How to Break a Liberal’s Brain (Part 2): What’s Wrong with White Supremacy?
May 17th, 2012 by Unamused
Derbyshire’s “racism” (meaning clear and honest thinking on issues of race) is on full display: besides the standard “racist” content (e.g., insufficient hatred of White people, failure to identify conservatism with pure evil, etc.), the article features the following much-quoted passage — a slap in the face and a kick in the crotch to “anti-racists” (meaning anti-White racists) everywhere.
The enemies of conservatism are eager to supply their own nomenclature. “White Supremacist” seems to be their current favorite. It is meant maliciously, of course, to bring up images of fire-hoses, attack dogs, pick handles, and segregated lunch counters — to imply that conservatives, especially non-mainstream conservatives, are cruel people with dark thoughts.
Leaving aside the intended malice, I actually think “White Supremacist” is not bad semantically. White supremacy, in the sense of a society in which key decisions are made by white Europeans, is one of the better arrangements History has come up with. There have of course been some blots on the record, but I don’t see how it can be denied that net-net, white Europeans have made a better job of running fair and stable societies than has any other group.
One day I asked the bored, black faces staring back at me: “What would happen if all the white people in America disappeared tomorrow?”
“We screwed,” a young, pitch-black boy screamed back. The rest of the blacks laughed. [A White Teacher Speaks Out, American Renaissance, July 2009]
Non-white supremacy is after all the rule over much of the world, from entire continental spaces like sub-Saharan Africa to individual black-run or mestizo-run municipalities in the U.S.A. I see no great floods into these places by refugees desperate to escape the horrors of white supremacy.
What are we to make of this?
Reasonable people: “well, duh”
Remember how it is that we break a liberal’s brain: “for many fundamental liberal beliefs, there are conservative counterarguments so clear, so compelling, so commonsensical that they leave leftists and their allies speechless.”
In this instance, the fundamental liberal belief is that White supremacy is evil. Obviously, unquestionably, tautologically evil. Supremely evil, in fact (according to every right-thinking moral relativist). It is the greatest evil the world has ever known — no, the greatest evil any possible world could ever know! Even to contemplate moving the supremely evil notion of “White” “supremacy” down a rung or two in the hierarchy of evil (say, just above #7: opposition to gay marriage) is to commit a hate crime of Hitlerian proportions.
The conservative counterargument: point out how well White supremacy works in practice.
Let’s look at Derbyshire’s argument in greater detail. There are three main points.
- Overall, historically, White supremacy (“a society in which key decisions are made by white Europeans”) has worked out relatively well.
- Many non-Whites will acknowledge this, if only implicitly (in their migration patterns, for instance — see below).
- Non-White supremacy, which is in practice the only alternative to White supremacy, is uniformly horrible when it is Blacks or Mestizos (“Hispanics”) who are left in charge; Asians are a mixed bag. For proof, just look at who is migrating where.
You can’t really dispute any of these fundamental points — well, you can, but you’ll have to resort to lies, hopelessly faulty reasoning, or both.
For instance, you might point to one example of a less-than-ideal White supremacist society, or even a really lousy one, like Nazi Germany, while of course ignoring the words “overall” and “relatively.”
You might point to some non-Whites who have allegedly suffered in some way under a White supremacist regime, again ignoring those two crucial words: “overall” and “relatively.”
You might even claim that you really like the way Blacks and Mestizos run their countries and will be emigrating any second now. (We really wish you would.)
But you’ll probably just scream “RACIST!”
Liberals: “ow, my brain”
You see, liberals who wish to avoid terminal brain-breakage are left with four basic responses:
- get really angry,
- be really sarcastic,
- more-or-less literally attack your opponents (in Derbyshire’s case, they already got him fired from National Review), and
- try to preempt them by getting to the debate first and letting everyone know they can just go home because your opponents are big ol’ racists so there’s no need to listen to anything they have to say.
For example, watch the heads explode over at the New York Observer, in “John Derbyshire Thinks White Supremacy is Pretty Great, Historically Speaking” (May 14). Let’s skim the boilerplate.
… blatantly racist… subtly racist… anti-immigration… Southern Poverty Law Center… “hate group.”
Off to a good start: no actual content, but she did use the word “racist” a lot. Now let’s get into the snark.
But over at VDare, Mr. Derbyshire used his inaugural column to clarify some misconceptions. Mainly, that the term “White Supremacist” gets a really bad rap!
Well, yes, the term “White supremacist” does in fact get a really bad rap — the very article in which the apparently sarcastic sentence appears, for instance.
And who are we to argue with History, really?
Well, yes, the last few centuries, at the very least, clearly show the superiority of those societies “in which key decisions are made by white Europeans.”
(Coincidentally, the argument that White Supremacists get a bad name directly conflicts with his previous essay on how stereotypes are “essential life tools.”)
Well, that doesn’t make a whole lot of sense, because it’s not at all obvious what “directly conflicts” with what and how it does so, and this seems like the sort of thing you should explain in your article, maybe just a little, but hey, you’ve preemptively dismissed the value of stereotypes, so I guess I won’t look into the matter any further.
White Power Bob will be so thrilled to hear…
Haha! White Power Bob! That evokes images of poor White people! Fuck those losers! Hahaha!
(Obviously, economically disadvantaged People of Color are awesome.)
… that all intended malice aside, a pure European bloodline is just factually superior to any other race or ethnicity.
Well… okay, uh, now we appear to be getting into some weird stuff that the author concocted on her own specifically to sound ridiculous. Does it, though?
Does it really?
Given the heritability of human behavioral traits like intelligence and conscientiousness, and given the overall superiority of European-run societies (England vs. Ethiopia, Canada vs. Congo, Holland vs. Haiti, Germany vs. Gabon), which is likely due in part to the distribution of those traits within and between the major population groups (“races”), I expect that “a pure European bloodline” would plausibly be “just factually superior to any other race or ethnicity.”
Oh, wait, I did that wrong. I was supposed to burn a cross and get a swastika tattooed on my forehead so everyone can identify the stoopid racist, right?
Surely a few oopsies like Hitler not winning World War II can’t erase all the evidence that white Europeans should run all of society, right?
A guest appearance by robotic intergalactic space-Hitler? Who could have guessed. That guy is always up to something!
For me, the two most amusing things about this line are the fact that it took White men, from White societies, dedicated to White values, armed with White technology to defeat Hitler, which means this cannot possibly be an argument against White supremacy (see, that’s how you show that something “directly contradicts” something else); and secondly, the author’s convenient omission of what I’m sure is a really long list of societies (past or present) run by Blacks or Mestizos that would have stood any chance of defeating Germany under Hitler, or indeed defeating Luxembourg under Dupong, or maybe just some that aren’t totally shitty places to live.
More liberals: “brain not work so good no more”
More head explosions occur at the Atlantic Wire, in the badly edited “Racism for Dollars: John Derbyshire Turns White Supremacist Pitchman” (May 14).
Allow me to distill the essence of this article for you:
- White supremacy is obviously, unquestionably, tautologically bad
- some people with different opinions are soliciting donations
- DAS RACISS
It is nothing more than an attack — a financial one — on John Derbyshire and VDARE.com: make sure you don’t give these racists any money, especially the racist with cancer, or they’ll just spend it on more racism and you’ll be a racist too! (Aside: my eyes just sort of skip over the word “racist” now.)
If you don’t believe me, here’s the article (emphasis mine).
John Derbyshire’s first column VDARE after being fired from the National Review — besides one dedicated to thanking generous readers — includes a defense of WHITE SUPREMACISM. It doesn’t seem like a coincidence that one of Derbyshire’s most EXPLICITLY RACIST ESSAYS is packaged with a very explicit request for donations. It seems Derbyshire has discovered one of the benefits of turning off lots of mainstream readers by writing a RACIST ESSAY about advising his kids to avoid black people is that it earns the loyalty of a smaller number of RACIST READERS who will pay money for more RACIST STUFF… BLATANTLY RACIST STUFF… pandering to RACISTS… RACIST NEWSLETTERS…
Did you get all that?
Racist essays, racist authors, racist websites, racist readers; racist posters, racist pamphlets, racist flyers, racist leaflets; racist countries, racist states, racist manors and estates; racist counties, racist towns, racist neighborhoods abound (and let us not forget racist backyard barbecues in racist neighborhoods, racist barbecues in racist locations other than backyards, delicious meats grilled slowly through racist methods other than racist barbecuing, and general racist food products considered independently of the slow racist grilling of delicious racist meats in racist backyards — but I digress); racist flowers, racist trees, racist birds, racist bees, racist clouds, racist seas (oh look, a racist shooting star!); racist people, racist things, racist burgers, racist wings; racist teachers at racist schools, who enforce the racist rules; racist cops and racist laws, racist cats with racist paws; racist every kind of stuff — okay, I think you’ve had enough.
Unamusement Park: the Dr. Seuss of racism.