Friday, October 21, 2011

A Mad Weir of Tigerish Waters

And if the world were black or white entirely
        And all the charts were plain
Instead of a mad weir of tigerish waters,
        A prism of delight and pain,
We might be surer where we wished to go
        Or again we might be merely
Bored but in the brute reality there is no
        Road that is right entirely.

— Louis MacNeice, from “Entirely”

This morning we received an email from a relatively new reader who lives in Florida. He proposed a topic he would like to see addressed at Gates of Vienna:

The world is a busy place right now. I won’t blame you for not addressing this topic right away. Your articles on history have been very well done and interesting. As I’ve said in a comment I am not a good student of history like some of my fellows so those entries about Germanic, Scandinavian, and Norman peoples are good.

Primarily my praise is for the fact that you do not pretend to cover up the sins of America’s ancestors as many enemies in our world would love to accuse you of. But I wonder if you could spend some time discussing, for the benefit of any open-minded accusers out there, the difference between the views of the alert, EDL class, of groups out there and racism.

I know there is a difference and it is primarily to do with migration, adsorption, absorption, getting along in freedom. In other words why, Gates of Vienna, are you not an Aryan nationalist bigoted collection of white guys?

As I wrote out my reply to him, it kept getting longer and more involved. The essay below is a lightly-edited adaptation of it.

That’s a good question. My wife will probably answer it differently, since she and I come at the issue from different angles.

To me, race is not the important issue; immigration is. If we (the USA) or Australia or European countries stopped all immigration, or at least slowed it down to a trickle, in two or three generations race would no longer be an issue. This would especially be the case in countries that have not experienced a lot of mass immigration up until now. France is an exception — it has an Algerian population of long standing, going back more than a hundred years, so its problems will remain.

In addition to limiting immigration, two other policies would be necessary:

1. Deport all criminal immigrants, revoking the citizenship of serious criminals if they are naturalized citizens; and
2. Insist on assimilation.

These steps would keep race from being an issue in most countries. Unfortunately, no Western country is doing these things — Denmark comes the closest — so we are headed for catastrophe, probably within the next twenty years or so.

The United States is also a special case. Black people were brought here against their will beginning four hundred years ago. In my area (Central Virginia), the ancestors of many of the black people arrived on this continent before the ancestors of the most of the white people who live here now. Thus they have at least as good a claim to the territory as the whites. There can be no moral justification for solving the “race problem” here through forced relocation — we are going to have to muddle through with what we have now.

In my local area, which is rural, the blacks and the whites are split about 50-50, and the populations are mixed fairly evenly. Yes, there are clumps of each race, but those are small and interspersed among each other. There is also a lot of interbreeding within the lower class.

This means that radical ideas about racial separation — e.g. David Duke on the white side, Louis Farrakhan on the black — cannot be implemented in Central Virginia without massive, apocalyptic violence. People who have lived here for centuries and do not feel like moving will not easily be uprooted to satisfy the schemes of power-mad people in Chicago or New Orleans. If such a “solution” were attempted, the fabric of our society would be utterly destroyed.

Therefore I don’t view “white nationalism” as a solution to our problems, at least not in my little corner of the world. The situation I was born into will not be improved by such ideology; it will be made horribly worse. We will simply have to attempt to continue as we are, somehow, despite the fact that many blacks don’t like whites all that much, and vice versa.

But the mutual antipathy is not universal, not one hundred percent. My neighborhood is mostly black; I know a lot of black people. Some of them don’t like white people, and it shows. But most are normal, decent people, and some have been crucial friends to me.

There are many families here, black and white, that go back 100, 200, or 300 years. Some of those families have had relationships with one another since one of them owned the other as property. They know each other intimately. They are on good terms or bad terms, but are not strangers to one another.

This is a complex situation, just as conflicted relationships within families are complex. Race “problems” in such a milieu cannot easily be solved, and certainly not through ideological theories crafted by race-demagogues hundreds or thousands of miles away.

There are differences between blacks and whites. There is ill feeling. There are long-standing grievances. Yet these are my people; I was born among them. I will stand by them.

I don’t share the concern of the modern white nationalists with human biodiversity, but I have no quarrel with their work. They refer to themselves as “race realists”. My description above is also “race realism”. Those are the races. What I described is the real situation between them. Realistically, there is no “solution” to racial problems in my home country. We will simply have to get by, somehow, just as families do.

This is why I am not an Aryan nationalist.


Gregory said...

I am not an Aryan either. But I still hate islam and its head-cutters. And, I do pray for the members of the EDL and I hope that they grow to a majority in that island. They I hope they can get rid of all of those suicidal politicians and get real, understanding, and country preserving individuals in leadership. Could be a sort of civil war involved, but, oh well. What has to be done, has to be done.

jeppo said...

A lot of people online waste an awful lot of bandwidth fantasizing about a 100% Aryan ethnostate, the future Whitemanistan of their dreams. But back here in the real world, the egg that is Central Virginia, or the United States as a whole, cannot realistically be unscrambled. So the Baron is right, we might as well focus on something actually achievable, like ending mass immigration once and for all.

The percentage of white people needed in a nation to preserve Western cultural norms and First World living standards isn't 100%, but it must be at least 50% + 1, in a democracy anyway. That's the difference between white-majority settler societies like the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and (arguably) Argentina and Uruguay on one hand, and post-Western, formerly white-controlled but now non-white-majority nations like Mexico, Colombia, Venezuela, Brazil, South Africa and Zimbabwe on the other.

But now that non-white births outnumber white ones in the US, the future America will probably share more similarities with Brazil and South Africa than it will continue to resemble Canada and Australia, even if immigration is stopped tomorrow. The other white settler societies and Russia might survive as white-majority nations, though this is doubtful, but the US won't, no doubt about it. All that can be done is to try to mitigate the damage that the coming non-white majority will surely bring.

So we have to start planning for a post-American West. Only in Europe can what we call Western Civilization survive in the long run, because only Europe will likely remain a white-majority continent through the end of this century and beyond, though some of its constituent parts might not (France, Britain, Holland, Belgium, Sweden). The white Western world is retreating to its pre-1492 European homeland, and the sooner we accept this unfortunate reality, the better we can devise strategies to protect our collective interests going forward.

Basically, the political and economic centres of gravity in the West have to shift from the New World back to the Old. The white-majority EU must supplant the coming non-white-majority US as the new superpower of the West, with Brussels replacing Washington DC as its political capital. London and/or Frankfurt should replace New York as the economic/financial hub, and the euro should replace the US dollar as the world's primary reserve currency. The big military decisions should be made at NATO HQ in Belgium (in an enlarged NATO that includes Russia to balance the power of the US) rather than the Pentagon alone, while the ESA should replace a bankrupt NASA as the world's premier space agency.

We, the white Christian Westerners, no matter where we live, need a superpower to defend our civilizational interests in a world that contains increasingly powerful billion-people-plus behemoths like China, India and the OIC. The US, with its coming non-white majority, will no longer be considered a Western nation (non-white = non-Western) just three decades from now. Russia's population is shrinking rapidly, while the percentage of the remainder that is non-European (especially Muslim) grows even faster, and it can no longer be considered a superpower.

A united Europe will be the only possible Western superpower left standing by the latter half of this century, and then only if it manages to stop mass immigration. And remain united of course. Even with its myriad of faults, the EU is all we've got left at this point, so we should try to make it work in our interests: conservative, anti-Islamist, pro-white, pro-Christian, pro-Western, etc. If the EU goes down, then so do the last remnants of our once great and powerful civilization.

Sagunto said...

Quote of the day for me:

"To me, race is not the important issue; immigration is. If we (the USA) or Australia or European countries stopped all immigration, or at least slowed it down to a trickle, in two or three generations race would no longer be an issue."

This is so true. A nugget to go with my morning coffee. Thank you Baron.

As always, kind regs from Amsterdam,

Sagunto said...

Jeppo -

I agree with many of the points you make (though I'd lay emphasis on tradition and the natural rights of Western "aboriginals", not on "whiteness", which is already implicated as a feature of traditional European communities).

I'm afraid though, that I don't share your (albeit conditional) view of the EU as a superpower and in that capacity a possible defender of Western values (assumed that freedom, right of property and justice are still considered foundational Western values).

First of all, I don't believe we, the people, need "superpowers", i.e. big government superstates, to manage our natural rights, in fact, quite the contrary. The power of the political establishment statists has only become "super" by way of the illegitimate expropriation of our wealth (through taxes and monetary inflation).

Secondly, my claim would be that the EU (a bureaucratic institution that - in a free world - shouldn't even exist in the first place) with its emphasis on forced mass immigration, "civil rights", and near totalitarian ambitions to rule the lives of all of us, is just the transatlantic image of the US (not America). Not an exact mirror-image of course: the US is still a superpower where the near religious state-sponsored promotion of "diversity" and "multiculturalism" is concerned, where the EUSSR superstate is big on regulatory, bureaucratic ehm.. "finesse", getting bigger by the minute..

Apart from these concerns, the one thing that i.m.o. needs to be abolished before all other things for freedom as a Western value to survive, is central banking and central economic planning (currently dominant in both the US and the EU).

Kind regs from Amsterdam,

Anonymous said...

Baron, your post is testimony to the fact that race, as well as immigration, is a big issue (let's not try to pinpoint "the" issue ; there's no such thing ; there are issues aplenty).

The question of whether it is realistically possible to separate races in a given country, or whether such and such race is legitimate in such and such place, is another question altogether.

Too many arguments between right-wingers and left-wingers go like this :

Left-winger : there's no such thing as race among humans... race is not an issue... it's poverty's fault... you're a racist and you stink, etc, etc.

Right-winger : [blah blah blah... the usual reasonable stuff].

Left-winger : [blah blah blah... the usual silly stuff].

Right-winger : [more reasonable points].

Left-winger : OKAY, what do you suggest we do, then, exactly ? How do you plan to ship THEM back ?

At which point, I usually say : hey, hold it for a minute ! Did you just admit that not only races exist, but that race is indeed a problem, and that the only reason why you refuse to discuss it, and you smear your opponents with the "racist" label, is that you think there's no solution to the problem ?

I'd like to hear you admit that race is indeed a problem, Mr. Left-winger ! Then, we can start discussing solutions, and possibly -- just possibly -- admit to the lack of them.

But in the process, you'd have taken back your smears about "racism", and apologise for them.

Incidentally, I believe that in many cases, there are indeed solutions, including voluntary or forced repatriation (the black problem in America seems more intractable).

It has occurred in the past (including in America).

Even nowadays in the United States, separation and relocation are occurring. It's called white flight (and black flight, because non-ghetto blacks also tend to flee black neighbourhoods... much to the dismay of the target white population, which has to move again to some other place after a while).

Baron Bodissey said...

Robert —

“Even nowadays in the United States, separation and relocation are occurring.”

You are not an American, so your evaluation of what is happening is partial at best. And many Americans who have never lived in the rural South share your misconceptions. They simply don’t know what they’re talking about.

What you refer to is indeed occurring, but primarily in the urban areas. The rural areas — especially here where I live — are becoming even more mixed, at least at the lowest socioeconomic levels. Separation is just not happening.

The urban areas obviously account for a much larger population, but — and this is important — the rural areas make up by far the greater geographical space.

Thus, the mixture of races is not only a “problem”, it is a deeply-established fact, one that will not be changed by wishing things were different, or by legislating, or by implementing policy proposals.

As I said in my post, only a society-destroying catastrophe of unimaginable proportions could separate the races in the rural South. Since I prefer that a cataclysm not occur here in my homeland, I will look for ways in which we can continue as we are, despite the problems between the races, for at least the next few generations.

spaceis411 said...

wow - i've never taken issue with you before but now i have to. race-separation? seriously?
first off, europe is dying and has the letters DNR stamped all over it. it really won't be getting better. the populations loss in eurasia is essentially irreversible.
as for the US, our only hope is an INCREASE in immigration. yep - an increase. open the borders. with a few conditions:

no language but english allowed - sorry, language is culture.
possibly keeping people out of urban areas for a decade or so - this country was built from small towns and currently they're going wanting.
criminal activity should always be punished with deportation - play nice or go home.

nations are organisms - they're either growing or dying. and don't even think about mentioning overpopulation - seriously, have you been to wyoming or north dakota?

for months i've been following this site - clear thinking from rational people. fanaticism - bad preservation of western ideals - good. but this type of puerile racism just makes me wonder.

Baron Bodissey said...

spaceis411 --

I can't help but feel that you are engaging in "opposite reading" here.

My precise point is that race-mixing is not reversible in my part of the country, regardless of what anyone may feel about it. That is, exactly the opposite of what you seem to have read into it.

There are problems between the races, but we will have to learn to live with them somehow. If saying that makes me a "racist", so be it.

By the way -- calling your interlocutor's position "puerile racism" guarantees that your arguments will not be taken seriously.