The evil of the Alt Right

A member of the black tribe doesn’t like white identity politics. I am shocked, I tell you, shocked!

The Alt-Right Is Evil and Must Be Opposed

When called racist, the alt-right deflects by pointing to social justice warriors. Look at all these groups openly antagonistic to white people, they exhort. Look at the attacks on so-called “white privilege” and white men and white culture. How is it racist to push back against that?

They have a point, to an extent. Logically, it cannot be racist to oppose racism. To the extent social justice warriors are racist, and they are, they should be vehemently opposed. The problem with the alt-right is that they do not fundamentally oppose racial identity politics. They merely substitute one brand of it for another.

The Alt Right is not merely white identity politics. If it were, one would not see a Red Indian and a Brown Persian supporting it and embraced by it. But the Alt Right does accept racial identity politics, and for much the same reason we accept gravity.

Because that is the way that the world, and now the West, works.

This is an interesting tidbit from James Lileks, who I’ve read for rather longer than he’s read me.

Fun fact: while I was working at the St. Paul Pioneer Press, I would occasionally pitch in and edit a few pieces in the features section. One of them was a video-game review by this guy named Vox Day. Another fun fact: when I was writing for AOL in the late 90s, John Scalzi was my editor. So I’ve had tangential connections to both people on the absolute ends of the GamerGate spectrum. I’ve followed both as the years went on. The best thing about criticizing either is that neither cares a whit.

Can confirm, for myself, at any rate. But James doesn’t seem to grasp the simple and straightforward fact that history fades, whether we will or no:

If you asked me how I feel personally affected by the Holocaust, it would be about a one. Because I am not personally affected. But I care, because it’s a defining event of the 20th century. How important is it to remember it? Ten. Ten because it shows what the State can do. Ten because it shows where tribalism and race-hatred and Jew-hatred lead. Ten because it shows how a rational, cultured people can go off the rails entirely, except for the ones they build to the death camps. Ten because it shows how nationalism can curdle into the smelliest hatreds. Ten because it shows that technology does not bring enlightenment. Ten because it shows how smart guys with good degrees and a wife and kids at home are perfectly capable of designing the means to commit boundless atrocities. 

And that is all very well. But the serious problems the world faces today are not the result of a surfeit of nationalism, but rather a shortage of it. Pendulums always swing too far, and Holocaustianity has been used to justify some deeply pernicious acts that are bound to lead to tragedy, such as the Immigration Reform Act of 1965.

And while James sneers at the inevitable indifference of today’s teenagers to events that took place before their parents were born, I can’t help but note the fact that his reasoning is based on the idea that the Holocaust was “the defining event of the 20th century”, which is obviously false.  Not only is it not in the top 10 for the century, it’s not even #1 for the Jews.

That’s one telling line. The other is Vox’s distinction between Europeans and Jews.

I find that tremendously amusing. I live in Europe and that is not my distinction, it is a distinction that is made by both Europeans and Jews.