In 2009, Human Events named its “Conservative of the Year.” Their choice hadn’t passed an important piece of legislation. He didn’t write a philosophical treatise on conservative principles. His selection had nothing to do with his position on healthcare, the economy, gun rights, immigration, or affirmative action. Dick Cheney became America’s most important “conservative” for his criticism of the Obama administration’s handling of the war on terror.
My point here isn’t to argue that the former vice-president is wrong when he advocates torture of Al-Qaida leaders, though I believe he is. It’s to show how intellectually hollow the modern day conservative movement is. Including the 9/11 attack, terrorism has been responsible for no more than 2.2 percent of the murders in the United States since 2001. But it’s unlikely that anyone would be named “Conservative of the Year” for his handling of the issue of crime.
I’m no scientist, but I would guess that nuclear technology, like all technology, is going to get progressively less expensive and more widely available. Muslims have never failed to use against their enemies any type of arms they could get their hands on . They also tend to fight those whom they live amongst. One would think that the odds of a major terrorist attack happening would depend on how many Muslims are allowed to live in the United States. Reducing Islamic immigration in the name of fighting terror would receive widespread public support, be completely practical in a way installing a puppet regime in Afghanistan wouldn’t, and not lead us to kill or torture anybody. Yet the “Conservative of the Year” whose entire raison d’être has been “keeping us safe” acts as if such a thing isn’t even possible. The idea that nothing must be done to stop the March Of Diversity is so entrenched in the minds of those considered of the Right that they will defend America policing the entire planet, torture, indefinite detentions, and a nation on permanent war footing but won’t mention immigration restriction or racial profiling.
It’s because of so-called “conservatives” like Cheney that an Alternative Right is necessary.
Besides our disagreements with mainstream conservatives on the issue of foreign policy and the relative importance of fighting terrorism, there is the topic of race and, more broadly, IQ and heredity. We’ve known for a while through neuroscience and cross-adoption studies–if common sense wasn’t enough–that individuals differ in their inherent capabilities. The races do, too, with whites and Asians on the top and blacks at the bottom. The Alternative Right takes it for granted that equality of opportunity means inequality of results for various classes, races, and the two sexes. Without ignoring the importance of culture, we see Western civilization as a unique product of the European gene pool.
True, the writings of IQ popularizers John Derbyshire and Charles Murray occasionally appear in mainstream conservative publications. But the true value of hereditarian arguments in defending property rights and the free market and attacking affirmative action is never appreciated. To get an idea of why liberals have been so successful in the last fifty years, just look at how well they follow their premises to their logical conclusions on a wide variety of issues. Men of the Left believe that all races are biologically the same. Therefore, every social pathology that especially afflicts blacks and Mexicans (non-Asian minorities or “NAMs” for short) has a cause in the environment. Stereotypes probably have something to do with it, so we must watch our words and purge anyone who says anything insensitive from a position of power. Billions need to be spent on schooling to get those struggling up to par. Minority children must learn about heroes of a similar ethnic background. In addition to stereotypes, there’s old fashioned discrimination, so we don’t need to worry about whites losing opportunities due to affirmative action. And since white society bears a collective guilt for pathologies that affect the entire black community, 40,000 white women raped a year by black men does little to change the racial scorecard.
Meanwhile, though National Review Online will let John Derbyshire do a Q&A on race and intelligence, precious few mainstream conservatives will draw the obvious conclusions from such research. For example, low-IQ Mexican immigration is the greatest threat to America. Anti-discrimination laws should be repealed not only because they’re unconstitutional and infringe on the right to free association, but because whites have very good reasons for avoiding NAMs. Schools should stop wasting time trying to close achievement gaps. And not only do whites have nothing to feel guilty about, they are the best thing to ever happen to blacks. Even ignoring race, humanity will not move forward through equality or by raising up the really stupid to level of just plain stupid.
Right-wing writers even refuse to bring up hereditarian arguments when their implications dovetail with the ostensible aims of conservatism. So while the free market is defended on utilitarian grounds or a conservative will attack affirmative action from the perspective that such programs “reinforce stereotypes,” nobody in the mainstream will point out that it is unjust to punish some people for being better than others. IQ is a magic bullet that penetrates the entire egalitarianist agenda. To be a conservative and ignore it, or even not give it the attention it deserves, is like stabbing at your opponent with a knife when you have a bazooka in your arsenal. Could all this be why leftists treat war lovers like Cheney and the neocons as respectable opposition, while going for the jugular of anybody who goes slightly off script on the issue of race? John McCain, who seems to favor nuclear conflict with Iran, Russia, and other adversaries, is considered a “moderate”; Jared Taylor, on other hand, whose foreign policy views are peaceful and diplomatic, is considered a beyond-the-pale extremist.
The topic of heredity is like that of fighting terrorism in that even when we agree with the mainstream conservative movement on basic facts, we differ on how much emphasis we should give the topic. Since any movement only has so much political capital to spend, the choice of what should be prioritized can be just as important a question as those regarding deeper ideology. The libertarian magazine Reason doesn’t have enough pages to go after every state violation of liberty, so it focuses on restrictions on gay marriage and marijuana, and virtually ignores fiat money and multicultural brainwashing in public schools. So though the Alternative Right encompasses a certain brand of libertarianism, there’s little for us to be excited about, and much for us to detest, about the journalists most often associated with that term.
An anti-statist movement sits very uncomfortably in the atmosphere of an anti-racist society. If the races are equal, why does the free market always produce results that favor some groups and not others? And why do whites always end up near the top and blacks at the bottom, everywhere and always? What could explain the exact same story being told in the Caribbean, America, Europe, Latin America, and Africa? The most consistent thinkers who reject hereditarianism tell us that we live in a world dripping with “white supremacy.” Mainstream discourse expresses this implicitly in such things as who is and isn’t allowed a positive racial identity. And conservatives are by and large silent on NAM failure. It’s no wonder, that as Michael Levin says, “a bad theory beats no theory,” and Leftism has triumphed among the educated public.
There’s an important semantic purpose behind the name Alternative Right. When you live in a society in which you’d like to change the entire idea-making establishment, it makes little sense to call yourself a “conservative.” On the other hand, we shouldn’t do away with the term completely, as there is something inherently conservative about seeking a political and social culture that is a better fit with human nature than the one we currently have. We may lament the low European-American birth rate, but the fact that it’s even near replacement level in such a feminist and anti-natalist society is a testament to natural sex differences. While there’s more miscegenation than in the past, with the media as it is, we should be heartened that white teenage girls aren’t passing themselves around in black neighborhoods. And though nobody will tell a pollster that they desire to live in a neighborhood free from NAMs, the real estate market doesn’t lie. People to a large extent act as if they agree with us. And they’ll be healthier socially and as individuals when they’ll be able to say so openly. Consider this webzine a first step in that direction.
4 Comments
It is possible that there is a slightly higher IQ for liberals as opposed to conservatives. (I would like to see the data …) A possible explanation for this is that more ordinary people tend to not read books. That is good, in this case. It takes a certain kind of personal and prideful delight in abstruse theories , to believe in racial equality. In one’s experience of day to day reality, one is presented with a common sense reaction to blacks and browns…they are dumb and dumber, etc. But if one is smart, like Copernicus, one figures out, especially when charmed by Professor Ghoul, that , like the heliocentric theory which defies common sense and allows the smarties to smile at the boors and peasants, Aha! the earth is not the center of the solar system, the sun is the center.
Llikewise, blacks are not dumb, violent, criminal, and coarse, etc. by Nature , they have been made that way by….CULTURE, Aha! the hapless student says to himself, like the Sun in the solar system, CULTURE is at the center, and my little brain cannot see. (Plato’s cave.) I have been led into the brillance of sunshine…It is Culture!
Culture has stunted the blacks and browns, and that Culture is the White Guy, and his racialism and all the other isms of his rule.
Meanwhile, Archie Bunker says, Aaaahhhhhaaa! and waves his hand to shoo away Copernicus, (Meathead, if you are old enough). Well Archie Bunker is conservative and cannot be seduced by empoverished theory. (Well, Jew TV (Ed Asner) did manage, over several years, to get Archie to be a negro-lover, but not even the Jews dared present Archie giving away his daughter to a shine. Propaganda does have limits.
So, in summary, it takes a real smart careerist to believe nonsense. But he will believe it particularly if it positions him for Success. Then there is another kind of Believer.
The other kind of Believer (like me 40 years ago, the only child of a leftwing family, and Vietnam, and no conservatives around except Bill Lip-Curl Buckley, and no race science available until later, except for crushed Darwinism well-buried somewhere outside academy) is the well intentioned and genuinely humane White guy and White gal. We are racially programmed by the North to be open to strangers, per the evolutionary psychologists like KM. We have adopted a religion which includes strong tendencies to Universalism, Agape, and personal affiliation beyond family and tribe. Neither Greek nor Jew. (It is apparent that a religion tends to fit a genome, just as social norms tend to fit a particular genome. That Whites are the only race to have invented free speech, says something about our genome.)
Our religion has been very egalitarian, per James Russell’s book, “Breach of Faith and the Immigration…” Our liberal churches following the example of the Unitarian Universalists of the early 19th century, spun off the Abolitionists who went on to lead the Army of the Night of freeing the slaves. Then of course, our liberal political tradition of 1776, tempered by the Federalist Papers, yes, claimed some kind of Equality even while soberly denying blacks, wisely, their “common humanity”. (There is of course no common humanity, except for inclusion in Homo Sapiens from a taxonomy standpoint.)
So, in brief, only Whites have invented Equality, and Christianity, and it is true that Asians have taken that bourgeois Equality and further debased it with Maoism and Pol Potism, and killing fields that dwarf the jews/commies of the USSR.
Whites invented Equality, especially Racial Equality and they did it before the Jews got their oar into the swamp with the Immigration struggle that ended in the 1965 Immigration Act, opening the gates to the lower forms of humanity…give us your tired, your poor, your wretched of the earth…typical Jewish, commie rhetoric for the “Dispossessed”. Archie Bunker (Early) might have said, “Yeah?.Dispossessed by Who?”
In historical terms, per Russell (above), the Stoics and Alexander invented equality, and the lumpen elements, poor, immigrants, ruined farmers, ex-soldiers in Greece and Rome, exslaves, and slaves…grabbed on to Equality and Universalism, and Christianity in order to explain the loss of their former world of agrarian predictability (relative to urbanism) and local gods, and traditions, AND to that which is familiar and comforting.
Without trying to follow the ins and outs of Christianity (for which I am unqualified anyway), The Great Myth of Equality has been with the West for over two millenia, and with the coming of the Mass Age of Democracy in the last century or so, we got it now in spades, especially Racial Equality.
Another factor here gets us into personal psychology. Equality is like totem teddy bear. It makes folks feel like God has not abandoned them. It provides standing for demands made of the State. It relieves the smart and successful of possible guilt in that they can claim that they had the same chances as the bum, or, now with regard to Race, the myth of racial equality relieves the smart and successful of relative claims on their wealth or concern. It provides the non-smart and unsuccessful with dreams of Success; next time, the Second Chance, try harder, etc. Finally, briefly, it seems that anybody’s claim to inclusion should be recognized, and that feels good to the average White person. Whites are generous, compared to other races (save the whales, free the slaves, free women, free Everybody! Yup. Nietzsche may have gone overboard in his contempt of Pity, but Pity was one of his personal struggles, as attested in a letter. Got Pity Whiteman? yup , in spades.
We Whites are hobbled by Pity. No other Race pitys like us. In India, one steps over the dying on the street. In Africa…nevermind. So this is what we are dealing with. It is our natural-born (genetic) prodigious generosity and openness to the Other, that is the source of our susceptibility to Claims by the useless, wretcheds, miserables…
Of course, this cannot go on forever. Deficits, Programs that do not and cannot work to civilize the Others, wars for a foreign power that we pay and die for, massive propaganda in the jewish/liberal media, reckless immigration of low lifes…we are starting to crack up.
Tea Partiers may protest their innocence of racialism, but don’t believe it. They use the memes (thought I would never use the term) of crime, and welfare, and illegal immigration, but they are implicitly and explicitly racialist at the dinner table. Archie Bunker is returning to his white roots.
conclusion. There is a profound psychology of Whites which must be appreciated. LIberals are not bad people in fundamental terms. (how could they be? I was once one, as well as other now race conservatives (!) ) They are misled by good intentions into bad results (Paved with Good Intentions). These people are starting to awaken. Travelling in Norway in 2008 with my big mouth, just about everybody over 40 expressed great concern about their immigration problem (black blobs usually in burkas pushing baby buggies in the town square). The most succinct remark from a white woman about 40: “We were very naive.”
So this is what is happening at home. Slow but sure. Immigration is the # one issue. We don’t need more Theory so much as we need political and psychological skills in riding the wave. Certainly, there is no room for squirrely actions. We are not going to create that wave, but we can ride it, and keep talking good sense to folks.
Joe Webb
Excellent article! I guess you could say the left is the “attack the whites” party when you consider that most of their measures are against whites –unfairly. They want to take our money, our jobs, and our knowledge of truth away. Then they want to mix us with other races to take our identity and even who we are away. They want to annihilate us, basically. The high-IQ seems to come in when they couch this war of genocide in high-sounding moralistic terminology, lol. Strip that all away, and they simply want to oppress Europeans til they can eliminate them. The right should be 100% pushing against this to defend our RACE.
Since we know that Germany pre-ww2 was the most advanced nation on Earth at the time they embraced racial truths about the differences between races, and we know that the higher-IQ Japanese embraced racial differences as well and allied with the Germans, and we know that our own country years ago was more conservative in that we protected our own race with measures like the 1924 immigration laws, it seems that the high-IQ = leftist is not because of the high-IQ itself. It is coming from someplace else. High-IQ individuals tend to go to college — where intensive propaganda and nascent young activism are thrown together in a volatile hormonal mix. Young students want to change the world, and they are becoming adults and beginning to think for themselves, as they encounter these ideas from professors who themselves have been indoctrinated and / or know that political correctness has its rewards. It is a propaganda production machine aimed squarely at the highest in IQ. It took me years of intensive study and motivation on my own to break free–not to mention courage, and accepting that I live in a not-so-nice world, and that those awful “racists” may not be that awful after all…
Sadly, IQ does not mean courage, or truth-seeking, or true compassion — just look at the Jews, they are the Lex Luthors of the world with their higher-average IQ’s (ironically–they invented the Superman comic character–to manipulate our heroic impulses… ). Incidentally, Jews are about 80% democratic (not counting the neocons…) so I’m sure they were part of those higher figures on leftist-IQ. It would be nice to see the data, the samples they used, etc. in such studies too. Leftist data/samples tend to be massaged in my experience in one way or another — it is remarkable what you can come up with when truth is not your object by narrowing your focus, either in the study itself (head start programs for example), or in the chosen sample.
A note about the rape data: The actual reported number of rapes is on the order of 37,000 not 40,000, however, rapes are reported at about 50% — one of the lowest reporting rates of any crime. The actual number white women raped by blacks could be a staggering 70,000 or more a year. Also, it is important to say that whites do not rape black women and that even if we double the statistically insignificant 5 or so reported white-on-black rapes it is still insignificant. It is supposed to be an Ku Klux Klan canard of dire racism that blacks want to rape our white women — a sign of the most depraved racism. Too bad it is absolutely true beyond most people’s wildest imaginings.
It would be helpful if you would provide a link or citation to the article you mention. It sounds like typical egalitarian horseshit to me: “We think everyone is equal, and that is because we are smarter than the rest.”
I have read numerous articles about studies that have been done on why some people are ‘conservative’ and other people are ‘liberal’. The studies seem to indicate that on average, those who are conservative are stupider than those who are liberal. One article hypothesized that the less-intelligent conservatives do not have the mental capacity to ‘think outside’ of evolutionary traits and have problems processing complex questions (like social problems). The article hypothesized that the slightly-more intelligent are able to surmount survival-of-the-fittest evolutionary traits a bit better, and have a more capacity to understand complex problems. It would be interesting if you could write an article addressing those conjectures. If they were true, it would explain a lot of the right-wing positions that are so simplistic they verge on being cartoonish, and it would explain why cognitive dissonance is so prevalent amongst conservative groups.