Follow by Email

Wednesday, 30 September 2015

Racists in Our Midst: A Screed Against the White Nationalists Part 6

This is part 6 of an extensive essay that was intended as portion of my book and conservative standpoint series. However, with the modern course of events and the explosion of racist conversation among social media users and in the public forum it mutated. I will post a new post in the essay on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday.

This post concludes the series which you can find from the start at Part 1

Suffice to say many more things could be said about the festering ideology that is ingratiating itself within the conservative community, but for now I will close.

The very first question I posed was why are conservative ideas so closely linked or mutable in relation to racist and white nationalist ideas? I suggested it was largely a failure of modern conservatives to do their homework. If conservatives do not have a firm conception of the epistemology and history of their political tradition then what means do they have to refute the claims of those who suggest they are part of the same tradition?  

I made the assertion that Burkes conception of prejudice as the thoughtless and natural decision making of the unlearned varied widely from our common interpretation today. I made mention of a natural ancestral consensus based on culture passed down through generations as the meaning of prejudice, not racialism and exclusion simply because one is uncomfortable or unlearned.  A further argument was made that David Hume was one of the first to assert that equality is pernicious and that the principle that we must ameliorate the divergences of wealth is erroneous. However, I also suggested that such thoughts leave the nature of government and democratic gradualism, along with institutional stability, unaddressed. I made brief mention of the fact that many societies in the global south due to the course of history missed an opportunity or lacked the preconditions to establish a gradually evolving democratic state based on the rule of law; without these conditions and criteria, any appeal to inequality as a good or necessary thing is meaningless. The number one conservative axiom from Burke onward is that circumstance dictates everything and these White Nationalists ignore circumstance.

I went on to suggest that many buttresses of conservative thought do not apply to white nationalist community. For example, they discard the charity taught in Christianity, they ignore the principle themselves, and they mock those who apply it by adopting children of hardship, the vast majority of whom come from non-white continents. I briefly mentioned that WN’s use the conservative appeal to— nation, tradition sentiment, culture, institutions, faith, and history then obfuscated it— by tacking race onto the end. This minor alteration is as insidious as to completely change the tone of the principles and not only make them unloving towards fellow man, but completely exclusive and desultory, the subject of rapid decline and fall. From here it was imperative to show, how in fact, the ‘white’ nations of the world were not disappearing, at least not at the hands of minorities.

I noted that WN’s fear mass immigration; I do as well. They do for the wrong reasons however; they panic and suggest that whites are being bred out. It is nonsense. As I phrased it all that is happening is Caucasians are falling in the baby business. We have failed to reproduce and aside from government incentives very little can be done to spur childbirth, our privileged lives just make the responsibility of childbirth too onerous for many and or impractical until the middle years, when time being limited a single child family is common. This is not a value judgment just a fact.

In corollary with the statement that whites are being bred out or dying off or whatever term is chosen, is the fear of miscegenation that permeates the mentality of the WN community: miscegenation being a pejorative for interracial relationships and childbearing. But despite the claims to the contrary I illustrated with the example of diverse Toronto (the mixed race relationship capital of Canada), and there are many others, that we just are not seeing widespread adoption of mixed race dating. Under 10% in most countries most of the time is the norm. The races of the world will stay very separate for a long time to come. Since they are separate it is evident that Caucasian societies remain hegemonic. From here I asked why that was.

It has been crudely suggested by the racialists that culture is a product of race. This is not true, and I highlighted a broad oeuvre that is capable of refuting such a claim. Instead, the various scholars suggest that environmental factors are most dictatorial in the germ of culture. For example, were the people forced to settle or did they remain agrarian, did they adopt a faith based on a certain way of life? Why have people not adopted certain civilization tendencies and instead remained hunter gatherers? How and why is it that so many Americans do so well, especially among minorities, and others do so poorly? All these questions have answers in just the modest number of texts:  Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel, Ian Morris’s Why the West Rules for Now; Thomas Sowell’s books Black Rednecks and White Liberals, Race and Economics, Markets and Minorities, Ethnic America, Economics and Politics of Race, and Intellectuals and Race; I am sure a great many more relevant texts and monographs exist.

From this point I addressed the media’s role in the adoption of inappropriate and slanderous language to libel conservatives acknowledging that it was the inappropriate terms of racist and islamaphobe for example that made any discussion of issues beyond the pale. From here the only logical course for many mainstream conservatives was to approach the WN’s media and look for someone anyone to address their concerns about culture and immigration for example, and if they were racists as well, then why would it matter that the real racists are called as such as well?

All the fourth estate has managed to do is obfuscate the issues and conflate conservatives as racists. They were unaware they were pushing the two camps together and breeding resentment simultaneously; outrage continues to percolate and in their desperation mainstream conservatives are adopting inflammatory language to get their voices heard.

Finally, I turned to the example of the mainstreaming of racists ideas through social media and mainstream media. The White Nationalists think tanks and publications, the social media personalities and twittersphere, and finally, the Trump campaign, which seems to deliberately characterize itself as without dignity and sophistication.

I had originally asked if the White Nationalist movement was growing in power or if we were becoming more sympathetic and tolerant of their ideas. I believe the answer is an affirmative yes. So, what may conservatives do to limit the ability of these ideas to slip into the mainstream and discredit us? Firstly, be certain to reflect on the history of conservative theory and action; secondly, strike back whenever possible and denounce the racists for what they are, even if they share views with you the origins are pernicious and toxic; thirdly, do not degenerate into racists terms out of frustration, but rather ponder what you intend to say about affairs and then do so always pushing to get issues of culture and nation into the public sphere. It is not all the fault of conservatives: at every turn we find a reluctance even among our own kind to discuss civilization and its nature, and a no one seems willing to discuss the disturbing flood of migrants from the global south who are unlike in culture and unlike in means. Until these issues can be discussed openly I am afraid the normalization of racist discourse will continue that can’t happen.