What is it to be against racism? It’s an easy thing to support, if you have any empathy – these people are just like us; and it’s true, as far as it goes: we are all human. But is there more? Have we forgotten something? Do our families matter? And how many levels of human relation beyond our family matter to our identities, and our histories, and therefore, our futures? Do these anti-racists also think we can choose even our families? This is the key point.
Though I loathe to mention it, I feel like compelled to bring it up: I am mixed race (white, on the one hand, and ‘disadvantaged’ other on the other). This should, I hope, dispel any notions that I would somehow benefit from a white-positive identity politics, as mixed race people are rarely given any from either side. Therefore this attack on anti-racism does not advantage me in any way – in fact, a ‘multicultural’ society would probably put me ahead, or give me advantage due to perceived or actual disadvantage due to my heritage. But nonetheless, I can’t escape my self-destructive compulsion towards reality – and it is a compulsion, passed down by my family, many of whom share the same anti-social need to be honest, even, or especially, when the whitest of lies would favor them.
So what do the anti-racists say? Of course they all know race exists, don’t be stupid! They only say that it doesn’t matter. Why? Press them harder. Perhaps they’ll say: ‘It doesn’t matter on an individual basis’. There it is! Individuals are different? No, surely not. We are different, but noticeably similar to, for example, our parents or their siblings. Let’s clarify it. Individuals can be different. Someone in my family can be unlike most of my family. That’s more like it. Hold on, keep reading: don’t worry, even I’m experiencing that sinking feeling pressing me to disagree even with myself and the point I seem to be making, but let’s press on, for the sake of argument, at least.
I guess I’m talking about outliers right? The idea that race doesn’t matter, only talent, and even if there are certain racial tendencies, it doesn’t help anything to assume race exists. But this all comes back to individualism. We only care about the individual. Liberal and libertarians celebrate this as an ideal quality of any modern society. It sounds good, doesn’t it? But there are so many individuals. Who or what is even capable of caring for all of us on an individual level? God? Is the humanity, then, God? But let’s not go there. Instead, let’s ask ourselves an almost progressive (in the American political sense) question: outliers towards what? Towards white western culture of course. Maybe the progressives have a point. White culture and ‘whiteness’, by favoring the outliers that are most suited to the systems of western society, are effectively erasing the distinctiveness of other races.
So who are the real racists? (I had to say it, I apologize)
But maybe all (or most) sides can see some common ground here. I remember when Richard Spencer in a street interview with an ‘African American’ suggested that slavery had been a good thing for blacks in the long run because it allowed them to participate in western society (though not if he had his way, of course). He makes a compelling, if disturbing, point – as do other ‘racist’ commentators who encountered Africa, when they noted that, while the west became The West, with all the legacy of Rome and Athens, Africa was still Africa. Was it, as some genuinely argued, the climate? Was it geography? And when the West came for the New World, the natives were clearly underdeveloped, even if they may have been happier overall. What happened? Do such things really have such a profound impact on potential? But I digress
So, who are the real racists? The white supremacists are, of course. Don’t think I disagree.Even the personable ones seem to fantasize about an ethnostate that could never exist practically, not without excessive force or genocide. And yet, the anti-racists are also racists. This is my point. The anti-racists want to erase the distinctions between people of all races. They want to tell you that your race is meaningless – as meaningless, perhaps, as your family. Both genocidal racial supremacists and anti-racists are trying to realize that racist joke I saw, somewhere: “You can’t be racist if there are no other races.”
Lets change the subject. How do the anti-racists want us to divide ourselves? What does it mean when we say we choose our family? By what focus does it attempt to erase all racial and also familial difference? Ideologically, for one. If some man isn’t a diehard feminist, you western women, you must not mate with him. More generally, we’re induced to find someone who agrees with us in all the important things, someone who ‘shares our beliefs’, because, we seem to imply, we can never love someone who disagrees with us. How disturbing is that? Christ can’t be happy with us on that one. Another division point is intelligence and knowledge. This happens through education, mostly, and other status signals like modern art, but this is conveyed through the idea that we should find someone we can talk with: this implies not only someone who is as intelligent as us, but also someone who is not more intelligent that us. How disturbing! This applies to friendships as well, of course. We can’t be friends with someone who disagrees, and we can’t talk with friends who are more/less intelligent/knowledgeable. What kind of races are we trying to breed?
Oh no, I finally said it.
But isn’t it true? Of course there are exceptions, talk to me about exceptions, please. But isn’t it true? We are breeding by temperament and by IQ, irrespective of race. This is unrelated to ideology – every anti-racist is trying to end racism by erasing races – but these new ‘races’ are developing by ‘free choice’ (the free market is brutally efficient), and will, most likely, emerge without strong differences in skin color. Why now? And how? Here our old friend feminism rears her ugly head. Under the so-called patriarchy, women weren’t allowed to compete as such, nor was anyone allowed to choose for themselves. They married a man within their class who might be smart, might be an idiot, might be ideological identical, might not, he just had to be a man with a social group which had low social mobility. Therefore, you likely had smart men with dumb wives, and smart women ‘suffering’ a dumb husband (and who cared what the wife’s politics were?): it’s intellectual/biological/etc redistribution, allowing for a people to not be divided by brains or talent or even temperamental leanings. Women’s equality surely has ruined the West – it’s a tragedy, and it’s a tragedy that it’s a tragedy. We are all free to choose, and that freedom seems to be leading to ‘choosing’ a member of our new race, one that might have nothing to do with our old race. Is it more disturbing, do you think, to care about skin color, than to hate someone who is politically different, or intellectually inferior?
I would personally love it if we could avoid both.
To end things, lets assume for a moment one white supremacists meme is absolutely true: that white people are fundamentally of higher IQ than other races. Do you see where I’m going with this? What might have happened in Africa, under this theory – might it have been something other than the conditions in Europe that causes this change? Might there have been some intellectual and status elite in Africa who only bred with one another, and later left their brothers and sisters behind? Regardless of what actually happened in the past, I honestly worry about the future. Why do we need to breed with and befriend only our ideological and intellectual kin groups? Would individuals ever freely choose otherwise? Will the new races be more dangerous because their differences are so economically significant? Is the push to get us to ignore race in our day to day lives an intentional effort to get us to ignore the reality of race, so we don’t see what’s happening? Or am I exaggerating, fantasizing, myself? Who knows. In the end, however, I think it’s important to understand that family is a reality, and that any effort to form a new family should be seen as what it really is: a new family.