It is conventional wisdom on certain parts of the Right that the anti-white animus we see on the Left is nothing but a practical solution to a political problem. For years, Steve Sailer has been pitching the idea that the Left has to keep its non-white auxiliaries focused on the evil white man. Otherwise they will notice they don’t like one another all that much and begin squabbling. The implication is the Left is not really anti-white. They just work that double-game for practical political consideration.

Another way to frame it is the Cold Civil War that John Derbyshire described twenty years ago. This imagines the political battle field as the good whites, the old Yankee coalition, versus the bad whites, the old Confederate coalition. The good whites use anti-bad-white language to recruit non-white auxiliaries. At the same time, the bad whites rely on subtle calls to racial solidarity to bring in whites from outside the Old South, including disaffected whites in good white areas.

The implication of this view is that the anti-white rhetoric is just a pose. The good whites are not really anti-white, as they themselves are white. As Joe Sobran observed decades ago, “In their mating and migratory habits, liberals are indistinguishable from members of the Ku Klux Klan.” This observed preference for their own kind not only undermined their moral claims, it motivated them to keep a firm hand on those non-white auxiliaries, which would make their coalition unwieldy and ineffective over time.

This way of imagining the Left is comforting, as it suggests they will come to their senses at some point and pull back from their suicidal leap into multiculturalism. It also means it is possible to appeal to their humanity and decency. This has been the path so-called conservatives have chosen since they lost the Civil Rights debate. Instead of confronting the Left, they have functioned as the conscience of the Left, but also as a loyal assistant, shielding the Left from a real opposition willing to fight.

What is becoming clear today is the rhetoric from the Left is not just a clever way to organize their coalition. It is not just esoteric language in the cold civil war. The Left really does hate white people. This is plain when you watch their candidates react to news events. They sound like ambitious pols in the African National Congress, trying to establish themselves as the cutting edge. Their favorite chant these days is to claim America is haunted by white supremacist going back to the founding.

This anti-white hysteria has its roots in the revising of American history after the Second World War. The America ruling elite stood not just as the rulers of America but the rulers of the free world. America was a global empire with a global elite. That required a new narrative and mythology to explain and justify this new reality. That new narrative was the second founding theory, which argued the Civil War was the second founding, finishing what was started in the original founding of the country.

As is usually the case, we can understand this by examining the obsequiousness of the co-called conservatives. This post on the ironically named American Conservative is a good example. Note the repetition of the idea of America’s original sin, which of course is slavery. The implication is that the original founding was flawed, as it maintain slavery, at that sin is with us to this day. Just as man’s struggle with original sin is what animates life on earth, the sin of slavery is what animates American history.

In this framing, the promise of America was the Declaration, but the result was the constitution adopted in Philadelphia. The starting point of “all men are created equal” gave way to the three-fifths compromise and the maintenance of slavery. You see, that is the original sin. The promise of the founding was subverted by those wicked slave holders in the South. This not only justifies a blood libel against those bad whites, it justifies endless self-loathing for the good whites, who went along with it.

The person to blame for turning an ancient rivalry between English cultures into an endless brother-war is the historian Harry Jaffa. His retelling of the Civil War is considered the starting point for the idea of the second founding. He is largely responsible for turning Lincoln into the American Moses. Eric Foner is another historian who promotes the notion that the Civil War was a second founding, or a completion of the first founding. Foner has a book conveniently titled The Second Founding due out this fall.

Now, this second founding that completed the first founding, re-centering the nation on the Declaration, rather than the Constitution, was not the end. After Reconstruction, blacks were not fully incorporated into society. Women did not have full legal rights. Jews, of course, were still excluded from the elite. Whites were still allowed to control their own lands. The story from the second founding to now is the process of rectifying those things and achieving the ideal of the Declaration.

In other words, we have slowly and steadily moved from a place where ending slavery in a bloody civil war fixed the defects of the first founding, to a place where making the rhetorical flourishes of the Declaration the religion of the land. The founding cannot be complete until all men are equal, which means as long as whites are seen as doing better than non-whites, the task remains unfinished. The conclusion of our rulers is that the second founding can only be completed when there are no more white people.

That’s how we got to this place where anti-white proselytizing is becoming something of a religion for the ruling class. It’s why bigots like Max Boot and Cathy Young are compelled to lecture white people on their failings. You’ll note these types never write columns about how Jews need to relax or consider their privilege. One does not have to be an anti-Semite to wonder why two Russian-born Jews feel the need to lecture American white people about their alleged moral failings.

Contra the anti-Semites, this is not part of some global plot. People like Max Boot and Cathy Young are not terribly bright, but they are ambitious. They stake out these positions because it helps them gain entry to the elite of their field. Boot, despite being wrong about everything for decades, has a perch at the Washington Post. Sarah Jeung landed a prized spot on the New York Times editorial board, based solely on her emotional rants against white people on Twitter. Today, hating white people is the key to success.

For sites like this to exist, it requires people like you chipping in a few bucks a month to keep the lights on and the people fed. It turns out that you can’t live on clicks and compliments. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. If you don’t want to commit to a subscription, make a one time donation. Or, you can send money to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. You can also use PayPal to send a few bucks, rather than have that latte at Starbucks. Thank you for your support!

Usually, when people think of corruption, they imagine government officials taking bribes, selling access or self-dealing at the expense of the people. It is the politician doing favors for someone, who is secretly giving the politician money. It’s not that the act of taking cash for access, for example, is illegal. It is that this sort of self-dealing happens outside of public view. The constituents don’t know that their representative is taking bribes or cutting secret deals at their expense.

That’s why people take offense at this sort of corruption. It makes a mockery of the whole democratic process. The point of representative self-government is for the people to select representatives, who will speak for them. Those representatives then populate government with people, who have the duty to carry out government functions for the good of the people. If the representatives or bureaucrats are taking bribes and selling favors, it undermines the point of the democratic system.

This sort of corruption, regardless of scale, is petty corruption. The people doing it acknowledge the reason for the political order and they accept that their actions are in violation of that order. They know they are violating the trust placed in them by their fellow citizens. They are simply motivated by the same things that are always behind these sorts of personal failures. They either give in to temptation or they are of low character. Petty corruption is a part of the human condition.

There is another sort of corruption that is far worse. This is when the people in positions of authority no longer respect the spirit of the law. They see the law as nothing but an obstacle course, which they must navigate in order to get what they want. Whether it is the process or the limits, the law is just a puzzle they must defeat. This sort of corruption is a rejection of the spirit of the law and the process created to write and execute the laws. This is the corruption we see in the courts.

There can be no reading of court precedents that would lead this judge to rule that long guns are not protected by the Bill of Rights. The Supreme Court has made that clear and legal scholars agree about the intent of the Second Amendment. This women does not care about the law or the spirit of the law. She is a political fanatic, who sees the law and the political system as obstacles. She stands in opposition to the political order, yet she is allowed to serve as a judge, rotting the system from the inside.

Throughout the system, we see judges make rulings that fly in the face of black letter law and prior precedents. It’s become such a common occurrence, it is just assumed that every consequential case will end up in the Supreme Court, as no one respects the rulings of lower courts. The Ninth Circuit, for example, has been a punchline for decades, because that court is stocked with fanatics and imbeciles, unable to perform their basic duties. All of its rulings are assumed to be flawed.

This situation with the federal courts has become particularly acute after Trump won the 2016 election. No matter what the administration does, a federal judge somewhere rules it is unconstitutional. The reasoning is often so bizarre, it suggests they are intentionally mocking the spirit of the law. These judges are trying to discredit the basis of the system that allows them to be judges. The court no longer respects the spirit of the laws or the political system that creates them

Most Americans, using the old definition of the term, still see the courts as the backstop for democracy. While the courts often make mistakes or give in to the fads of the day, the courts are still seen as the safety valve. It’s why legacy Americans still talk about rights and the rule of law. Despite what they see on their televisions every day, they still think the people on the bench respect the spirit of the constitutional system. That is no longer the case, as the courts are thoroughly and irredeemably corrupt.

Of course, the problem with the courts did not happen overnight. The new elite that coalesced in the middle of the last century lacked an historical attachment to the Anglo-Saxon form of jurisprudence. Instead, they either explicitly rejected that as bourgeois, and therefore illegitimate. Or, they came from a different legal tradition in which judges made and interpreted the law. Either way, the new elite that formed after the war was at odds with the spirit of the American legal and political system.

This corruption became clear in cases like Griswold v. Connecticut and more famously in Roe v. Wade. In both cases, the courts manufactured new law, based in nothing but the whims of the court, but also corrupted the very basis of the legal system. Ever since, the courts have been the most important branch of government. The political class now fights for the power to stock the courts with people, who promise to pervert the law in favor of their side at the expense of the other.

We have reached the point now where the judges no longer feel that have any need to respect the spirit of the laws and the system that created them. Every case that goes to the Supreme Court has four votes for or against it, regardless of the issue. The four Progressive fanatics are so predictable, it is just assumed they will rule in favor of their tribe’s wishes. The only question is which “conservative” judge will be selected to fink on his team and side with the orientalists on the bench.

Now we see that the lower courts are in full revolt. U.S. District Judge Josephine Staton, the one who ruled that long guns are not protected by the Second Amendment, no longer cares about the law. She is fully woke, by which is meant fully politicized. She has no respect for the law or the process that form and uphold the law. She and her fellows on the bench are in full spiritual revolt against the system that makes it possible for her to be a federal judge. She is the face of spiritual corruption.

Petty corruption, like a judge taking a bribe, is no threat to the system. A crooked judge can be exposed and his punishment can serve as a reinforcement of the spirit behind the system. Every system needs a rule breaker once in a while to test the resolve and be an example to everyone. The corruption we see today is a sign that the system has broken down completely. Our elites no longer have any respect for the spirit of the law or the intellectual traditions that are supposedly its foundation.

For sites like this to exist, it requires people like you chipping in a few bucks a month to keep the lights on and the people fed. It turns out that you can’t live on clicks and compliments. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. If you don’t want to commit to a subscription, make a one time donation. Or, you can send money to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. You can also use PayPal to send a few bucks, rather than have that latte at Starbucks. Thank you for your support!

In his book, At Our Wits’ End, Ed Dutton uses the space program as an example of how general intelligence has declined. It’s not a bulletproof example, but more of a way to think about how declining intelligence impacts a society. Fifty years ago, America had the collective ability to organize a massive project like the moon shot. Today, the country lacks the organizational ability to do a moon shot. That organizational ability is a function of the general intelligence of society.

Again, it is not the perfect example, but it is a good way to start thinking about how declining IQ manifests. Fifty years ago when the nation celebrated the moon landing, everyone, including the scientists involved, assumed it was the first step in exploring the solar system. The nation that conquered the world, was now going to conquer the solar system. Instead, fifty years on, America is a nation being invaded by primitive barbarians and struggling to keep the cities from collapsing.

Another way to think about the impact of both declining intelligence and the barbarian invasions is to think of the social structures of society as tools. Things like political systems and government institutions are the tools evolved by society to address its challenges. Those tools reflect the intelligence and cognitive complexity of the people who created them. It’s why things like liberal democracy are not easily exported to other countries that lack the craftsman to use these tools

Liberia, for example, can adopt the American constitution for themselves, but remain a backward African nation. The people who created the American constitution were smart and mostly of northern European heritage. The average IQ of the colonists was probably in the high 90’s. The average IQ of Liberia is in the 60’s. Expecting the Liberians to implement the tools of American political order is like expecting a child to operate a five-axis CNC machine. It can never happen.

In America, where the smart fraction gets smaller and the average IQ declines, the process will be different. These tools exist. They were created and made functional by our ancestors. As we run short of people capable of operating these tools, they will either be abandoned on stripped down, so they can be operated by a population no longer able to run a complex society. The Democratic presidential field is a good example of what happens when human capital is in decline.

One area to watch is the war machine that was created to be run mostly by smart white guys with a sense of adventure. Automation and technology has replaced a lot of human brainpower in the military. The sophisticated computer systems on ships, planes and weapons makes it possible for mediocre people to operate them. No one needs to calibrate machine guns on fighter planes or learn trigonometry in order to serve in an artillery unit. Computers do the heavy thinking today.

Even so, the war machine needs the organizational intelligence to make the whole thing function. It also needs a significant number of young men willing to risk their life to achieve military objectives. Navy Seals are often portrayed as unsophisticated risk takers, but they are the smart fraction of the military. The point of the spear is a combination of intelligence, risk taking and creativity that reflects the general intelligence of the military and the society that produces it.

This story about the problems in the elite services is a sign of things to come. It’s not just that the number of men available to serve in these units is in decline. It is the decline in organizational intelligence that is needed to maintain these units. These units require a leadership stack above them with the skill and ability to keep these types of soldiers on edge, but under control. In the multicultural America, the vibrant and diverse military will not have the human capital to fill these roles.

The military is not about to collapse, but like the space program, it is less capable, because of declining human capital. The phenomenon of Navy ships smashing into things is another example of what happens when the skill of the craftsman falls below that required of his tools. As the leadership becomes more vibrant and diverse, the ability of the war machine to function as it was designed will decline. Eventually, the decline in organizational competence will result in a catastrophe.

The response to this will also be what we see with the space program. The invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan was probably the last big foreign adventure for the Empire. The reason the usual suspects have not been able to start a war with Iran is the growing awareness that the military is not capable of waging it. America can launch a bunch of missiles and conduct air strikes, but an actual war with Iran would most likely be the Varian Disaster of the American Empire.

As we see all over America, the decline in general intelligence will result in a decline in military capability. The services will become increasingly vibrant. The leadership will reflect the new Americans that are pouring over the borders. The combination of the barbarian invasions and the decline in native intelligence will slowly reduce the military to an expensive tool no one can operate fully. It will become nothing more than a very expensive jobs program that no one dares put in the field.

For sites like this to exist, it requires people like you chipping in a few bucks a month to keep the lights on and the people fed. It turns out that you can’t live on clicks and compliments. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. If you don’t want to commit to a subscription, make a one time donation. Or, you can send money to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. You can also use PayPal to send a few bucks, rather than have that latte at Starbucks. Thank you for your support!