Steve Sailer, in his VDare.com article The Color Of Crime And The New Orleans Nightmare: George W. Bush vs. Jared Taylor manages to be provocatively wrong about a few things. Provocative wrongness is when an incorrect statement provokes the reader to gain a better understanding of the truth. Some writers do this intentionally, which is a reason it's always important to read critically. Sometimes it's the best a guy can do. If I'm wrong about something, but my statement provokes in you a better idea of what the truth is, then maybe I've accomplished something.
Here is the first point on which Sailer is wrong:
"Personally, I am a citizenist... My starting point in analyzing policies is: `What is in the best overall interests of the current citizens of the United States?'(Jared Taylor wrote a response to those points in Taylor vs. Sailer--Survival v. "Citizenism" which has been posted on VDare.com as well as on Taylor's American Renaissance.)
"In contrast, so many others think in terms of: `What is in the best interest of my: identity group / race / ethnicity / religion / bank account / class / ideology / clique / gender / sexual orientation / party / and/or personal feelings of moral superiority?'
"Precisely because basing loyalties upon a legal category defined by our elected representatives is so unnatural, it's the least destructive and most uplifting form of allegiance humanly possible on an effective scale."
If we were living in the year 1962, I would agree with Sailer 100 percent. I was brought up as a "citizenist," not as pro-white. I'm not even bothered by the unnaturalness of "citizenism." Civilization requires some shaping of our habits of thought and behavior that might be at odds with our "natural" tendencies. What's "natural" about good table manners?
The problem, however, is that none of those non-white or anti-white identity groups are at all likely to change their ways. The multicultural faction of the ruling class has been encouraging identity politics (for everyone except white male heterosexuals) for the last 30 or 40 years. Even the neo-cons have, for practical purposes, gone "multi" over the last decade. They used to preach assimilation to our "creedal" nation, but that was before G.W.B. spoke Spanish on the campaign trail.
We have to consider what will work for us. Whether or not a "citizinist" multi-racial society is possible is something we'll never know. The powers that be are obviously working for something else. Do we oppose them with appeals to assimilation and universalism? Do we promise our fellow citizens that we will be true to principles that the current ruling class merely claims to believe in?
No, we have to be white. More than that, we need to be White, with a capital "W," meaning that we are racially aware in the political sphere. Is White biological or socially constructed? Doesn't matter. When we are voting, when we are taking with our fellow White citizens, when we are agitating, White is what we are.
This leads us to the second provocative wrongness in Sailer's article:
The typical white intellectual considers himself superior to ordinary white people for two contradictory reasons:The jab about people believing in equality and being proud of their own high intelligence is cute, but Sailer misses a key point: many intelligent, verbally skilled or verbally trainable White people are not part of the influential class of writers, professors, pundits, etc., that comprises the "intellectuals" of whom Sailer writes. There are, for example, many thousands of White computer programmers who have learned the hard way that they did "face significant non-white competition." They lost their jobs to it. They were cavalier about affirmative action in the '80s because Black programmers were not a serious competitive threat, but their current situations make them much more likely to take issues of race seriously.
For this reason, Taylor's strategy of wanting whites to imitate the ethnocentrism of minorities, while it will inevitably gain adherents as the white majority is reduced to a white minority by immigration, is highly unlikely to succeed any time soon. There is simply too much rivalry among whites.
- He constantly proclaims belief in human equality, but they don't;
- He has a high IQ, but they don't.
To many elite whites, minorities are just useful pawns in the great game of clawing their way to the top of the white status heap.
Which is, more or less, the only game in town. Taylor's dream of white solidarity has no appeal to white intellectuals and writers simply because they believe, condescendingly but also fairly accurately, that they don't face significant nonwhite competition. The vast majority of their rivals are other whites.
There are deeper issues. In any reasonably large high school, you'll find a few well-adjusted brainy types and a few mal-adjusted brainy types. The former go into business, medicine, engineering, etc., and set up nice lives for themselves and their families. The latter are more attracted to social science, psychology, journalism, politics and so on. (I'm speaking broadly here -- the quibbles, qualifications and hair splittings would bore you.) Anyway, the brainy, mal-adjusted high school kid goes to college and finds . . . Identity! He's part of a bunch of cool, hip, multi-cultural, cosmopolitan types. He's free from all the failures he experienced among the rubes back home. And he is on a deliberately crafted path to identifying with and serving the multi-cultural faction of the power structure. When he leads discussions about the importance of valuing "difference," he is symbolically addressing his own feelings of differentness.
There are a few things that can go wrong, from the perspective of the powerful. The geeky prospect might become alienated from the power structure itself. He might be rejected by the power structure. He might be a rare person of true integrity who speaks his honest opinion about the rightness and wrongness of things.
All of these intelligent White people who are not serving the power structure can become a major part of the pro-White vanguard. Those of us who already see ourselves as part of that vanguard can encourage and facilitate that tendency.
One of the key tasks we face is to re-connect ourselves with the White masses. We have to identify cultural tendencies that keep us apart. There is a huge amount of literature with the "outsider" theme. Brainy literary types are supposed to think of themselves as "outside of" ordinary society and even see their situations, sometimes, as similar to that of Frankenstein's monster, peeking through a crack into a warm, human world they cannot be part of.
Then there are forms of mass entertainment that ridicule intellectuals as eggheads, dweebs, geeks and so on. We all know the routine.
The separation needs to be healed. I'm not saying all pro-White intellectuals are geeks, but some of us are. I am. We need to re-connect with those we drew away from in our earlier years. Artistic works are an absolutely essential element of that re-connection project. We don't want cornball "cross the line" "diversity" exercises. We want works with the power and artistic excellence of things like West Side Story, but with a pro-White perspective. (We've been "making nice," in Lt. Shrank's words, with the PRs and everyone else for the last 40 years, and it seems like their turf is always theirs, while ours is still up for grabs.) We want many nuances of feeling and attitude and even touches of ideology worked out over the course of months in TV dramas like Dawson's Creek. We need pro-White rock bands who can draw tens of thousands of average White people to concerts and who put URLs for American Renaissance and VDare in their CD liner notes. We need to promote works of literature that are sympathetic to poor and working-class White people. We need to appreciate the cultural power of folk music and dancing.
The object is to build a movement that is intelligent and forceful. One that has an "elite" with a great deal of popular support. That elite will dispossess the existing multi-cultural elite from its positions in government, media and education. Jared Taylor can teach at Harvard if he wants to. Steve Sailer can edit the Wall Street Journal. Special positions will be created for people like me who have been loyal to their people but who do not have any real scholarly credentials or aptitude. Yes, I'm talking about a White Studies department at the University of Michigan! I'll have a nice office in Lane Hall!
This idea of one elite displacing another is something Sam Francis often wrote about. The current multicultural elite is dispensable. We neither need nor do we want "solidarity" with those "intellectuals and writers" for whom, according to Sailer, "white solidarity has no appeal." Those are the people who think that tenure is an unalienable right given to them by God. In fact, academic freedom means the right to serve your people unhindered by petty bureaucratic power games. It does not confer a right to betray one's people. I will express my sympathy for those we displace by writing up a list of pretty good wines that can be purchased in 5 liter boxes.
Average White people will, once again, live in a country managed by people who are intensely loyal to the White people they govern. There will still be ethnic and racial "diversity" in America. Minorities will be treated with general fairness, and we will help Black Americans develop a functional elite of their own to displace the whiny, corrupt and often stupid personalities that now dominate Black politics. If they don't want our help, fine, we won't bother. But the government will be unashamedly dominated by the White, pro-White elite, which will always be open to aspiring White people, based on interest, merit, temperament and loyalty, and which will openly proclaim its devotion to ensuring that America will continue to be dominated by White people forever.
I went to a movie last night. Everyone in the theater was White. The movie was stupid, but people seemed to be having a good time. I don't think any of those people understand the importance of White racial awareness. Willy-nilly, that understanding will come about in the next five years or so. When it does, they will seek out fellow White people who are intelligent, thoughtful and well-educated on racial issues.
On that day, I'll stand outside of the theater and smile and introduce myself.
"Hi! I'm Your Intellectual!"
Addendum, October 3, 2005:
The first part of Sailer's reply to Taylor has been posted on VDare.com: The Bennett Brouhaha, The New Orleans Nightmare, And Me.
Copyright © 2005
If you wish to link to this article, try copying and pasting:
<a href="http://m3peeps.org/03/hiyi.htm">Hi! I'm Your Intellectual!</a>
[Go to index for Web Log, Volume Three]
[Go to m3peeps.org home page]