Tag: Vibrancy is our strength

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.

Identity politics

Like war, it only takes one side to practice identity politics for them to become the operational rules of the game. The reason the Left is reacting with such fear and outrage to the election of the God-Emperor Ascendant is because they understand that the breaking of the so-called Blue Wall and the shift of the white woman vote to the Republican Party means that a majority of whites now effectively subscribe to the same identity politics to which Hispanics, Blacks, Asians, Jews, Muslims, and Africans all subscribe.

The Trump administration need pay no more heed to the anti-White identity interests than the Obama administration paid to the White identity interests. In fact, it should not, because Donald Trump’s second term depends upon continuing to ride the transformation of the Republican Party into the White Party.

It is very hard for those with strong ideological principles to accept this transformation. It was, and is, difficult for me to do so. But the fact, the logic, and the observable reality is that you can no more successfully appeal to ideology in an age of identity politics than you can successfully argue dialectic before an audience limited to rhetoric.

Throw out the OED!

Nigerian negresses will henceforth define all words in the English language. You can throw out your dictionaries now.

Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie has no time for white men who want to redefine what racism is. The Nigerian feminist author appeared on BBC Newsnight on Friday with R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr., founder and editor-in-chief of the conservative magazine The American Spectator.

Discussing Donald Trump’s campaign, Tyrell argued with host Emily Maitlis’ comment that Trump’s language has been racist.

“Thats not true, he hasn’t been racist,” Tyrell said, but Adichie wasn’t having it.

“I’m sorry, but as a white man, you don’t get to define what racism is, you really don’t,” she said. “You don’t get to sit there and say he hasn’t been racist when objectively he has.”

Redefine? The negress obviously has no idea what the white man’s definition has been for decades. But the amazing thing is that she’s not even the most clueless one there. You simply must watch the video, as when Tyrell asks the woman from the BBC why the media always focuses on the KKK instead of the Knights of Columbus, her response simply has to be seen to be believed.

Now remember, these are the people who consider themselves to be the intellectual elite. Never forget this whenever you’re dealing with the media. They are uneducated midwits with less intellectual curiosity than the average alley cat.

Stop, or he’ll say stop again

John Scalzi hasn’t learned that no one cares anymore.

John Scalzi ‏@scalzi
This just in: supporters of a racist presidential candidate upset and offended to be called out on their racism. Get used to it, folks.

John Scalzi ‏@scalzi
Woke up to people offended about my tweet about how people voting for a racist are offended about being accused of racism. Well, yes.

Francisco Silva @DrCisco
@scalzi I wouldn’t say they are all racist, but they definitely all voted for a racist, so it ends up the same. They are “racism enablers”

John Scalzi ‏@scalzi
John Scalzi Retweeted Francisco Silva
Yup. If you voted for a out-loud racist with racist plans, you voted for racism, and, you know. That’s racist.

Robot @_RobotPanda
@scalzi I’m seeing you and all the other salty democrats are dead set on electing Trump a second time in 2020.

John Scalzi ‏@scalzi
This is the “if you call people out on their racism, they’re going to keep doing racist things to spite you!” argument.

John Scalzi ‏@scalzi
The Cinemax Theory of Racism. Or, why voting Trump was racism, even if you don’t see yourself as A racist.

That’s just it. We ARE used to being called racist. And you know what? WE DON’T CARE. It’s not the irony of a dishonest and hypocritical white SJW living in a 99.99 percent white rural Bradford, Ohio calling people who are actually multiracial or living in diversity-enriched places that renders people indifferent, it’s the fact that the emotional pain of being called disqualifying names is now considerably less than the emotional pain of discovering that you’re increasingly surrounded by diversity and vibrancy.

Not that this will convince McRapey that if he just calls people “racist” a few thousand more times, they’ll totally come to see things his way. SJWs always double down.

Minnesota didn’t nearly go for Trump because the DFL voters liked Trump’s policies, but because what used to be Camp Snoopy is now a vibrant-infested Camp of the Saints and Dinkytown has been invaded by 100,000 Somalis, several of whom have died in suicide bombings and other terrorist attacks around the world. Those places are no longer Minnesotan in any meaningful sense, they are now African, and most Minnesotans don’t want to live in Africa. They are nice people, they don’t hate anyone, but one doesn’t have to hate a people to not want to live in their country rather than one’s own.

The more time passes, the more whites are learning that they would much rather be called racist than suffer living in a diverse and vibrant society as the possibilities for white flight disappear. The more time passes, the more whites are going to decide that they are willing to do as the Hispanics and Asians do, and drive out diversity and vibrancy from their societies.

This is what is called “the right of free association.” The right to freely associate comprises, after all, the right to disassociate.

And let’s not forget, John, that you voted for a Satanist pedophile….

No unity, no healing

That is language from a now-bygone era. This is the new reality.

Shocking video out of Chicago shows a mob of young black men viciously beating an older white man because he voted for Donald Trump, dragging him through the streets as he hangs out of the back of his car.

The clip shows the thugs repeatedly screaming, “you voted Donald Trump” as they assault the victim from every angle while others steal his belongings.

“You voted Trump,” the mob screams, “You gonna pay for that sh*t.”

Another woman shouts “beat his ass,” while another man is heard laughing before remarking, “Don’t vote Trump.”

They are not your people. They are not your kind.

Just ask them.

Nations exist for a reason. Borders exist for a reason. And homogenous nations are created from heterogeneous nations for a reason.

Diversity + Proximity = War.

White flight in England

The British are in the process of learning why America is so racist and violent.

White populations in towns and cities are dwindling at record levels and in extreme cases have halved in a decade, it was revealed today. In Newham, east London, just 16 per cent of the population are white, compared to 33 per cent ten years ago.

Academic Ted Cantle, a Government adviser of community cohesion, says by the 2021 census the polarisation will be even greater and suggests Government intervention like ensuring ethnic balance by ‘placing pupils in diverse schools’.

The report says many towns and cities, such as Birmingham, Leicester, Slough, Luton, Bradford and London, have seen areas develop where the white British population is ‘increasingly dwindling’ as minorities increase. Professor Cantle cites Blackburn as one of the most segregated towns in Britain whose Whalley Range area is now 95 per cent Asian and the local butcher admits he has never served a white Briton.

Today’s landmark report suggests the state intervenes to halt the white majority becoming increasingly segregated from growing ethnic populations in urban areas. One suggestion is the ‘bussing’ in of white children into schools with high ethnic populations, or vice-versa.

It has been used in America in schools where more than 85 per cent of students are from the same background. A ‘quota’ from the an alternate ethnic group is then sent by bus from another nearby area.

The report says: ‘Politicians and policy-makers need to encourage white British residents to remain in diverse areas; to choose, rather than avoid, diverse areas when they do re-locate, encouraging similar choices with respect to placing pupils in diverse schools; in other words to create a positive choice for mixed areas and a shared society’

Bussing. Right. Because that worked SO WELL in the USA. The amusing part is the Asians complaining that no sooner do they invade a white neighborhood than the whites leave and force them to live surrounded by – the horror – other people like them!

Soon, there will be nowhere left to run, nowhere left to fly. What, then, will the British people do?

Two police ambushed in Des Moines

The price of vibrancy is always white corpses:

Two metro-area police officers were shot and killed in apparent “ambush style” attacks early Wednesday. Police from Urbandale and Des Moines departments responded to a report of gunfire at the intersection of 70th Street and Aurora Avenue at about 1:06 a.m.

The first officers arriving on the scene found an Urbandale officer shot. The officer, whose name has not been released, died, said Des Moines Police Sgt. Paul Parizek in a news release. At about 1:26 a.m., a Des Moines police officer was shot and killed near the intersection of Merle Hay Road and Sheridan Drive while responding to the scene where the Urbandale officer was shot.

Both officers were gunned down in their patrol cars.

The police departments are wary of officers’ safety, as the attack appeared targeted at officers.

Their families will, no doubt, be consoled by the thought that no one will be able to call them racist.

UPDATE: The suspect is not a BLM activist, but a bearded white man. It looks like BLM isn’t to blame for this one.

Immigration and the rise of white identity

Given the long track record of left-liberal policies producing the exact opposite of the result expected, it should come as no surprise that social scientists are discovering that, far from eliminating racism, an increasingly diverse society is creating a cohesive trans-ethnic white identity in the United States:

In a study of white Americans’ attitudes and candidate preferences, we found that Trump’s success reflects the rise of “white identity politics”—an attempt to protect the collective interests of white voters via the ballot box. Whereas racial prejudice refers to animosity toward other racial groups, white identity reflects a sense of connection to fellow white Americans.

We’re not the first to tie Trump’s candidacy to white identity politics. But our data provide some of the clearest evidence that ongoing demographic changes in the United States are increasing white racial identity. White identity, in turn, is pushing white Americans to support Trump.

When we talk about white identity, we’re not referring to the alt-right fringe, the white nationalist movement or others who espouse racist beliefs. Rather, we’re talking about everyday white Americans who, perhaps for the first time, are racially conscious.

The concept of “garden variety” white racial identity stands in contrast to conventional wisdom. In the last three decades of scholarship on whiteness as a race, the prevailing view has been that most whites fail to notice their own whiteness. In a society dominated by white people, whiteness simply fades into the background. Just as fish fail to notice the water around them, whites are unlikely to think about how they are members of a distinct group.

Our research shows that the era of “white invisibility” is coming to a close.Endorsement of white identity politics was highest in heavily Hispanic neighborhoods and was strongly correlated with white racial identity. These results suggest that America’s growing ethnic diversity is creating a politicized form of white identity that has clear repercussions for future elections….

Why does it matter that whites’ politics are driven by concerns about the interests of their racial group? It suggests that racial bias increasingly reflects attention to the welfare of one’s own group rather than animus toward other groups. These collective concerns are only going to become more pronounced as the nation becomes more diverse.

Recent research in social psychology suggests that when whites engage in discrimination based on their perceived collective interests, it’s hard to convince them that such discrimination is wrong. After all, doesn’t every group have a right to prioritize its own members? We believe our results portend increasing difficulty in achieving the democratic aim of getting race out of American politics.

Once more, we see that the Alt-Right perspective is supported by science, logic, and history. It’s conceptual models are predictive. The conservative perspective is not, and its conceptual models reliably fail to correctly predict future events, except occasionally disaster for the left-liberal models, which is rather like trying to take credit for predicting that gravity will still be operative tomorrow.

That is why Point 8 was included in the 16 Points of the Alt-Right.

The Alt Right is scientodific. It presumptively accepts the current conclusions of the scientific method (scientody), while understanding a) these conclusions are liable to future revision, b) that scientistry is susceptible to corruption, and c) that the so-called scientific consensus is not based on scientody, but democracy, and is therefore intrinsically unscientific.


Any movement that aligns itself with science, history, and correctly applied logic is much more likely to take positions that will eventually prove popular, even if they are initially despised, because events are always going to move in ways that favor their interpretations. This is why the Alt-Right is on the rise along with the development of white political identity in the USA. The only way to get race out of American politics is to deny the other races the ability to participate in the political process.

Also notice that it shows my interpretation of white identity as an American phenomenon appears to be correct, as Europeans are not facing anywhere near the same level of racial pressure, particularly not in a political sense. Here in Europe, the pressure is cultural and religious in nature, so I expect a cultural Christian identity to gradually arise in the lands that were once collectively known as Christendom.