Peas and carrot cake

On a colorblind society and other observable absurdities:

To a large degree, I became racially conscious because of my black clients, who eventually destroyed all my preconceived notions about race. My awakening did not come from one or even a few incidents, but from the accumulation of thousands upon thousands of small interactions.

Day after day my clients continue to amaze me. There is no racial education quite so thorough and convincing as spending time with blacks, and my clients are far from being the poorest and least competent blacks. They are not indigent criminals for whom I am a court-appointed lawyer. They are people who can afford (or think they can afford) a lawyer to get a divorce, contest a custody judgment, beat a traffic ticket, etc. Some are government employees who make $60 to $70 thousand a year, yet even this group is vastly different from whites….

In my state, the parent who does not have custody — almost always the father — pays a percentage of net income to the parent with custody — almost always the mother. The mother gets 20 percent of the father’s net income for the first child, 25 percent for two children, and up to 50 percent for five or more children. What if a man has children by several women? Each mother gets 20 percent for the first child, so a man with five children by five different women is supposed to be paying 100 percent of his income in child support. I once had a client who had 12 different children by 10 different women. Theoretically, he owed 250 percent of his income. These laws simply don’t make sense for blacks.

The idea that all races are equally suited to all societies and vice-versa has never made any sense to me, probably because I have lived in four very different societies, with four different languages, as an adult. Whenever I see someone blithely assuring me that the Chinese will adapt to the West because Magic Dirt or virtue-signaling in some other similar fashion, it always makes me smile, because I am a much better cultural chameleon than most and I know very well how very different my values and assumptions and instincts are, and have remained, than the values and assumptions and instincts of those who have variously hosted me over time around the world.

When something so foundational as a legal system cannot reasonably account for variances in behavior, no society, indeed, no civilization, is possible for long. Rest assured, many of those who eagerly anticipate living in a non-white society are going to bitterly, bitterly, regret the world they have lost if they ever get to experience what they think will be a better society.

White people are supreme at precisely one thing: creating white societies. If you want to have a certain type of society, be it German, Japanese, or Navaho, the one thing you absolutely need is a sufficient number of that kind of people. It is strange, but many who understand one cannot make carrot cake from peas or mushrooms still seem to think they can make an American society without Americans.

The ironic thing is that even some of the immigrants are beginning to realize this. In England, for example, some groups of immigrants are becoming increasingly upset because they believed they were going to be living among English people in a functional, highly civilized English society, not among other immigrant groups in a dysfunctional, increasingly uncivilized multicultural society.

Society is people. It is not values, or skin color, or height, or any other thing that people possess. Adulterate the people and you will devalue the society. Demographics is destiny.


Facts are “fake news”

The social media giants are increasingly demonstrating themselves to be the servitors of Big Brother. White is black, day is night, Islam means peace, and real news is fake news:

Under the guise of tackling “fake news,” Google is removing search results that pertain to crime statistics that show black people commit more crimes, despite the fact that this is widely documented to be true. An article in the Guardian entitled Google ‘must review its search rankings because of rightwing manipulation’ details how “leading academics” are pressuring Google to artificially edit its search algorithm to prevent certain subjects from appearing at the top of its search rankings. In response, the piece notes that Google has removed search results that suggest “black people commit more crimes”. Negative results about the religion of Islam were also removed.
This is alarming given that virtually every metric proves that criminality is more prevalent in black communities compared to white and Hispanic communities in America. It’s an uncomfortable fact that black people commit more crimes than any other race in America, but it’s a fact nonetheless. Claiming that reality is actually “fake news” because it suits your political stance doesn’t change the nature of reality.

Despite making up just 13% of the population, blacks commit around half of homicides in the United States. DOJ statistics show that between 1980 and 2008, blacks committed 52% of homicides, compared to 45% of homicides committed by whites.

More up to date FBI statistics tell a similar story. In 2013, black criminals carried out 38% of murders, compared to 31.1% for whites, again despite the fact that there are five times more white people in the U.S. From 2011 to 2013, 38.5 per cent of people arrested for murder, manslaughter, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault were black. This figure is three times higher than the 13% black population figure. Black males aged 15-34, who account for around 3% of the population, are responsible for the vast majority of these crimes.

Despite being outnumbered by whites five to one, blacks commit eight times more crimes against whites than vice-versa, according to FBI statistics from 2007. A black male is 40 times as likely to assault a white person as the reverse.

While it is understandable that Google would want to prevent neo-nazi content from appearing at the top of its search rankings, the fact that the tech giant is now censoring objective facts under the justification of tackling “fake news” is chilling.

This indicates that Google, along with Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and other social media sites, are using the excuse of “fake news” to bury factual information that is inconvenient to leftist political narratives.

This dedication to falsehood and deception will only make it all the easier to disrupt them when the time comes. Furthermore, the charges of “neo-nazi” are every bit as dubious as the charge of “fake news”.

Never forget the First Law of SJW: SJWS ALWAYS LIE.


The sickness pervades

The insane German government desperately needs scouring:

The German government has reacted to the shocking news about a Muslim migrant who raped and killed a 19-year-old woman by warning that it would be watching Facebook posts carefully for instances of Islamophobia.

A teenage Afghan asylum seeker was arrested on Friday for the alleged rape and murder of medical student in Freiburg which took place last month.

The victim’s father is a senior EU official and a vehement supporter of the migrant policy that has seen over a million “refugees” pour into Germany over the last year. The aftermath of the murder was made even more bizarre by the fact that the victim’s parents used her funeral to raise money for charities that are working to bring more “refugees” into Germany. The victim herself was also a “refugee activist”.

As if the story couldn’t get any more disturbing, the German government’s response was to warn German citizens who expressed anger over the incident on Facebook that it would be on the lookout for Islamophobic hate speech.

Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel asserted that the murder should not be used to stoke anti-migrant sentiment.

These monsters are even more delusional and morally vacuous than the National Socialists were. I find it absolutely incredible that the German people continue to tolerate them. Here is hoping that the nationalism rising across Europe will soon sweep them into the deepest dustbin of history.


Epic cuckery

It’s not often you can find a man willing to use his wife’s murder to virtue-signal, but the New York Times managed to dig up this god-level cuck in the West Village:

On Nov. 1, 2006, I found my wife, Adrienne Shelly, dead in her West Village office. Adrienne, an actor and filmmaker, had been brutally murdered by a 19-year-old undocumented Ecuadorean construction worker; he later said they were having an argument and, fearing she would report him and have him deported, he killed her and staged her death so it would appear to be a suicide. Our daughter was just 2 years old at the time.

Given the anger and grief I still feel, I could easily be seduced by Donald J. Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric that is the cornerstone of his presidential run. “They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists,” he said as he began his campaign in 2015. And in these final weeks before the election, rather than tacking to the middle, he seems to be doubling down. “We’ve got some bad hombres,” he said in last week’s debate, referring to immigrants who commit crimes.

And it’s not just Mr. Trump. In the years since Adrienne’s murder I’ve received several offers from prominent members of the conservative media, including Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly and Megyn Kelly, to speak out on this issue and give legitimacy to right-wing anti-immigrant sentiment. Who better than a Democrat to attack an entire segment of our population, right?

But Adrienne was not murdered by an illegal immigrant, per se. She fell victim to a depraved killer who simply happened to be an undocumented immigrant. It is an obvious distinction, almost too obvious, but it’s an important one to consider as the country goes further down the dangerous path of demonizing those not born here.

Americans don’t need to demonize the 65 million invaders in order to send them home. But if that’s what it will take, then that’s what will happen. And no amount of epic cuckery, even of this near-Platonic form-style, is going to stand in the way for long.

It’s not about illegals or even immigrants per se. It’s about something much more primal. It’s about who we are and who is not us. We are not abstractions. We are not ideas. We are flesh-and-blood people, and those who ignore physical reality are, as always, the most likely to suffer the physical consequences.


Debt + Diversity = Community Death

A tale of white flight:

I’m devastated. My husband and I saved for 10 years to buy our dream home and since then a bunch of loud, gangster Latinos have moved into our neighborhood. They’ve started having late-night parties every week, drugs, scary-looking guys, etc.

We are going to lose our home’s value if we don’t sell asap. When we saw another gang banger party starting tonight two houses down I cried and cried. I love my my home. I wanted to grow old here. I wanted to retire here and die here. It’s completely unfair.

As soon as I’m well enough,after the baby is born we have to put our beautiful home on the market. Why, why do these people have the “right” to do this to our communities?

This is the response to every cuckservative, Churchian, SJW sob story about how “unfair” it is to send home invaders who “only want a better life for themselves and their children”. They don’t have any right to that “better life” because it is coming at the expense of the native peoples.

It’s not just the immigration. It’s the low-interest loans that permit the shifting of the demand curve upward. This is why discrimination, racial or otherwise, is not only moral, it is necessary, and why anti-discrimination laws are themselves immoral, destructive, and ultimately dyscivilizational.

Every community should have the right to pass laws banning anyone they don’t want in their community from being permitted to buy homes there. If people want to live in a mixed community, then let the community permit that. And if people don’t, they should not be forced to do so, or have the wishes of an entire community overturned by one indifferent party who is leaving anyhow.


The alarmed and the anxious

There is simply no living with vibrancy, be it in the streets or in the theater.

Vice-president-elect Mike Pence, a self-confessed man of the people, was delivered a message directly from the cast of Hamilton – after earlier being booed by the audience on Friday night. As Pence made his way to his seat he was loudly booed. The jeering then got so bad that the performance had to be stopped repeatedly, according to audience members.The booing was most likely linked to Pence’s anti-LGBT stances throughout his political career, as well as Donald Trump’s election victory this month.

‘During “You’ll Be Back (Reprise)” they had to keep pausing the song while people jeered Pence on every line. “When your people say they hate you…” Fully stopped the song for a minute while people lost their s**t. Never seen anything like it,’ one audience member tweeted.

At the conclusion of the show, the cast delivered a message directly to Pence.

‘Vice-president-elect Pence we welcome you and truly thank you for joining us here,’ Brandon Dixon – who plays Aaron Burr – said on-stage. ‘We sir, we are the diverse America who are alarmed and anxious that your new administration will not protect us, our planet, our children, our parents, or defend us and uphold our inalienable rights.
‘But we truly hope this show has inspired you to uphold our American values and to work on behalf of all of us. All of us.’

Now, Pence appropriately maintained his sense of dignity and issued a vanilla statement about diversity when ambushed by the media afterwards. But it would have been nice if he had said: “You’re not Americans. Your values are not our values. You have to go back.” Of course, it probably would have caused a riot, as we all know what respect SJWs have for free speech. To them, free speech means they will lecture freely while you will sit there and dutifully nod your assent to the Narrative.

Regardless, the experience was likely a salient lesson and I tend to doubt that the Vice-President-elect is going to forget this lunacy any time soon. There is no negotiating, compromising, or living with the Diverse, who are not, have never been, and will never be, Americans, and who, like their immigrant forebears, are falsifying American history in an attempt to claim it for themselves.

They should be alarmed and anxious. They know that the Alt-Right will never accept them or negotiate with them, and that their days of pulling the wool over the eyes of conservatives are over.


Mr Dreher contemplates the red pill

When even a conservative as hopelessly, haplessly cucky as Rod Dreher is beginning to become indifferent to accusations of racism – although, he still never misses a chance to wag his finger and remind everyone that real racism is very bad – then you know we’re on the verge of a preference cascade. Dreher responds to an email from a reader named Andrew who actually has gone ahead and swallowed it at the American Conservative:

Dear Liberals, Democrats, progressives, leftists: Your use of the word “racist” doesn’t work anymore. We get it. You’re superior. You’re enlightened and we’re not. You care about diversity and we don’t. We only listen to dog whistles. We have given up trying to talk you out of your presumptions, or trying to earn your approval. We no longer consider it worth our while to reassure you that we’re not “that kind” of Republican.


But the fact is, we’re not as stupid as you think we are, and we see right through you. And if there’s one thing Trump has done, he’s given us some backbone to make our voices heard. Of course, that means “expressions of racism” will increase. (OMG!) And every child who behaves like a bully will be blamed on Trump. The fact is, we just won’t care about your freak-outs. Go ahead and caterwaul. You lost, and you deserved to lose.


I cast my vote for Trump reluctantly. Now, I couldn’t be prouder.

Thoughts?

I understand where Andrew is coming from in this e-mail, and I highlight it here to point out that a country in which people do not feel shame over racist thoughts, beliefs, and actions is a morally diminished country. I take Andrew’s point to mean that the left has accused him and people like him of racism for so many things, no matter how trivial, that the accusation doesn’t faze him anymore. I have been saying for some time now that if the alt-right grows in power and influence, it will be because ordinary people get tired of being bullied by these kinds of accusations, and choose to ally with people who might actually be bona fide racists, but who aren’t bothered by the attacks from the left.

I think Trump’s not giving a rip about political correctness was a big factor in his rise. If you’ve been reading me all year, you know that I’ve objected to his vulgarity and coarseness on many occasions. Trump lowers our discourse, and normalizes ways of talking in public that ought not be normalized. Having said that, it is undeniably true that the willingness of many on the left to demonize as bigots (racists, sexists, homophobes, Islamophobes, etc.) white people who don’t live up to strict progressive blasphemy codes has called forth contempt for the (necessary and important) taboo against racism itself.

Think of it like this: Prohibition encouraged contempt for the law. If you pass so many “laws” around normal discourse, saying to transgress them makes you an “outlaw” (= bigot), then you should not be surprised when people go full Uncle Chuckie, and cease caring.

And once people stop caring, it rapidly becomes apparent to everyone that the “necessary and important” taboo against racism is neither necessary or important. Remember, the pendulum never stops on a dime; just as the Left turned the taboo against homosexuality into a pseudo-disease, the rise of the Alt-Right will coincide with the taboo against racism transforming into something widely seen as being considerably more deleterious than “homophobia”.


The racial detente is over

This is an unusually astute article on an important reason that helps explain the rising appeal of the Alt-Right across America from the Federalist.

Privilege theory and the concept of systemic racism dealt the death blow to the détente. In embracing these theories, minorities and progressives broke their essential rule, which was to not run around calling everyone a racist. As these theories took hold, every white person became a racist who must confess that racism and actively make amends. Yet if the white woman who teaches gender studies at Barnard with the Ben Shahn drawings in her office is a racist, what chance do the rest of have?

Within the past few years, as privilege theory took hold, many whites began to think that no matter what they did they would be called racist, because, in fact, that was happening. Previously there were rules. They shifted at times, but if adhered to they largely protected one from the charge of racism. It’s like the Morrissey lyric: “is evil just something you are, or something you do.” Under the détente, racism was something you did; under privilege theory it is something you are.

That shift, from carefully directed accusations of racism for direct actions to more general charges of unconscious racism, took away the carrot for whites. Worse, it led to a defensiveness and feeling of victimization that make today’s whites in many ways much more tribal than they were 30 years ago. White people are constantly told to examine their whiteness, not to think of themselves as racially neutral. That they did, but the result was not introspection that led to reconciliation, it was a decision that white people have just as much right to think of themselves as a special interest group as anyone else….

Furthermore, the ever-present drumbeat from the Left that every conservative victory is the death throes of bad, old white people who are about to be swept away by waves of brown immigration is making many whites dig in. On a certain level, how can you blame them? They are explicitly being told that their values and way of life are under the sword. How do we expect them to react?

Well, they’re all just in the very early stages of finding out. But we will never negotiate with them again. We will never believe them again. The long, stupid, dishonest detente is over. Let a hundred meme-flowers blossom.


Mailvox: but what about MEEEEE?

One thing that I’ve found interesting is the intrinsic solipsism possessed by many stranieri resident in the USA, some of whom actually think that pointing out the fact that their lack of an American heritage, or their children’s lack of an American heritage, comprises a coherent argument against my various observations and expectations for the future rather than underlining it. This email from an Englishman married to a Filippino is fairly par for the course.

I’m English and I moved to the States more than 20 years ago, as a young man. I’m a naturalized citizen. I voted for Obama twice and, this time around, I voted for Clinton, but I can understand why people recoil from the worst parts of her candidacy. Regardless, to me, as a European liberal, she was going to protect things that believe in. Not as much as Bernie might have, and I voted for him in the primaries. Anyway, this is all incidental and background. I wanted to ask you about the language of race ebing used by the alt-right and by Trump both during the election and afterward. And whether it makes you feel at all queasy.

As an empathetic person I’m always trying to understand both sides: I can see why someone in Virginia, or Pennsylvania, or Florida, or wherever, is upset that illegal immigrants have taken their jobs. And I understand, and have been outspoken in my way, about the rise of Islamic fundamentalism here, and everywhere. I understand it all. These are real threats, not imagined. But here’s my problem: how do we become unified as a country if some groups have been singled out to be treated differently? My wife was born here in the States, but her family is Filipino. Both her parents are doctors who came to the States in the 1970s. They have lived the American dream. They worked like dogs for years and now they own a big house in the middle of the country, and a house in California, and a house in the Philippines. They have their Audis and there Mercedes and their Porsches. Clearly, they deserve what they have worked for. We disagree politically. They voted for Trump, I think.

My wife is American. Speaks like an American. Went to school and got a master’s degree in America. Highly educated. And we’re waiting for the moment that someone who doesn’t know her walks up to her in a grocery store and tells her to go home. Where is home? She doesn’t speak Tagalog. She can’t go to the Philippines. And why should she. She’s American. Our children, we have three boys. I’m waiting for them to come home from school to tell me a classmate told them they’re different, not American enough, not good enough. That they are what’s wrong with America.

So I’m wondering, does the alt-right have any reservations at all about framing the discussion in this way. Identity politics is only okay if you can know for certain you’re getting the identities right. Isn’t diversity good? Right now, we’re wondering if we should take our American kids and try to get jobs in my native England instead. I’m not being egotistical but I think we have so much to offer America. We can’t do it if people look at my brown children and assume they have no place in shaping it. Do you have any concerns that demonizing the groups that people belong to instead of the bad actors within them will have negative results?

Taken to its logical conclusion: if Trump’s candidacy ignites a race war, would you be happy, or sad, or indifferent?

In answer to the questions:

  1. No, “the language of race” being used by the Alt-Right and by Trump doesn’t make me at all queasy. I think it has been remarkably restrained, considering the seriousness of the situation.
  2. Why would the Englishman be concerned about “the rise of Islamic fundamentalism” here and in England but reject the obvious American concerns about the invasion by people like him and his wife? Don’t Muslims have the same right to invade other countries and settle in them en masse that Englishmen and Filippinos do?
  3. The man’s wife and her parents should consider going home. Because it is home. They even have a home there! They’re not American. They are Filippino. That’s why they’re waiting for someone to tell her to go home. She knows she’s not at home in America and he knows it as well. It is no one else’s fault that she didn’t learn her native language and it is no one else’s problem either. His kids are not part of what is wrong with America because they are not American. They are invaders and settlers, just as the second-generation Muslims who have driven the native English out of Bradford are invaders and settlers.
  4. The Alt-Right has no reservations at all about framing the discussion this way. The Alt-Right does not hide from reality, whether we like it or not.
  5. Identity politics do not need to be “okay” any more than gravity or sunlight do. Identity politics are normal, historical human behavior that always dominate multiracial societies. And history shows that an angry invaded people fighting displacement in their own homeland tend not to be very careful about identities; the lines usually end up being drawn in a rather crude and binary fashion.
  6. No, diversity is not good. Diversity is very, very bad. Diversity destroys community. Diversity + Proximity = War.
  7. America neither wants nor needs what the Englishman is offering. Tens of millions of Americans would probably like to deport him on the basis of him being a foreigner who voted for Obama and Clinton alone. He and his children would have even more to offer the less-developed Philippines, but the truth is that he doesn’t give a damn about Americans, what they want, or what they need, he’s merely intent on living wherever he thinks it would be most beneficial to his family. He’s concerned now because he’s beginning to sense that the ground is shifting underneath his feet and it may not prove to be the most beneficial place in the future.
  8. Why should his brown children have any place in shaping America to their liking? They are not American and what they want is not what native Americans want. Geographic location is not nationality. I didn’t become Japanese because I lived in Tokyo, and I’m not Italian just because I reside in Italy and speak Italian. Nationality is not a difficult concept, it is not an abstract concept, and it consists of considerably more than official government paperwork.
  9. No one is “demonizing” anyone. To observe that the man, his wife, her parents, or his children have zero American heritage between them is not demonization, it is accurate observation. We can also observe that their behavior is very much in line with the Alt-Right’s predictive model for it. He’s not concerned that the Alt-Right is wrong, or evil, he’s concerned that we are correct.
  10. It is not Trump, his candidacy, his presidency, or the Alt-Right that will ignite a race war. What will ignite ethnic conflict in the USA is the same thing that has always ignited it everywhere around the world since the dawn of Man; the presence of different ethnicities in the same geographical location. This outcome has been the most likely one since 1965, and no amount of solipsism, handwringing, appeals to emotion, and searching for a Nazi bad guy is going to avert it.

BN has a rather different perspective:

Read your article today. On the train I dug out The Fate of Empires by John Glubb as it reminded me of what you were saying. It still amazes me the reaction one gets when it is shared with liberals. If they can move beyond coarsely dismissing the author they sputter and say “America is different. We are different.” Is there any scenario you see the identity politics and brewing ethnic tensions in the US de-escalates? I think if Trump utterly fails as president maybe it defers it. But just do not see him failing.

The fact is that only Donald Trump can significantly delay the inevitable strife, and he can only do so by accepting a lot more of it than most Americans are presently willing to accept. If Trump somehow managed to return the US demographics to 80-85 percent white in the next eight years through immigration restrictions and repatriations, that would buy the USA at least another generation, and possibly two, of relative domestic tranquility.

Even a return to the pre-1986 amnesty demographic balance would be a de-escalation scenario. But I find it very hard to believe that the God-Emperor Ascendant has the vision, or the nerve, to push that far ahead of the conceptual curve. The best we can probably hope for is that he will keep the situation from actually getting worse, and thereby stave off serious domestic conflict until an eventual financial collapse, which I anticipate in the early 2030s.

And finally, a reader from Bradford adds a somber note:

The community of my street doesn’t exist anymore. The social organizations don’t exist any more. It’s all been erased except that the stone, brick and mortar still stands.

Devastating. That is what the Englishman and his family have to offer America. Social destruction. And that is why all sane Americans should want them to go home, whether that is Manila or Bradford. It’s not about the quality of the immigrants, the scale of the mass migration has rendered that irrelevant now. It’s a simple and straightforward matter of quantity.

That is what the Alt-Right is standing against. That is why the Alt-Right exists.


“Republicans are now the White Party”

It’s interesting to see that the ethno-strategy that both I and Steve Sailer have recognized for quite some time now is being recognized. Steve, of course, recommended the conscious adoption of it as a political strategy. I, on the other hand, viewed it as an inevitability that some politician, whether Republican or not, was bound to figure out eventually:

Trump adopted the Sailer Strategy—whether he knew it I have no idea—and won handsomely. It would be wrong to impute huge numbers of down-market whites voting for Trump simply to racism, as many on the left predictably are doing. Quite a few Trump voters in swing states like Pennsylvania and Ohio turn out to have voted for Obama—twice. They wanted change, Obama didn’t deliver, so they gave Trump a chance to be the change-agent in Washington they have long sought. The roots of their dissatisfaction are social and economic more than racial, and bien-pensant efforts to portray their legitimate grievances as “hate” reflect the worst of post-modern progressive intolerance.

All the same, it cannot be denied that ethno-racial concerns played a role here—and that it was the Democrats who opened that can of worms. Since the beginning of the century, liberals have been crowing about the “emerging Democratic majority” being delivered by changing demographics, heavily fueled by immigration (legal or not). President Obama’s reelection four years ago seemed to conclusively prove that the “new” America—morally superior to the old, white-dominated one—had arrived, and the Republicans were on life support, waiting for GOP voters to go the way of the dinosaur. As one of Obama’s media acolytes hailed the 2012 victory:

President Barack Obama did not just win reelection tonight. His victory signaled the irreversible triumph of a new, 21st-century America: multiracial, multi-ethnic, global in outlook and moving beyond centuries of racial, sexual, marital and religious tradition.

This was more of the Marxistoid “right side of History” blather that Team Obama has indulged in for the last eight years—and it was utterly wrong. To the surprise of no one who understands human nature, many whites didn’t appreciate being told that they had to die off for “progress” to be achieved. They didn’t like being derided by their betters as “bitter clingers” with their guns and Bibles, and they especially didn’t like being termed “deplorables” unworthy of compassion or consideration. In the last days of Hillary’s doomed campaign, its contempt for a huge chunk of the American population had become so blatant that one of her top celebrity surrogates publicly hailed the “extinction” of straight white men as a step in the right direction.

Trump is no political genius. He made an appeal to working-class whites, who correctly felt that the Democrats viewed them with undisguised contempt and didn’t want their vote. The “emerging Democratic majority” thesis included the need to get some of those whites, a legacy Democratic voting bloc, to win national elections; under Obama, his party decided they didn’t need them at all, which was a terrible, almost incomprehensible mistake. It shouldn’t be necessary to point out that running against working-class whites—at almost 40 percent of the electorate, the biggest voting bloc in America—is the definition of political insanity.

Yet progressives somehow managed not to see the nose right on their face. Hence President Trump. What commentators term “identity politics” has now become normative, thanks to the Democrats indulging in it, and Trump is now aping them. It would be more correct to term this what it actually is: nationalism. Ethno-racial nationalism is an enormously potent political force; wise politicians know this and employ it cautiously. Nationalism arouses genuine passion and is a political motivator like no other, which it explains why a majority of white women voted for Trump, to the bitter consternation of outraged feminists.

Moreover, once nationalism becomes the main political factor, there’s no putting that troublesome genie back in the bottle. Politics become tribal, ethnic conflicts waged at the ballot box rather than on the battlefield. Having done most of my scholarly work on multiethnic societies like the Habsburg Empire and Yugoslavia, I can attest that the fires of nationalism, once stoked, are only put out with great difficulty—and that ethnically diverse societies that play games with nationalism are living dangerously.

Nationalism transforms politics from ideology to tribe. As Lee Kwan Yew, whose founding and prosperous running of multiethnic Singapore for three decades made him one of the most successful politicians of the 20th century, expressed it concisely, “In multiracial societies, you don’t vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion.”

The Republicans are now the White party, de facto, whether they want to be or not. American politics will never be the same, and 2016 looks like a landmark election in the manner of 1980, 1932, or 1860, each of which transformed the United States. Buckle up, it looks to be a bumpy ride ahead in the emerging era of competing American ethno-nationalisms.

The key phrase there is “whether they want to be or not”. Cuckservatives will cuck. Conservatives will wax passionately about men being created equal. Jews will fret about anti-semitism. Mexicans and Asians and mixed-race people will posture about being called names. Liberals will cry racist, SJWs will cry fascist, and Nazi, and white supremacist, and every other name they can dream up. None of this matters. 


Why not? Why was it inevitable that Republicans would become the White American Party while Democrats become the Not American Party? Lee Kwan Yew explained it very clearly many years ago. (I am, you may recall, not only a student of economics, but an East Asian Studies major as well.) “In multiracial societies, you don’t vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion.”

Ideology is dead. The USA is no longer the Anglo-American society described by de Tocqueville. It is now a multiracial society, and as unexceptional in this regard as all of its various predecessors in that regard. Therefore, all US citizens will increasingly vote in accordance with race and religion, just like the rest of the world tends to do. Liberals wanted the USA to be more like the rest of the world. Well, congratulations, liberals, but perhaps you probably should have been a little more careful about what you wished for.

And if you’re thinking that mudsharking and race-mixing is the answer to multiracial conflict, think again. That particular outcome is considerably worse than you might think. You see, one of the things that leads to is the likes of me.