[PLEASUREMAN]

Because MacDonald talks extensively about Jewish ethnic separatism in his book, I was going to tack this onto the Culture of Critique thread, but I think it deserves its own space.

I do want to address in more detail MacDonald's solution to the problem of ethnic separatism. Jeff Fries linked to this OC Weekly article predictably condemning Kevin MacDonald, written with separatist gusto by whiny, aggrieved Mexican (or Mexican-American if you must) Gustavo Arellano, who is apparently known for writing an "Ask a Mexican" column, in which he presumably explains and defends the custom of throwing soiled toilet paper in the trash instead of just flushing it. Despite this minor celebrity he is forced to write in an alternative weekly (i.e. they can't give it away).

Subheaded "Skinheads In Suits", the article is a badly written, overheated tirade about white racism, the sort of thing that has been de rigueur in alta-trash for decades, and Arellano is like a ninth generation Xerox of what was an eye-rolling form to begin with. You simply can't run around in this circle without fulminating about what imaginary racists are doing to keep your clan down (perhaps forcing them to dispose of their fecal matter "in the shadows"). So Arellano's intemperate, wild-eyed tone is far from surprising--a kind of civilized version of putting excrement on cheap paper and then saving it.

Of course one of the benefits of academic solidarity against debate is that it frightens away the timid, leaving tenured academics like MacDonald speaking to ever shrinking and ever stranger audiences. As Arellano writes:

Arellano:

All along, MacDonald has insisted he isn’t an anti-Semite or a neo-Nazi and definitely not a racist—he’s just a hard-working academic whose work happens to have an exclusively skinhead following. “I don’t necessarily endorse all of the attitudes reflected in all of the articles,” MacDonald wrote to the Southern Poverty Law Center in regards to a 2008 exposé in its Intelligence Report magazine showing the professor’s courting of the extreme right through submitting his work in their publications and accepting their grants.

But at that summer IHR meeting, MacDonald began shedding his regular-guy façade. And with his introductions to Freedom 14 and other local neo-Nazis at that conference, the professor began the first steps toward emerging as a full-fledged bigot. As first reported by the Weekly in a Jan. 5 post on our Navel Gazing blog, MacDonald is now partnering with Freedom 14 and a notorious neo-Nazi lawyer to publicize a new political party modeled after England’s fascist British National Party, a new party created explicitly to deport all non-whites.

I guess calling the SPLC's lazy defamation of MacDonald an "exposé" is one of the ways this ninth rate George Lopez (if you can imagine such a thing) convinces himself this stuff is worth printing. Not that Arellano, even given a head start and some prepared notes, could make head or tails out of MacDonald's theories on group conflict and group evolutionary strategy--I know a libarts major when I read him. It's enough for Arellano to tell you that a bunch of Jews found out that MacDonald "courts the extreme right", which is liberal jargon for "disagrees with me about anything whatsoever". Wake me when this Mexican is done ranting in his strange, English-like dialect.

But here is where I must stop defending MacDonald. Not because he is hanging around with supposed "unsavory types"--obviously no rational person would take Arellano's assertions at face value--big deal. I highly doubt MacDonald is giving the Nazi salute to throngs of skinheads, and Arellano is careful not to summarize the tone or substance of anything MacDonald has said, instead running off on a tangent about absurd fringe figures who might have been in the crowd at one of these talks, or even more tenuously who who might have agreed with MacDonald about something once. I KNEW IT!

Of course Arellano will have his own ideas about why ethnic separatism is evil when MacDonald advocates it but part of our colorful tapestry of diversity when Arellano--drunk on a cooler full of Coronas by the looks of his output--does essentially the same thing. But MacDonald himself should know better, and Arellano is unwittingly showing why.

Mexicans are now following the ethnic separatist model, not the assimilationist model, which poses a problem. Practically all of the pro-immigration rhetoric has been dependent on the idea that Mexicans will assimilate. But as we are seeing, they will not assimilate because they've been shown a better way: the Jewish model that MacDonald describes in depth. There is more to be had, especially for what is a mostly peasant class of low skill, uneducated, and culturally brain-dead immigrants, in remaining apart. I'm not referring to the moronic La Raza reconquista stuff, which is just self-affirming fantasy not unlike a Tea Party protest (the participants will never be bedeviled by the question of what to do if they win). Rather, I'm talking about maintaining affirmative action status and the ability to sue for discrimination while discriminating like mad themselves.

What marks out ethnic separatists, whether they are sobbing Mexican racists or vituperative Jews or (in fairness) meth-addled white skinheads, is their aggressive competition with other ethnic groups while internally practicing highly nepotistic behavior. Mexicans have demonstrated an impressive drive to be as racist as they can be, as has been identified in surveys of Mexican attitudes towards blacks and whites, their clashes with blacks in California, and the day-to-day petty racism they exhibit, often recounted anecdotally--you generally don't have to wait long for a Mexican to say something racist, and he often seems delighted to have an audience. (In some respects Mexicans are the most contemptible of separatists, boot-licking those above them while viciously kicking anyone of lesser status in the teeth.)

This is my complaint. MacDonald could be doing a great deal to advance the cause of an assimilationist West that remains true to its universalist values by writing about the system gaming behavior of Mexicans who have cynically adopted an ethnic separatist stance in emulation of Jews and (to a lesser extent) blacks. By contributing to a body of research on ethnic separatism and the problems it leads to, MacDonald would be helping mainstream whites come to terms with the downsides of a multiculturalist society and make an affirmative effort to return to assimilationist traditions, rather than simply demanding that Mexicans stop coming en masse.

Instead, MacDonald is raising the bar unreasonably high for mainstream whites; they must accept a radicalized and contentious ethnic posture unlike anything they are accustomed to or find palatable. They must reject not only those who have adopted an anti-Western ethnic separatism, but also those who have chosen to assimilate but are of an ethnic background other than European. This is unrealistic in the extreme, and can only lead to a fractious society that I do not want to be a part of.

People will not readily bind together only to reject something; they must have something worth striving for and sharing.

[BushrodButtram]

Once they've started, ethnic politics never go away. Consider how entrenched the Bloc Quebecois/Parti Quebecois are in Canada, or the UDMR in Romania (the Hungarian party,) or look at the shitshow that Belgian federal politics has become.

Race politics is weird stuff. For instance, in Romania, Hungarians are an excluded and self-excluding minority; they remember the days when they ruled Transylvania (as do the ethnic Romanians) and many still harbor irredentist views that Hungarians in Hungary would find laughable and pathetic. On the other hand, the much smaller Armenian majority is totally assimilated and they do fine. The crucial issue seems to be whether there is a critical mass of identity politickers willing to vote on a race ticket. If there are, their party will promiscuously form coalitions with anyone at the national level since they don't care about national issues beyond the question of how many goodies they get.

In the United States, whites are not prepared, nor will they be prepared anytime soon, to engage in explicit race politics as most blacks and Mexicans do. But many whites are extremely uncomfortable with things as they are. I suspect that some of the recent protest politics (Perot, Jesse Ventura, Tea Party) comes out of sublimated racial anxiety. Therefore, as PM said, what American whites need to do now is to become conscious of the abuses of ethnic politics routinely perpetrated by other racial groups and to demand assimilation.

I think that this offers little prospect for success, however, because in the end whites will become a minority even were the border to close tomorrow. In the long term, whites will have no real choice except to become racially conscious in response to the racial consciousness of most blacks and Mexicans. This consciousness will not be willingly chosen and whites, whose myths of citizenship include racial neutrality, will strive to find exceptions for members of model minorities. It is as yet an open question whether those minorities wish themselves to assimilate; even if they do, though, their mean-regressed descendants will be likely to adopt racial grievance techniques as they begin to slip in social status.

[PLEASUREMAN]

If you can get assimilationism to start working again--to be a (charitably) enforced goal--you can deal with parts of the eventual "white minority" problem in advance. But we are getting near the "too late" point, if not already past it. Nonetheless I expect that white ethnic separatism will not work out well for whites. It will instead create a "sub-white" ethnic group that has little in common with its parent. What lives on will have a light complexion, but it won't be "white" as people today understand the word. And it will hardly be worth preserving.

[BushrodButtram]

Cultural winter, PM, I'm telling you. Imagine how mad the Romans must have been that the Germans weren't assimilating.

[The Toast of Botswana]

BushrodButtram, 19 April 2010 - 12:01 PM:

Cultural winter, PM, I'm telling you. Imagine how mad the Romans must have been that the Germans weren't assimilating.

Or when their kids started growing their hair long, wearing pants, and dropping the "-us" from their names. That actually happened in lots of places in Gaul and Italy.

[PLEASUREMAN]

Points taken about irreversible cultural decline, but I assume no one here is actually defending MacDonald, who looks set to achieve absolutely nothing with his separatist jihad.

[Bibles 'n Guns]

In places like Texas and California the goal of assimilation is doubly hampered by the fact that Mexicans see themselves as racially and culturally superior. Why assimilate to a civilization that appears weak, and which you anticipate sweeping aside on your triumphant march to majority status? Mexicans other out-groups perceive Whites to be much weaker and more helpless than they actually are, and this perception does and will continue to shape race relations in a way that will make returning to the assimilation model all but impossible.

This post has been edited by Bibles 'n Guns: 19 April 2010 - 02:57 PM

[stanley]

PM, how do you think things are likely to turn out for American whites? You've indicated in other posts that you see some kind of backlash (by whites) ahead. I know this is like predicting earthquakes, but I'm interested to know what you think may be in store.

[PLEASUREMAN]

stanley, 20 April 2010 - 07:07 PM:

PM, how do you think things are likely to turn out for American whites? You've indicated in other posts that you see some kind of backlash (by whites) ahead. I know this is like predicting earthquakes, but I'm interested to know what you think may be in store.

This is a good question. The short answer is I don't know. Maybe the most likely is that we will limp along until we reach an extreme resource crisis (Americans do not live off the land). We will see more division and corruption and the government will become more involved in distributing racial spoils. Some whites will develop ethnic identities but not that many. As Mexicans become a larger demographic they will step on blacks and maybe there will be ethnic power-sharing with whites. Eventually Americans will just accept that the Southwest is Mexican (especially after amnesty happens and borders are opened further). "Living white" will become expensive as taxes/inflation increase and as the burden of supporting Mexicans is felt by the smaller productive population.

If there is a backlash it will be against white liberals/political correctness. Once whites are a minority they will lose some of their inhibitions about voicing prejudice (particularly after they are subjected to blatant Mexican discrimination). Already liberalism is a minority religion for whites; McCain would have won easily with Reagan's electorate (and he was a terrible candidate whom no one liked). In effect it will be safer and safer to assume the white person you just met is not liberal. It's already pretty safe to assume that a white person you meet over the age of 35 has a considerably more jaundiced view of race than he used to.

This does not mean whites will become more conservative. Certainly not socially. They'll just be more aware that other people want what they have and have the numbers to extract it via taxation.

Once you have any kind of crisis or meltdown it gets dicey. People panic and do something as a collective and it's tough to predict what that will be. I guess all I'm doing here is extrapolating trends, with the caveat that history seldom works out that way. Unexpected things happen and what people thought was the future turns out quite differently. I can see a poorer, more fractious America hanging on for a long time, just much more irrelevant to the world than it used to be, and generally an unhappier place to live.

But happiness is relative. You are only really aware of the delta between what you used to have and what other people have now. And that changes throughout your life.

[stanley]

Thanks. Kind of like what I'm anticipating. Grim, but... who knows!

[PRCalDude]

PLEASUREMAN, 20 April 2010 - 04:47 PM:

stanley, 20 April 2010 - 07:07 PM:

PM, how do you think things are likely to turn out for American whites? You've indicated in other posts that you see some kind of backlash (by whites) ahead. I know this is like predicting earthquakes, but I'm interested to know what you think may be in store.

This is a good question. The short answer is I don't know. Maybe the most likely is that we will limp along until we reach an extreme resource crisis (Americans do not live off the land). We will see more division and corruption and the government will become more involved in distributing racial spoils. Some whites will develop ethnic identities but not that many. As Mexicans become a larger demographic they will step on blacks and maybe there will be ethnic power-sharing with whites. Eventually Americans will just accept that the Southwest is Mexican (especially after amnesty happens and borders are opened further). "Living white" will become expensive as taxes/inflation increase and as the burden of supporting Mexicans is felt by the smaller productive population.

If there is a backlash it will be against white liberals/political correctness. Once whites are a minority they will lose some of their inhibitions about voicing prejudice (particularly after they are subjected to blatant Mexican discrimination). Already liberalism is a minority religion for whites; McCain would have won easily with Reagan's electorate (and he was a terrible candidate whom no one liked). In effect it will be safer and safer to assume the white person you just met is not liberal. It's already pretty safe to assume that a white person you meet over the age of 35 has a considerably more jaundiced view of race than he used to.

This does not mean whites will become more conservative. Certainly not socially. They'll just be more aware that other people want what they have and have the numbers to extract it via taxation.

Once you have any kind of crisis or meltdown it gets dicey. People panic and do something as a collective and it's tough to predict what that will be. I guess all I'm doing here is extrapolating trends, with the caveat that history seldom works out that way. Unexpected things happen and what people thought was the future turns out quite differently. I can see a poorer, more fractious America hanging on for a long time, just much more irrelevant to the world than it used to be, and generally an unhappier place to live.

But happiness is relative. You are only really aware of the delta between what you used to have and what other people have now. And that changes throughout your life.

I think that if we want to look at what's in store for whites here, we should look at Mexico itself where there are actually many whites. Mexico is officially classified as a mestizo nation by the government but of course many whites live and socialize amongst only themselves there. My wife's friend is from Mexico City and all of her Mexican friends are "Mexico City" type Mexicans. My wife's friend has a cousin who looks like a red-headed iberian celt.

So down there, whites just seem to stick to themselves and try to adopt a low profile and hold onto their wealth, though there are plenty of poor whites there too. My wife's friend said that she knew a ton of people that were planning to leave Mexico if Lopez-Obrador were elected during the last election cycle. Lopez Obrador ran on a "New Deal" platform: he planned on confiscating wealth and re-distributing it. Many Mexicans were moving money out of the country before the election. He lost by a very narrow margin, though I've heard he's turned into something of a joke now (like John Kerry or manbearpig).

Mexico doesn't look like it's going to racially blend into a common race anytime soon, and it's already 500 years after Cortez landed. Many Mexicans don't speak spanish, rather they speak their indian dialect. Many Mexicans speak spanish, but very poorly. There is actually little national unity and most just try to keep ignore the federal government as much as possible.

In other words, it's essentially another large, diverse country full of many disinterested ethnic groups. The whites there act like the whites here (liberal, infertile). The mestizos/indians there, in many ways, act better there than here. There is no welfare there to support their 3.5 ignorant piglets (as PMAN put it). The birthrate in Mexico is actually lower than it is here.

I suspect, like PMAN says, that the sunbelt will become another de facto Mexico complete with all of its excitement. We've already seen the deterioration of infrastructure (roads, for instance) to Mexican levels in California. Tijuana actually looked better than the San Fernando valley when I was down there not too long ago. The area from Tijuana south to Rosarito and beyond is much more pleasant than driving down the 405 through Los(t) Angeles.

Whites who want their grandchildren to look like them may want to move to the northern latitudes of this country, where space is relatively abundant even if jobs are scarce.

[miles]

If (and when) Mexican women start working en masse here (once they speak English and type), we might see their birthrates go down, unless we incintivize them with lavish benefits. The black birthrate got below replacement here for a little while a few years back, and is only at replacement level now. The birthrate in Mexico is well below 3 children per female presently, and the life expectancy is above 70. I get the feeling many Mexicans simply are using the USA much like many white working men used to "use" Alaska Pipeline work, great pay (for them $7-an-hour is more like $20 an hour because of how cheap things are in Mexico) for a few years, and then a return back home.

In some ways, if held to the southwest, a couple of states becoming overwhelmingly hispanic and wanting to secede to join Mexico would be the best medication for northeastern liberalism when leftoids seen what their prescriptions yielded, breakup, and a smaller, weaker nation.


Steve Sailer has floated the idea that if Mexicans were counted as "white", they couldn't get special quotas and set-asides, and this might be the only long term strategy to get them to consider voting for the G.O.P. Frankly, in my opinion, blacks descended from slaves are the only group that racially should ever be considered for any kind of quota in this country, as everyone else is here by choice. If we expand minority-hiring laws to every little group, we simply will have a mess in 30 years time when companies will need all sorts of beancounters to make sure they are within the law with every batch of new hires. It will be ridiculous as we will have Arabs, East Asians, South Asians, Hispanics, Blacks, African-blacks, Native Americans, Pacific Islanders, and whites, plus all the females.



I think women working (and voting) is the ultimate nix on a nation's birthrates. Everywhere women begin to work en masse, the birthrate falls dramatically within a couple of generations. Once they get "career-minded" and can have pre-marital sex, they just dont get off the carousel in time to have that second or third kid. If you factor in the gays, fatties (there will be many hispanics who will become morbidly obese as they get addicted to the Standard American Diet of cheesburgers, fries, and colas), asexuals, people-who-don't-want-to-fool-with-kids, lifetime bachelors/bachelorettes by choice, and the physically infertile.......you just dont come up with replacement-amounts of births. Japan (1.3 children per female), South Korea (1.0 children per female), and Iran (1.7 children per female) are all countries with sub-replacement birthrates, but very little gender feminism. Iran is even a religous country. I imagine this will apply to Mexicans as well, unless we incintivize their births with free housing, medical care, and free food................which it looks like we unfortunately will. Ive read that Brazil's birthrate got all the way down to 1.88 children per female in the mid 2000's, and that shocked me.



BTW---Can you -believe-that one in eight Americans take some form of food subsidy? Hipsters on food stamps. I thought I'd never see anything like that.

[PLEASUREMAN]

great post...counting hispanics as white would be a great idea, but liberals would catch on to that right away...WE NEED TO TRACK DISCRIMINATION, BIGOT

[stanley]

PRCalDude, 20 April 2010 - 09:28 PM:

Whites who want their grandchildren to look like them may want to move to the northern latitudes of this country, where space is relatively abundant even if jobs are scarce.

Funny you put it that way. As of now, my basically-WASP parents' four grandchildren only look about half like them. My sibling has been married twice, both times to Hispanics, and has four kids. Who knows how the kids will turn out, but you should see both sets of in-laws. Couldn't be more cartoonish. The first are hardcore MALDEF/La Raza types, with the father-in-law being an activist lawyer whose clients are almost all gangbangers and/or Mexican illegals. In the second set, both are from Central America. The mother is basically a welfare case supported in part by the state and part by my sibling, and the father fled the U.S. several years ago to escape prosecution for some felony he committed, but somehow made it back last year and is now living here on the lam - in a house owned by my parents. It's insane.

[PRCalDude]

Well, that's another data point on the intrigue and excitement that will be/is Aztlan.

All Mexicans have going for them is their racial solidarity, at the end of the day. And it ain't doing too much for them.

[TASTE ASSAULT]

so is Aztlan totally unavoidable now?

Any chance people are going to wake up and demand an operation wetback II?

this is depressing I'd rather America go out in a blaze of glory and get nuked to shit rather that have to sit back and watch this not with a bang but a whimper bullshit

[King of Niger]

America, and the west dies with a quiet sigh

[PLEASUREMAN]

America will go out with a bunch of shitty mariachi music playing at full volume and some fat mexican bitch yelling WHY DINCHU STOP after running a red light and hitting three other vehicles

[Major Hoople]

[Mercutio]

Major Hoople, 22 April 2010 - 11:02 PM:

Save us Teddy!