The crackers might have harsh opinions about their black brothers in private, but stating it publicly was forbidden even 40 years ago. Even 40 years ago, poor whites were figuring out that blacks had to be given extra help and they had to applauded when they managed to behave and make something of themselves.

The general assumption among whites was that race relations would steadily improve with each generation. It is what we were told every day by our betters. That was the driving force behind Obama’s presidency. Progressive Baby Boomers voted for him as an exclamation point, the crowning achievement for their generations efforts on behalf of race relations. Obama was the fulfillment of prophecy, which is why they talked about him as if he was black Jesus. He was the final sentence in America’s long struggle with race.

The point here is for more than half a century, good whites in America have been obsessed with making sure that all whites “come together” to celebrate and encourage blacks. The assumption is that this stems from white guilt, but there is no evidence to support this claim. The real cause is a deep belief that if the white community comes together and is united in its rejection of whiteness and racism, then through some sort of magic, the realities of race in America will disappear, along with the history of race.

This the force behind the frenzy of statue toppling. It has nothing to do with the Civil War or symbols of past racism. It is an attempt to immanentize the eschaton. The Progs are sure that in the final reckoning, all signs of race realism will disappear, including those in the past. Therefore, they can bring this about by erasing the past! That’s what is behind the mania that now includes erasing guys like Ben Franklin and Sam Houston from our collective memories. The Progs are trying to erase the past to bring about the rapture.

This self-flagellation is not happening in isolation. One result of the rise of anti-white politics, among whites, is that non-whites now feel free to drop the mask. Steve Sailer calls it the Late Obama Era Collapse. He trots it out whenever some blacks go crazy and start shooting cops and making a nuisance of themselves. Non-whites are now taking every chance they can to tell the world they hate white people. This is especially true of blacks, who have always hated white people to so some degree.

A good way to think of race is to tie race to geography. Blacks are African. Asians are Asian, obviously. Whites are European. Race correlates pretty well with geography, as the humans evolved on each continent to meet the demands of the environment. Ethnicity, on the other hand, is more like an extended family. A couple of tribes settled in an area like a river valley. They fought, intermarried and traded, but eventually combined into a single tribe. In time, their shared biology became a shared history and common language.

It’s why wars between tribes are common, while wars within tribes are rare. It is the same reason a man can publicly criticize his wife, but never let anyone else criticize her. A Jew can make jokes about Jews, but never tolerate a non-Jew making the same jokes. The reason is the Jew mocking other Jews is in the family. The white guy making sport of Jews is not in the family and is therefore always seen as a potential threat. Ethnicity is basic family biology that scales up to the maximum limit.

That’s the danger the anti-white Prog bigots have created for themselves. Fake Indian lecturing other whites about white privilege is tolerable to whites. Pampered black athletes, throwing tantrums on the football field and blaming whitey for biology, is intolerable. Black college students demanding apologies from the school because they are offended by the sight of cotton is infuriating to most whites. Blacks rampaging through our streets, making incoherent demands like overly indulged toddlers is creating a lot of bad whites.

For most of my life, the skins game has been a predictable morality play. A self-righteous honky lectures the crowd, black and white, about racism. The people in the crowd quietly tolerate the lecture. Everyone who has been marched off to diversity training knows the scene. This was tolerable as long as the whites in the crowd could pretend that the black people in the crowd were seeing it the same way. That is the main appeal of the Broadway play Hamilton. The whites in the crowd get a lecture and a pat on the head.

This sort of theater worked as long as whites were the dominant racial group and the non-whites took care to not prove the good whites wrong. As America edges closer to majority-minority status, the non-whites feel free to make their anti-white rage public, which is putting the lie to everything whites have been told over the last half century. It turns out that the prophesies were not true. There is no fixing the race problem and that realization by whites now leaves us with a much bigger race problem.

The good white answer to the bad whites, pointing out that blacks tend not to perform well in modern societies, was “shut up bigot.” Now, the only only public racists are non-whites, mostly blacks and foreigners. The Progs not only lack an answer to this, but they are actively encouraging it. The result is America is about to drive off a racial cliff. Prog appeals to white virtue fall on deaf ears, while the deranged antics of ungrateful non-whites convince white people that there is no fixing race relation.

This will not end well.