The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Robert Weissberg Archive
The Antidote for Toxic Blackness Is Toxic Whiteness
Some Advice to Starbucks
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
shutterstock_212595580

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The recent incident at a Philadelphia Starbucks in which the police were called to forcibly remove two loitering black men has again brought to the surface the dilemmas faced by businesses when dealing with the underclass, particularly black males. .

On the one hand, failing to keep out this troubled “clientele” can instantly destroy any restaurant, retail store, public library or even a bus terminal. Women in particularly rationally avoid places filled with those of poor hygiene and a reputation for hair-trigger personal aggression. The Philadelphia Starbucks manager undeniably knew the consequence if local blacks converted it to hangout to keep warm (or cool) while safely transacting illicit business. A tip-point would eventually be reached when even those lost in their iPads would depart rather than work in a de facto homeless shelter. Headquarters would shut the store down and everybody would be unemployed.

On the other hand, as Starbucks unfortunately discovered, kicking the bums out risks accusations of racism and dreadful boycott-inviting publicity, not to mention paying off hustlers to exorcise the racist demons. Starbucks is hardly alone in its vulnerability. A Toronto Chinese restaurant that asked blacks, and only blacks, to pay in advance was fined $10,000 though this policy undoubtedly reflected experience with eat-and-run customers.

Similarly threatened businesses have long devised clever counter-measures. A recent story tells of how a California 7-Even discouraged loiters and panhandlers by playing classical music. The franchise owner, Sukhi Sandhu, even reported how his paying customers now felt safer when surrounded by classical music, including hearing it outside the store. To be sure, it is unlikely than any of these newly comforted customers can distinguish Handel from Bach, but at some visceral level they grasp that the riff-raff loath these sounds and instead prefer local “Smoke and Coke” convenience stores featuring Drake or Lil Pump.

Let’s return to Starbucks. Unfortunately, a restaurant’s first line of defense against such an invasion—its menu—is useless here. No tinkering or raising prices will deter those disinterested in buying anything. The opposite may be true—higher prices to discourage down-market customers only creates more vacant seats available for loiterers. And forget about posting “customer only” for restrooms—as we know, it’s an invitation to trouble. And while playing Bach might help, it is just a first step.

ORDER IT NOW

How, then, can Starbucks survive? The answer is known to everybody familiar with today’s campus craziness: toxic, suffocating whiteness. In other words, make Starbucks the epitome of white Western Civilization, a much cheaper strategy than endless anti-bias braining and one easily defended legally. Just decorate Starbucks as if it were a Waspy library as one might find at an Ivy League university or an exclusive club, for example, New York City’s august University Club. Dark wooden shelves filled with well-worn classics, from Plato and Shakespeare to James Joyce. To satisfy those demanding diversity and inclusion, a few works by Zora Neale Hurston, James Baldwin and for the feminists, books by Virginia Woolf or Hannah Arendt will serve. No doubt, Starbucks can buy these shopworn classics by the ton and management will hardly care if they are stolen.

Add a small library table with an old-fashioned monster unabridged dictionaries and nearby would be an antique-looking, heavy-on-the-Latin place name globe on its own mahogany pedestal. Scattered about would be alabaster marble-like busts of Homer, Horace, Milton and the like and reproductions of 18th century English landscapes. And why not add a few well-known European newspapers such as the Frankfurter Allgemeine to further enhance the “intellectual” atmosphere. The check-out registers would offer a few elegant but affordable classics from the high-brow Penguin Hardcover series. Add a conspicuous community bulletin board announcing future poetry readings or openings in an all-vegan, multicultural daycare program for toddlers.

Now, for the coup de grâce: science. No Starbucks will lack handsome portraits of Archimedes, Galileo, Newton, Einstein or that Teuton from Central Casting, Max Planck. A few lithographs of vintage scientific instruments or famous equations will complete the message—Attention: you have entered the Western Civilization Zone and, in case you failed to notice, these all-stars are all European White Males. And to drive the point home, multiple clocks showing precise times will be everywhere while baristas might inform customers that their latte will be ready in seven minutes and fourteen seconds and apologize if its six seconds late. What could be more “white” than a fetish over punctuality?

These are only possibilities and the local terrain will suggest modification. In some venues only baroque music alone might do the trick; elsewhere menus might have to be partially in French or baristas would dress in “professorial” tweed jackets and colorful bow-ties.

Conceivably, businesses specializing in “toxic whiteness” would be hired to manage unwelcome clienteles. It is hardly rocket science. After all, if Ralph Lauren (originally a Bronx boy born Ralph Lipshitz whose father was a housepainter) can successfully mimic the English aristocracy, anybody can do it. Whites have overcome far greater obstacles.

Put it this way—blacks are absolutely right when the complain that they often feel excluded by whiteness. But, the opposite is equally true—whites feel excluded by blackness. Each to their own.

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Blacks, Political Correctness 
Hide 70 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. utu says:

    Anecdote=Antidote?

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    If I was the writer, I would be pretty embarrassed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Anon[140] • Disclaimer says:

    it is unlikely than any of these newly comforted customers can distinguish Handel from Bach

    Nice stroke of (clear, and also subtle on another level) humor there : )

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. Alma says:

    Dear Mr. Weissberg, I don’t know whether you are a white male or not, but I would hire a savvy black female proofreader if I were you because your misspellings and misuse of words (I think I found a few grammatical errors as well) do not speak well for your level of intelligence. As for the overall idea that whites are more intelligent than blacks and hispanics, it may well be true, but so what? The history of the US and probably other nations is filled with smart guys who are lousy leaders, immoral leaders, evil leaders, leaders without any foresight whatsoever. Give me a true leader with humility and a mediocre mind any day to run my country instead of a whiz kid who knows how smart he is and cares for no one but himself and his crowd. And get yourself some education. Who says test scores mean anything to anyone except the people who are high-scorers? (BTW I am a high-scorer, female unfortunately, and think test scores mean little.) I’m willing to bet you’re not a human at all and that this article was written by AI. Am I right?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    As for the overall idea that whites are more intelligent than blacks and hispanics, it may well be true, but so what?
     
    That's a fair point and one that reasonable people can honestly disagree about.

    What really matters, as I'm sure you will agree, is the fact that, as Ron Unz has clearly shown, black males are many times more likely than whites to perpetrate street crime, and especially violent crime. As a result it is entirely rational (as the well known race-baiter Jesse Jackson famously pointed out) to be more cautious around blacks, and therefore not to want them hanging around your commercial or other premises.

    I’m willing to bet you’re not a human at all and that this article was written by AI. Am I right?
     
    LOL! You don't like his opinion so it must have been written by an AI?
    , @anonymous
    Look back over the past six months, and you'll see others that are even more poorly edited. (He's also a witless and predictable humorist, piling on silly stuff until he hits a word count.)

    No matter what Mr. Weissberg purports to write about, his purpose is nearly always to denigrate black people.

    Why is Mr. Weissberg so obsessed with black people?
    , @Adolf Verloc
    "Who says test scores mean anything to anyone except people who are high scorers?" Uh, practically everyone who has seriously studied the issue.

    There are amoral high-IQ people, but the vast bulk of amoral, criminally-inclined people come from the population of dimwits you coo over. Almost every valuable human characteristic correlates positively with intelligence.

    It has not gone unnoticed that you boast of your high test scores before veering quickly away. Lol! Hypocrite!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. unit472 says:

    I am reminded of a long ago instance where a Denny’s restaurant in, I believe, San Jose, Ca. was accused of staging ‘black outs’ when it saw negroes arriving late at night. It would shut off its lights and pretend to be closed. The why of this is not hard to understand as negroes loiter at tables, are poor tippers, are loud and make other customers uncomfortable. They also rob cashiers and can become violent if their meager orders are not prepared and served to their satisfaction. They just aren’t worth the trouble.

    Unfortunately, as the author indicates, not a lot can be done to deny negroes service except to make the atmosphere as undesirable to the negro as possible but even that is now fraught with risk. Philadelphia wants to prohibit bullet resistant barriers between clerks and customers as being racist degrading affronts to negro dignity and who wants to have a cup of coffee and muffin in a shop that has an armed security guard?

    I often laugh when, after a so called, racist incident is alleged, blacks call for a boycott of the airline, restaurant, amusement park etc. Are they really so dim witted as to realize that if they did ‘boycott’ the business everyone else would be overjoyed? I’ve never gone to a Starbucks but if it became known as place negroes never went to I might just overcome my aversion to this companies leftist tilt and buy coffee there.

    Read More
    • Replies: @joef

    Philadelphia wants to prohibit bullet resistant barriers between clerks and customers as being racist degrading affronts to negro dignity
     
    Go to the Bronx, and you will mostly see the same thing (but not as severe as the bad old days). If they take these barriers away, and the merchants are successfully robbed a few times, they will no longer be able to financially sustain their business. As a result these merchants will be forced to close shop. Then the racial hustlers will complain that their afro neighborhoods are turning into "food deserts" (like Camden NJ, another urban "garden" spot of America, across the river from Philly).

    When will Starbucks (and others like them) understand that pandering to afro resentments, and race baiting extortions, does not appease them. They will only continuously demand more. We collectively just keep kicking the can down the road with oblivion, and eventually it will be kicked off the cliff. I guess cupcake dwellers will always naively believe that unearned praise & pandering will produce fruitful results.

    This was never demonstrated to be true for the last half century. For the rest of us urban dwellers who lived with this rotten mess, we know it cannot continue forever in its present form; and the cupcake dwellers will eventually pay dearly for their gross errors of naiveté. Most of us don't want this disastrous outcome, but it is what it is.

    , @Robert Weissberg
    Years back the NAACP call for blacks to boycott South Carolina over the Confederate battle flag. At least a few whites were thrilled and no doubt make travel plans to visit the state.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Randal says:
    @Alma
    Dear Mr. Weissberg, I don't know whether you are a white male or not, but I would hire a savvy black female proofreader if I were you because your misspellings and misuse of words (I think I found a few grammatical errors as well) do not speak well for your level of intelligence. As for the overall idea that whites are more intelligent than blacks and hispanics, it may well be true, but so what? The history of the US and probably other nations is filled with smart guys who are lousy leaders, immoral leaders, evil leaders, leaders without any foresight whatsoever. Give me a true leader with humility and a mediocre mind any day to run my country instead of a whiz kid who knows how smart he is and cares for no one but himself and his crowd. And get yourself some education. Who says test scores mean anything to anyone except the people who are high-scorers? (BTW I am a high-scorer, female unfortunately, and think test scores mean little.) I'm willing to bet you're not a human at all and that this article was written by AI. Am I right?

    As for the overall idea that whites are more intelligent than blacks and hispanics, it may well be true, but so what?

    That’s a fair point and one that reasonable people can honestly disagree about.

    What really matters, as I’m sure you will agree, is the fact that, as Ron Unz has clearly shown, black males are many times more likely than whites to perpetrate street crime, and especially violent crime. As a result it is entirely rational (as the well known race-baiter Jesse Jackson famously pointed out) to be more cautious around blacks, and therefore not to want them hanging around your commercial or other premises.

    I’m willing to bet you’re not a human at all and that this article was written by AI. Am I right?

    LOL! You don’t like his opinion so it must have been written by an AI?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. Randal says:

    This is entertaining, but what would be really nice is if, just once, a major business or public figure would stand its or his or her ground and refuse to apologise or compromise in any way when confronted with this kind of offence-mongering shakedown attempt, and get away with it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Them Guys
    Yes agree and as another suggestion when and if such methods in article fail to work.

    Just call, 1-800-Rent A Biker....Guarenteed and easy to locate 1/2 dozen hard core bad ass biker guys willing to suplement income willing to hang out inside or outside store or both for cheep! Say like $10 per hr cash money, and a free hand when necessary to defend selves and store patrons from an savage acts by brutal savages and undesirables.

    99.99% of time no such defense actions will take place...Just the fact of being there will defintly cause inner city ghetto types to pass store by.

    And now that for past two decades, and due to unknown reasons???, unlike back in 1960-70's eras, todays bikers are well liked and appreciated by most non-colored folks.

    Used to be signs at almost every type store-bars-resturants, that stated "NO Motorcycles Allowed on Premises" and "NO Black Leather motorcycle Attire inside".

    Back then zero such boycots and payment demands occured....Everyone basically understood a private buis has a right to who is allowed in etc.

    Meanwhile it seems all a sudden around 20 some odd yrs ago or so, so many non biker type people and most buisness' alike began to Like and welcome bikers in!

    Its some form of a wired phenomonon this occured...But ever since then a majority of folks in usa like bikes and bikers so much, many even hold deep inner secret desires to Be a biker!

    Even 85 yr old ladies out for a hair perm or whatever, stop off at seeing bikes parked to make nice sincere comments on how swell the bikes look or how cool pint jobs are on custom jobs.

    I mention all that as proof that Now today there has never before been a better time to hire such guys to act as deterents to unwanted riff raff that refuse all other forms or methods.

    Best of all the very meere presence of a few bad ass biker types is more than enough to get job done, and done via no need for phys actions nor even verbal warnings issued by them guys.

    Consider....Who else can have just Two guys on harleys, ride thru worst ghettos of Detroit at 2 to 3:00 A.M when headed back home and need take short route to save time and get out of cold nite temps and do so withOUT any worry of being two white guys cruising thru some of americas absolute worst ground zero ghetto inner city rats nest....And never get harmed nor threat's of such?

    It is The Perfect solution....Whites Love bikers and colored folks get very scared of and avoid em.
    , @Anon
    My thoughts exactly.
    I keep waiting...for someone, anyone, to grow the tiniest set of balls and simply say "no". When called racist, to simply say "Nope, now fck off". Or even "So what?"

    Similarly, that NY DA is getting hung up by the balls because his past hypergamic party girls have turned on him post-rejection and told the world the dirty rought sex they did was not consensual. When will a man in the PountMeToo era simply say, "No, it was consensual, and if you want, I can countersue for defamation". Ball-less white men, ball-less white men everywhere...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @Alma
    Dear Mr. Weissberg, I don't know whether you are a white male or not, but I would hire a savvy black female proofreader if I were you because your misspellings and misuse of words (I think I found a few grammatical errors as well) do not speak well for your level of intelligence. As for the overall idea that whites are more intelligent than blacks and hispanics, it may well be true, but so what? The history of the US and probably other nations is filled with smart guys who are lousy leaders, immoral leaders, evil leaders, leaders without any foresight whatsoever. Give me a true leader with humility and a mediocre mind any day to run my country instead of a whiz kid who knows how smart he is and cares for no one but himself and his crowd. And get yourself some education. Who says test scores mean anything to anyone except the people who are high-scorers? (BTW I am a high-scorer, female unfortunately, and think test scores mean little.) I'm willing to bet you're not a human at all and that this article was written by AI. Am I right?

    Look back over the past six months, and you’ll see others that are even more poorly edited. (He’s also a witless and predictable humorist, piling on silly stuff until he hits a word count.)

    No matter what Mr. Weissberg purports to write about, his purpose is nearly always to denigrate black people.

    Why is Mr. Weissberg so obsessed with black people?

    Read More
    • Agree: utu, Yan Shen
    • Replies: @Yan Shen

    Why is Mr. Weissberg so obsessed with black people?
     
    I've been wondering the same thing about that John Derbyshire fellow as well! And Jared Taylor. And basically any white nationalist type. These people sure do find blacks to be fascinating...
    , @utu

    He’s also a witless and predictable humorist
     
    True. C.J. Hopkins is the only writer here who can be fun to read. But he is a refugee from the Left so this may explain his good writing skills.

    Mr. Weissberg purports to write about, his purpose is nearly always to denigrate black people.
     
    Derbyshire has somewhat wider range and Sailer has significantly wider range but basically writing about blacks is what sustain them. However Sailer can write and often is funny.
    , @AaronB
    Focusing on blacks is easy, and a distraction from the real issues. It is also part of the general strategy of the elites to pit different sections of society against each other. That's also why they obsess over hispanics.

    That white nationalists leaders obsess over blacks and Hispanics shows that the alt-right hasnt been able to produce a high caliber leadership capable of long term thinking and clear seeing into the actual challenges facing this country, and instead are easy dupes of the elites.

    An intelligent strategy - and a morally worthy one - would be to form an alliance with all factions against our psychopathic elite - such an alliance may be temporary or long lasting, but it is certainly indicated by current circumstances.

    Moreover, white nationalists leaders being materialists, do not understand the moral level. They can't grasp that adopting an attitude of paternalism and support towards blacks is not only morally worthy, but is good strategy, and is perfectly consistent with continuing to point out the misbehavior of blacks and the negative aspects of black culture. Paternalism does not mean abandoning criticism - but criticism in an effort to support and uplift.

    Finally - and this would be the most astonishing thing to someone from the Victorian age - white cultural self-confidence has fallen so low that many today seem to feel genuinely competitive with blacks. To make themselves feel better, they need to put blacks down. 100 years ago, whites would have been so secure in their superiority that the idea of feeling competitive with blacks would be absurd.

    That so many white nationalists are willing to accept Jewish supetiority, but are harsh on blacks and Hispanics, shows not only or even primarily stupidity, but a collapse in self respect, motivation, and willpower. A real cultural collapse.

    The current generation of so called white nationalists seem hopeless - they are too close to, and too conditioned by, the culture of pessimism and defeat that created our current predicamemt, and have proven themselves unable to recover vitality, but rather to embody many of the attitudes that define our cultural collapse and perpetuate them and expand their reach.
    , @Truth
    He and Derb and Paul Kersey are enrolled in the same PhD in Blackpeopleology program. Weissberg is a legacy admit though.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. Years ago Chris Rock in his standup routine joked about how dumb blacks feel aversion to books:

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  9. “elicit” should be “illicit.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  10. Gordo says:

    I recollect this idea being put about a year or two ago on one of those Alt Right websites which are now being censored; AltRight dot com or Radix or Morgoth’s Review or some such.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  11. Svigor says:

    Good ideas, but simply playing Classical or Country music is much simpler and cheaper. Classical is my preference, but either will run off the diversity, sharpish.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Golobki
    They could start with Merle Haggard and "Okie from Muskogee"
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. @Alma
    Dear Mr. Weissberg, I don't know whether you are a white male or not, but I would hire a savvy black female proofreader if I were you because your misspellings and misuse of words (I think I found a few grammatical errors as well) do not speak well for your level of intelligence. As for the overall idea that whites are more intelligent than blacks and hispanics, it may well be true, but so what? The history of the US and probably other nations is filled with smart guys who are lousy leaders, immoral leaders, evil leaders, leaders without any foresight whatsoever. Give me a true leader with humility and a mediocre mind any day to run my country instead of a whiz kid who knows how smart he is and cares for no one but himself and his crowd. And get yourself some education. Who says test scores mean anything to anyone except the people who are high-scorers? (BTW I am a high-scorer, female unfortunately, and think test scores mean little.) I'm willing to bet you're not a human at all and that this article was written by AI. Am I right?

    “Who says test scores mean anything to anyone except people who are high scorers?” Uh, practically everyone who has seriously studied the issue.

    There are amoral high-IQ people, but the vast bulk of amoral, criminally-inclined people come from the population of dimwits you coo over. Almost every valuable human characteristic correlates positively with intelligence.

    It has not gone unnoticed that you boast of your high test scores before veering quickly away. Lol! Hypocrite!

    Read More
    • Agree: Mishra
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. Yan Shen says:
    @anonymous
    Look back over the past six months, and you'll see others that are even more poorly edited. (He's also a witless and predictable humorist, piling on silly stuff until he hits a word count.)

    No matter what Mr. Weissberg purports to write about, his purpose is nearly always to denigrate black people.

    Why is Mr. Weissberg so obsessed with black people?

    Why is Mr. Weissberg so obsessed with black people?

    I’ve been wondering the same thing about that John Derbyshire fellow as well! And Jared Taylor. And basically any white nationalist type. These people sure do find blacks to be fascinating…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alfa158
    I’m puzzled by that as well, but various obsessions like that seem astonishingly widespread. For example, many people around the Gulf Coast and in the Caribbean have this strange fascination with hurricanes. Neither I nor any of my neighbors here in Southern California ever give them more than a passing thought.
    Why do you think people are like that? Do you ever find people in China who are also obsessed with blacks and spend much of their time discussing their deleterious effect on Chinese culture? I’m just wondering how common this obsession is outside the US.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. utu says:
    @anonymous
    Look back over the past six months, and you'll see others that are even more poorly edited. (He's also a witless and predictable humorist, piling on silly stuff until he hits a word count.)

    No matter what Mr. Weissberg purports to write about, his purpose is nearly always to denigrate black people.

    Why is Mr. Weissberg so obsessed with black people?

    He’s also a witless and predictable humorist

    True. C.J. Hopkins is the only writer here who can be fun to read. But he is a refugee from the Left so this may explain his good writing skills.

    Mr. Weissberg purports to write about, his purpose is nearly always to denigrate black people.

    Derbyshire has somewhat wider range and Sailer has significantly wider range but basically writing about blacks is what sustain them. However Sailer can write and often is funny.

    Read More
    • Agree: Yan Shen
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. joef says:
    @unit472
    I am reminded of a long ago instance where a Denny's restaurant in, I believe, San Jose, Ca. was accused of staging 'black outs' when it saw negroes arriving late at night. It would shut off its lights and pretend to be closed. The why of this is not hard to understand as negroes loiter at tables, are poor tippers, are loud and make other customers uncomfortable. They also rob cashiers and can become violent if their meager orders are not prepared and served to their satisfaction. They just aren't worth the trouble.

    Unfortunately, as the author indicates, not a lot can be done to deny negroes service except to make the atmosphere as undesirable to the negro as possible but even that is now fraught with risk. Philadelphia wants to prohibit bullet resistant barriers between clerks and customers as being racist degrading affronts to negro dignity and who wants to have a cup of coffee and muffin in a shop that has an armed security guard?

    I often laugh when, after a so called, racist incident is alleged, blacks call for a boycott of the airline, restaurant, amusement park etc. Are they really so dim witted as to realize that if they did 'boycott' the business everyone else would be overjoyed? I've never gone to a Starbucks but if it became known as place negroes never went to I might just overcome my aversion to this companies leftist tilt and buy coffee there.

    Philadelphia wants to prohibit bullet resistant barriers between clerks and customers as being racist degrading affronts to negro dignity

    Go to the Bronx, and you will mostly see the same thing (but not as severe as the bad old days). If they take these barriers away, and the merchants are successfully robbed a few times, they will no longer be able to financially sustain their business. As a result these merchants will be forced to close shop. Then the racial hustlers will complain that their afro neighborhoods are turning into “food deserts” (like Camden NJ, another urban “garden” spot of America, across the river from Philly).

    When will Starbucks (and others like them) understand that pandering to afro resentments, and race baiting extortions, does not appease them. They will only continuously demand more. We collectively just keep kicking the can down the road with oblivion, and eventually it will be kicked off the cliff. I guess cupcake dwellers will always naively believe that unearned praise & pandering will produce fruitful results.

    This was never demonstrated to be true for the last half century. For the rest of us urban dwellers who lived with this rotten mess, we know it cannot continue forever in its present form; and the cupcake dwellers will eventually pay dearly for their gross errors of naiveté. Most of us don’t want this disastrous outcome, but it is what it is.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Them Guys says:
    @Randal
    This is entertaining, but what would be really nice is if, just once, a major business or public figure would stand its or his or her ground and refuse to apologise or compromise in any way when confronted with this kind of offence-mongering shakedown attempt, and get away with it.

    Yes agree and as another suggestion when and if such methods in article fail to work.

    Just call, 1-800-Rent A Biker….Guarenteed and easy to locate 1/2 dozen hard core bad ass biker guys willing to suplement income willing to hang out inside or outside store or both for cheep! Say like $10 per hr cash money, and a free hand when necessary to defend selves and store patrons from an savage acts by brutal savages and undesirables.

    99.99% of time no such defense actions will take place…Just the fact of being there will defintly cause inner city ghetto types to pass store by.

    And now that for past two decades, and due to unknown reasons???, unlike back in 1960-70′s eras, todays bikers are well liked and appreciated by most non-colored folks.

    Used to be signs at almost every type store-bars-resturants, that stated “NO Motorcycles Allowed on Premises” and “NO Black Leather motorcycle Attire inside”.

    Back then zero such boycots and payment demands occured….Everyone basically understood a private buis has a right to who is allowed in etc.

    Meanwhile it seems all a sudden around 20 some odd yrs ago or so, so many non biker type people and most buisness’ alike began to Like and welcome bikers in!

    Its some form of a wired phenomonon this occured…But ever since then a majority of folks in usa like bikes and bikers so much, many even hold deep inner secret desires to Be a biker!

    Even 85 yr old ladies out for a hair perm or whatever, stop off at seeing bikes parked to make nice sincere comments on how swell the bikes look or how cool pint jobs are on custom jobs.

    I mention all that as proof that Now today there has never before been a better time to hire such guys to act as deterents to unwanted riff raff that refuse all other forms or methods.

    Best of all the very meere presence of a few bad ass biker types is more than enough to get job done, and done via no need for phys actions nor even verbal warnings issued by them guys.

    Consider….Who else can have just Two guys on harleys, ride thru worst ghettos of Detroit at 2 to 3:00 A.M when headed back home and need take short route to save time and get out of cold nite temps and do so withOUT any worry of being two white guys cruising thru some of americas absolute worst ground zero ghetto inner city rats nest….And never get harmed nor threat’s of such?

    It is The Perfect solution….Whites Love bikers and colored folks get very scared of and avoid em.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth

    Just call, 1-800-Rent A Biker….Guarenteed and easy to locate 1/2 dozen hard core bad ass biker guys willing to suplement income willing to hang out inside or outside store or both for cheep!
     
    The sheer brilliance brought to you by the 150+ IQ crowd...
    , @Golobki
    They could start with Merle Haggard and "Okie from Muskogee"
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. anonymous[220] • Disclaimer says:
    @utu
    Anecdote=Antidote?

    If I was the writer, I would be pretty embarrassed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
    "If I [were] the writer", not "was". It's the hypothetical.

    You should be at least a little embarrassed.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. llloyd says: • Website

    In the European section in Beijing, there is the Book Worm Club. It fits exactly this parody image of Starbucks. The blacks, quite a number, hang around outside and consume drugs. They never go into Book Worm. Of course if one or two ever did, they would be treated close to Royalty after the initial shock. One point overlooked by Weissberg. To enter Book Worm, you have to climb a stair way. Also the name Book Worm is waspishly uncool.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  19. AaronB says:
    @anonymous
    Look back over the past six months, and you'll see others that are even more poorly edited. (He's also a witless and predictable humorist, piling on silly stuff until he hits a word count.)

    No matter what Mr. Weissberg purports to write about, his purpose is nearly always to denigrate black people.

    Why is Mr. Weissberg so obsessed with black people?

    Focusing on blacks is easy, and a distraction from the real issues. It is also part of the general strategy of the elites to pit different sections of society against each other. That’s also why they obsess over hispanics.

    That white nationalists leaders obsess over blacks and Hispanics shows that the alt-right hasnt been able to produce a high caliber leadership capable of long term thinking and clear seeing into the actual challenges facing this country, and instead are easy dupes of the elites.

    An intelligent strategy – and a morally worthy one – would be to form an alliance with all factions against our psychopathic elite – such an alliance may be temporary or long lasting, but it is certainly indicated by current circumstances.

    Moreover, white nationalists leaders being materialists, do not understand the moral level. They can’t grasp that adopting an attitude of paternalism and support towards blacks is not only morally worthy, but is good strategy, and is perfectly consistent with continuing to point out the misbehavior of blacks and the negative aspects of black culture. Paternalism does not mean abandoning criticism – but criticism in an effort to support and uplift.

    Finally – and this would be the most astonishing thing to someone from the Victorian age – white cultural self-confidence has fallen so low that many today seem to feel genuinely competitive with blacks. To make themselves feel better, they need to put blacks down. 100 years ago, whites would have been so secure in their superiority that the idea of feeling competitive with blacks would be absurd.

    That so many white nationalists are willing to accept Jewish supetiority, but are harsh on blacks and Hispanics, shows not only or even primarily stupidity, but a collapse in self respect, motivation, and willpower. A real cultural collapse.

    The current generation of so called white nationalists seem hopeless – they are too close to, and too conditioned by, the culture of pessimism and defeat that created our current predicamemt, and have proven themselves unable to recover vitality, but rather to embody many of the attitudes that define our cultural collapse and perpetuate them and expand their reach.

    Read More
    • Agree: Yan Shen
    • Replies: @Randal

    Focusing on blacks is easy, and a distraction from the real issues. It is also part of the general strategy of the elites to pit different sections of society against each other.
     
    This seems to be a common theme here lately, addressed to people (at Unz of all places!) who legitimately think race is an issue.

    "Why do you obsess over blacks?" "Can't you see you're being manipulated by "the elites"?" (Or by "the ruling class" for those more explicitly adopting Marxist twaddle as their guide to reality).

    1 Race and the routine censorship of honest discussion of it is the reason many come to Unz, where that censorship does not take place. [And by the way, if "the elites" are keen to promote race as an divisive issue, why do they so efficiently suppress one side of the debate over it so as to make it less of a divisive issue? See the next paragraph for the answer.]

    2 Your (and that of all the other antiracist hand-wringers here) pretence that there is no real issue over race is literally absurd. There are probably few greater sources of conflict in US sphere communities, despite the efforts of "the elites" to suppress the white side of the argument in order to keep the doors open for the mass immigration that feeds their profits, breaks down communities and established authorities and norms, and - yes - divides society.

    An intelligent strategy – and a morally worthy one – would be to form an alliance with all factions against our psychopathic elite
     

    This hippy notion that if only we could all just get along, we goodies would easily overwhelm the baddies of "the elite" seems incredible for an adult to actually believe in.

    Try to grasp this, please: the other factions do not agree with you about who are the goodies and who are the baddies, and their interests are not necessarily your interests, or mine.


    That so many white nationalists are willing to accept Jewish supetiority, but are harsh on blacks and Hispanics, shows not only or even primarily stupidity, but a collapse in self respect, motivation, and willpower. A real cultural collapse.

     

    What white nationalists "accept Jewish superiority"? Do you mean those IQ-ists who believe in a supposed higher average IQ for a minority of jews? That's hardly a majority white nationalist thing, nor is it really "accepting Jewish superiority".

    Granted you could argue that the Jared Taylor wing "accepts Jewish superiority" in a de facto kind of way by refusing to confront the real problems caused by jewish lobby power (though that seems more like plain political cowardice or opportunism, and if not then it is presumably an idiosyncratic kind of judeophilia on their part), but the reality is that white nationalists in general are castigated overwhelmingly more for going in the opposite direction and embracing swastikas and "Holocaust denial".


    The current generation of so called white nationalists seem hopeless – they are too close to, and too conditioned by, the culture of pessimism and defeat that created our current predicamemt, and have proven themselves unable to recover vitality, but rather to embody many of the attitudes that define our cultural collapse and perpetuate them and expand their reach.

     

    This appears to be a classic case of "blaming the victim". In reality it's not a "culture of pessimism and defeat" that created our current predicament, rather the other way around, combined with people like you insisting that there is no real issue with race. Pissing on our feet and telling us to our faces that it's raining.

    It's not the white nationalists that lack vitality, but the establishment whites who apologise for black underachievement and black crimes and excuse it all by demonising and scapegoating white history, in collaboration with the various identity lobbies with an interest in doing so. They have (by virtue of having lots of money and dominating the media megaphone) imposed that worship on the wider white population, enabled in part by people like you telling anyone standing up against it that they are objecting to something that isn't real.

    Granted that reflects a profound loss of confidence and failure to resist within the white races in general, but that itself dates back many decades, and "white nationalism" in its various forms (often just resistance to mass immigration and to pc antiracist discrimination) is a response to that weakness (and likely the only one that, in the long run, will allow any return to normal self-confidence).


    Finally – and this would be the most astonishing thing to someone from the Victorian age – white cultural self-confidence has fallen so low that many today seem to feel genuinely competitive with blacks. To make themselves feel better, they need to put blacks down. 100 years ago, whites would have been so secure in their superiority that the idea of feeling competitive with blacks would be absurd.
     
    100 years ago there were not huge government schemes to transfer wealth to blacks and laws to enforce discrimination against whites to supposedly benefit blacks, nor as many indoctrinated people like you telling whites that "race isn't an issue" and that they are getting all upset over nothing, as black thugs in their schools bully their children and armed black thugs menace them in their own disarmed streets and homes.
    , @Yan Shen
    Excellent comment. I sound like a broken record at this point, but since white Americans are always complaining about how racist Chinese people are towards blacks, I've been trying to counter that misconception by pointing others to this highly informative YouTube clip.

    This in a nutshell is the difference between white and East Asian cultural mindsets today and probably explains why there are no real Chinese equivalents to guys like John Derbyshire, Jared Taylor, or Robert Weissberg. I can't but lament how destructive an influence men like Derbyshire, Weissberg, or Ta-Nehisi Coates have been on the black community in this country.

    And Mr. Weissberg, please get someone to spell-check your articles in the future before they're published!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtsa0MT2H4I

    , @utu
    AaronB, this comment and the following ones in exchange with Randal could be distributed as leaflets. They deserve to be printed and framed. Congratulations. Consider writing a longer note. Perhaps Ron Unz would consider publishing it here. I think he is closer to your thinking than that of Sailer.

    One comment: Randal points out that us changing attitude towards Blacks will not necessarily change their attitude towards us. The way to think about it is the Prisoner Dilemma context in which your optimal strategy is to snitch because you expect that the other prisoner also will. But if the prisoners had higher moral standards where snitching is breaking the moral code then your chances of getting off by not snitching may increase. By snitching one only perpetuates the culture of snitching. While by taking a chance of more severe punishment and not snitching the cycle possible can be broken. (BTW, I was always surprised when I discovered how the Prisoner Dilemma was popular in social studies, psychology etc. at university departments. I always suspected that it was a sign of some sinister forces in actions that wanted us to not ever see morality as it was, say formulated by Kant. This is an Anglo-Saxon phenomenon which I call then bottom-lining, i.e, reducing all questions about your actions to the most god awful bottom line.)

    Yes, we may expect obnoxious behavior from Blacks but if we adopt equally obnoxious behavior we are going to Prisoner Dilemma scenario where we forget who is the Jailer and nothing will ever change. So I say yes to your paternalism and morality with the emphasis on the latter as it gives some hope.
    , @Truth

    That so many white nationalists are willing to accept Jewish supetiority, but are harsh on blacks and Hispanics, shows not only or even primarily stupidity
     
    Good post.

    If it ain't primary, we're going to a photo-finish.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Anonymous[378] • Disclaimer says:

    When opening in a black community, a concern is whether the cafe actually will adopt the character of that black neighborhood, or if it will traffic in the kinds of values that personify it as a ‘white space,’ as Jamelle Bouie calls it in Slate.”

    In other words, is it worth it to invest in multiple security guards, plexiglass barriers, cashiers’ cages, etc… for creatures who generally can’t afford the product anyway? The classical music will probably work. Dumb blacks don’t like classical music because it reminds them of high white status. Blacks probably consider classical music racist.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  21. One of the things that bothers me about old white males writing about whiteness is that they live in a fucking bubble. I live in an area with kids of multimillionaires. The kids here listen to rap. And are more likely to study computer science rather than the classics. They are lost in the past…Their version of whiteness is dying out..

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  22. Randal says:
    @AaronB
    Focusing on blacks is easy, and a distraction from the real issues. It is also part of the general strategy of the elites to pit different sections of society against each other. That's also why they obsess over hispanics.

    That white nationalists leaders obsess over blacks and Hispanics shows that the alt-right hasnt been able to produce a high caliber leadership capable of long term thinking and clear seeing into the actual challenges facing this country, and instead are easy dupes of the elites.

    An intelligent strategy - and a morally worthy one - would be to form an alliance with all factions against our psychopathic elite - such an alliance may be temporary or long lasting, but it is certainly indicated by current circumstances.

    Moreover, white nationalists leaders being materialists, do not understand the moral level. They can't grasp that adopting an attitude of paternalism and support towards blacks is not only morally worthy, but is good strategy, and is perfectly consistent with continuing to point out the misbehavior of blacks and the negative aspects of black culture. Paternalism does not mean abandoning criticism - but criticism in an effort to support and uplift.

    Finally - and this would be the most astonishing thing to someone from the Victorian age - white cultural self-confidence has fallen so low that many today seem to feel genuinely competitive with blacks. To make themselves feel better, they need to put blacks down. 100 years ago, whites would have been so secure in their superiority that the idea of feeling competitive with blacks would be absurd.

    That so many white nationalists are willing to accept Jewish supetiority, but are harsh on blacks and Hispanics, shows not only or even primarily stupidity, but a collapse in self respect, motivation, and willpower. A real cultural collapse.

    The current generation of so called white nationalists seem hopeless - they are too close to, and too conditioned by, the culture of pessimism and defeat that created our current predicamemt, and have proven themselves unable to recover vitality, but rather to embody many of the attitudes that define our cultural collapse and perpetuate them and expand their reach.

    Focusing on blacks is easy, and a distraction from the real issues. It is also part of the general strategy of the elites to pit different sections of society against each other.

    This seems to be a common theme here lately, addressed to people (at Unz of all places!) who legitimately think race is an issue.

    “Why do you obsess over blacks?” “Can’t you see you’re being manipulated by “the elites”?” (Or by “the ruling class” for those more explicitly adopting Marxist twaddle as their guide to reality).

    1 Race and the routine censorship of honest discussion of it is the reason many come to Unz, where that censorship does not take place. [And by the way, if "the elites" are keen to promote race as an divisive issue, why do they so efficiently suppress one side of the debate over it so as to make it less of a divisive issue? See the next paragraph for the answer.]

    2 Your (and that of all the other antiracist hand-wringers here) pretence that there is no real issue over race is literally absurd. There are probably few greater sources of conflict in US sphere communities, despite the efforts of “the elites” to suppress the white side of the argument in order to keep the doors open for the mass immigration that feeds their profits, breaks down communities and established authorities and norms, and – yes – divides society.

    An intelligent strategy – and a morally worthy one – would be to form an alliance with all factions against our psychopathic elite

    This hippy notion that if only we could all just get along, we goodies would easily overwhelm the baddies of “the elite” seems incredible for an adult to actually believe in.

    Try to grasp this, please: the other factions do not agree with you about who are the goodies and who are the baddies, and their interests are not necessarily your interests, or mine.

    That so many white nationalists are willing to accept Jewish supetiority, but are harsh on blacks and Hispanics, shows not only or even primarily stupidity, but a collapse in self respect, motivation, and willpower. A real cultural collapse.

    What white nationalists “accept Jewish superiority”? Do you mean those IQ-ists who believe in a supposed higher average IQ for a minority of jews? That’s hardly a majority white nationalist thing, nor is it really “accepting Jewish superiority”.

    Granted you could argue that the Jared Taylor wing “accepts Jewish superiority” in a de facto kind of way by refusing to confront the real problems caused by jewish lobby power (though that seems more like plain political cowardice or opportunism, and if not then it is presumably an idiosyncratic kind of judeophilia on their part), but the reality is that white nationalists in general are castigated overwhelmingly more for going in the opposite direction and embracing swastikas and “Holocaust denial”.

    The current generation of so called white nationalists seem hopeless – they are too close to, and too conditioned by, the culture of pessimism and defeat that created our current predicamemt, and have proven themselves unable to recover vitality, but rather to embody many of the attitudes that define our cultural collapse and perpetuate them and expand their reach.

    This appears to be a classic case of “blaming the victim”. In reality it’s not a “culture of pessimism and defeat” that created our current predicament, rather the other way around, combined with people like you insisting that there is no real issue with race. Pissing on our feet and telling us to our faces that it’s raining.

    It’s not the white nationalists that lack vitality, but the establishment whites who apologise for black underachievement and black crimes and excuse it all by demonising and scapegoating white history, in collaboration with the various identity lobbies with an interest in doing so. They have (by virtue of having lots of money and dominating the media megaphone) imposed that worship on the wider white population, enabled in part by people like you telling anyone standing up against it that they are objecting to something that isn’t real.

    Granted that reflects a profound loss of confidence and failure to resist within the white races in general, but that itself dates back many decades, and “white nationalism” in its various forms (often just resistance to mass immigration and to pc antiracist discrimination) is a response to that weakness (and likely the only one that, in the long run, will allow any return to normal self-confidence).

    Finally – and this would be the most astonishing thing to someone from the Victorian age – white cultural self-confidence has fallen so low that many today seem to feel genuinely competitive with blacks. To make themselves feel better, they need to put blacks down. 100 years ago, whites would have been so secure in their superiority that the idea of feeling competitive with blacks would be absurd.

    100 years ago there were not huge government schemes to transfer wealth to blacks and laws to enforce discrimination against whites to supposedly benefit blacks, nor as many indoctrinated people like you telling whites that “race isn’t an issue” and that they are getting all upset over nothing, as black thugs in their schools bully their children and armed black thugs menace them in their own disarmed streets and homes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AaronB
    1. I made clear that my strategy does not involve denying race, black misbehavior, or the negative aspects of black culture. However, the exclusive focus on race - to the detriment of culture, religion, spirit, and willpower - does grave and serious damage to everyone in this country,emphatically including whites, and I am really sorry that you can't see that.

    As I've repeatedly mentioned, I'm half-Jewish and grew up as an orthodox Jew. I have seen time and again how mediocrities obtain success through "spirit" - willpower, persistence, focus, and relentlessness.

    The current exclusive focus on "innate ability" which only whites are guilty of, is a millstone around your neck - it's a mask for white demotivation, defeatism, despair, and loss of cultural self-confidence, and it perpetuates these destructive attitudes. The

    I'm not suggesting it's realistic for blacks as a group to achieve parity with whites, but they can do much better - and whites can help both themselves and blacks by returning to an emphasis on culture, character, and the "spirit" .

    Finally, you whites seem to have lost the ability think strategically and multi-dimensionally - probably through the "flattening out" effect of materialism - which I believe actually makes people stupid. Even if your "race realism" is true, political considerations may dictate subordinating this issue to higher considerations.

    That you think "race realism" is the most crucial front in the culture war - and not toppling the psychopathic elite that, far more strategically flexible and politically dextrous than you, utilizes race-denial without believing in it for one second - merely makes clear that you are a dupe of our psychopathic elite.

    In the civil rights era, do you think Jews believed in the equality of blacks? Why can't whites now use blacks against Jews? The possibility doesn't even occur to you - a stupid concern with "realism" dominates your thoughts.

    Believe me, blacks know full well they have serious deficiencies relative to whites - but they are not going to admit this when they are constantly mocked by you. Context is very important in presenting certain truths. In the context of genuine moral concern for blacks, out of a genuine effort to uplift them, they would be much more likely to meet you halfway. But the stupid bluntness of your concern with "realism" - regardless of any other consideration - this flat, one-dimensional stupidity that afflicts white culture, does everyone harm and ends up not even being "realistic" - but becomes a code word for "matertialism". Nothing is more realistic than admitting the role of effort, motivation, and willpower - but white "realism" denies it.

    "Realism" is white code for materialism - and suicide.

    2. Fascinating. I guess it's just an illusion than that Jews joined with other minorities to undermine the white majority. Such hippy thinking can't possibly be believed by an adult. Thank you for exposing me to that dose of "realism", and bringing me back from my hippy fantasies.

    As for whether other groups would join with whites, certainly not when they are constantly mocked and vilified by whites, and not shown an once of sympathy or respect. But then "realism" demands that we must in the public sphere say all obnoxious and hurtful truths with maximum bluntness and brutality, without any moral, strategic, or political considerations, and without a larger context of moral concern and humans sympathy.

    Gaining a propaganda edge in this are a is not impossible, and surrendering the field to Jews to exploit is not inevitable. You would merely have to recover the moral dimension.

    You are allowing the terms to be defined by your enemies - either complete denial of necessary truths in favor of spurious moral concern, or blunt mockery without any moral intention. Sickened by their fake morality, you swing to an opposite extreme - instead of showing them what genuine moral concern looks like, which does not eschew necessary truths but deploys them in order to help and uplift.

    What I'm suggesting is that in the context of paternalism and moral concern, criticism of blacks and non-whites will be much more likely to be well received, will elevate the moral stature of any white movement that adopts this attitude, will soften the edge of "race realism" and make it far more palatable (and more "realistic" by admitting the spiritual and moral dimension), will not detract from necessary and true criticism of black culture, and will be strategically good policy.

    Moreover - any successful political movement must have a moral dimension. Your obsession with "realism" has blinded you to important truths.

    3. Steve Sailer, Derb, Cochran, Peterson - all accept Jewish superiority despite the math not hearing it out, argue in favor of it to an almost uncanny degree, and bluntly mock and revile blacks without any morally redeeming intention.(Peterson may be an exveption)

    This faction, substantial and respectable, are dupes of the elites. Yes, there are some factions like Vox Day, who do not accept Jewish superiority. But they also generally fail to understand the strategic advisabilty of alliances, are stuck in a fantasy of white supremacy that has long passed, and do a very poor job of generating a high moral level, and emphasize selfishness and contempt of others, rather than situating legitimate self-interest in a larger moral vision.

    And all revolutions are won by some kind of idealism - naked self-interest cannot motivate more than a few people for long, unless self-interest is identified with the advancement of spiritual ideals - as it is for Jews, Japanese, Victorian Christians, and pretty much every successful group, down to the individual Asian studying hard and sacrificing fun for the glory of his ancestors and connunity.

    4. "Blame the victim" -

    Materialism and the focus on innate ability to the detriment of character and spiritual factors - unique to whites and not found among Asians or Jews - has created a culture of pessimism and defeat. Derb and Sailer daily spew forth a stream of defeatist poison, and willingly bend the knee to any group that happens to be for the moment ascendant.

    Whites destroyed their religion, and their connection to poetry and myth, through the Enlightenment. With it went cultural self-confidence, motivation, and passion, and apathy, purposelessness, and listlessness grew. The new materialism flattened out thinking and restricted the range of permissible thoughts to an increasingly tiny set of "clear, precise" ideas that are inadequate to the rich complexity of the world and insufficient for the purposes of mature political policies based on complex strategy.

    It was an own goal. Whites made themeselves stupid and lethargic.

    At the same time Jews, sensing an opportunity, amplified white weaknesses while remaining inwardly aloof from them and never allowing their inner life to be entirely shaped by enlightenment ideals, and themselves maintained a rich connection to the non-rational sources of motivation while seeking to destroy it for you.

    5. I am not saying we shouldn't say race is an issue, as you falsely claim. We should be quite honest and critical about black deficiencies but within a context of paternalism and moral concern.
    , @joef

    Your (and that of all the other antiracist hand-wringers here) pretence that there is no real issue over race is literally absurd. There are probably few greater sources of conflict in US sphere communities, despite the efforts of “the elites” to suppress the white side of the argument in order to keep the doors open for the mass immigration that feeds their profits, breaks down communities and established authorities and norms, and – yes – divides society.
     
    I agree with the above statement. Those who pontificate from afar in cupcake land, never having to deal with the real violent consequences of bad urban afro behavior, love to tell the rest of us what we should think. They also like to pretend that the multitude of victims (including other Blacks themselves), from afro criminal violence, do not exist.

    Their typical solution is: just ignore it, while pandering & praising ad nauseam, with forever increasing entitlements, and it will all get better. Well it hasn't gotten better in the last fifty years, and arguably it has gotten much much worse. As once great American cities become their own versions of failed states, these enablers demand that we overlook all racial reality; however this unreasonable stipulation is detrimental to our own survival.

    We respond to afros, the way we do, because they are the primary aggressors (not because we hate them), and this simple cause and effect is lost upon these over credulous fools. If race relations are to get better, it is up to the afro american to repudiate their own antisocial actions. If these racial panderers want to ignore reality, and eventually die off from it, so be it... but don't expect the rest of us to go along and be their willing victims. We did not ask for this, but it is what it is.

    , @lavoisier

    Your (and that of all the other antiracist hand-wringers here) pretence that there is no real issue over race is literally absurd. There are probably few greater sources of conflict in US sphere communities, despite the efforts of “the elites” to suppress the white side of the argument in order to keep the doors open for the mass immigration that feeds their profits, breaks down communities and established authorities and norms, and – yes – divides society.
     
    Indeed. It is absurd.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Yan Shen says:
    @AaronB
    Focusing on blacks is easy, and a distraction from the real issues. It is also part of the general strategy of the elites to pit different sections of society against each other. That's also why they obsess over hispanics.

    That white nationalists leaders obsess over blacks and Hispanics shows that the alt-right hasnt been able to produce a high caliber leadership capable of long term thinking and clear seeing into the actual challenges facing this country, and instead are easy dupes of the elites.

    An intelligent strategy - and a morally worthy one - would be to form an alliance with all factions against our psychopathic elite - such an alliance may be temporary or long lasting, but it is certainly indicated by current circumstances.

    Moreover, white nationalists leaders being materialists, do not understand the moral level. They can't grasp that adopting an attitude of paternalism and support towards blacks is not only morally worthy, but is good strategy, and is perfectly consistent with continuing to point out the misbehavior of blacks and the negative aspects of black culture. Paternalism does not mean abandoning criticism - but criticism in an effort to support and uplift.

    Finally - and this would be the most astonishing thing to someone from the Victorian age - white cultural self-confidence has fallen so low that many today seem to feel genuinely competitive with blacks. To make themselves feel better, they need to put blacks down. 100 years ago, whites would have been so secure in their superiority that the idea of feeling competitive with blacks would be absurd.

    That so many white nationalists are willing to accept Jewish supetiority, but are harsh on blacks and Hispanics, shows not only or even primarily stupidity, but a collapse in self respect, motivation, and willpower. A real cultural collapse.

    The current generation of so called white nationalists seem hopeless - they are too close to, and too conditioned by, the culture of pessimism and defeat that created our current predicamemt, and have proven themselves unable to recover vitality, but rather to embody many of the attitudes that define our cultural collapse and perpetuate them and expand their reach.

    Excellent comment. I sound like a broken record at this point, but since white Americans are always complaining about how racist Chinese people are towards blacks, I’ve been trying to counter that misconception by pointing others to this highly informative YouTube clip.

    This in a nutshell is the difference between white and East Asian cultural mindsets today and probably explains why there are no real Chinese equivalents to guys like John Derbyshire, Jared Taylor, or Robert Weissberg. I can’t but lament how destructive an influence men like Derbyshire, Weissberg, or Ta-Nehisi Coates have been on the black community in this country.

    And Mr. Weissberg, please get someone to spell-check your articles in the future before they’re published!

    Read More
    • Replies: @AaronB
    Thank you.

    And that video deserves widespread dissemination, and is a good model for how whites may realistically criticize blacks without surrendering moral concern. This bizarre idea that "race realism" demands harsh mockery and gleeful pointing out of others deficiencies, or that moral concern demands glossing over deficiencies and lying about them - the two poles of the white response to blacks today - is a sad reflection of the radical loss of both genuine realism and genuine morality - in other words, maturity and depth - in our increasingly tawdry and superficial culture.

    I hear you about feeling like a broken record. I feel that way too.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. Alfa158 says:
    @Yan Shen

    Why is Mr. Weissberg so obsessed with black people?
     
    I've been wondering the same thing about that John Derbyshire fellow as well! And Jared Taylor. And basically any white nationalist type. These people sure do find blacks to be fascinating...

    I’m puzzled by that as well, but various obsessions like that seem astonishingly widespread. For example, many people around the Gulf Coast and in the Caribbean have this strange fascination with hurricanes. Neither I nor any of my neighbors here in Southern California ever give them more than a passing thought.
    Why do you think people are like that? Do you ever find people in China who are also obsessed with blacks and spend much of their time discussing their deleterious effect on Chinese culture? I’m just wondering how common this obsession is outside the US.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. AaronB says:
    @Randal

    Focusing on blacks is easy, and a distraction from the real issues. It is also part of the general strategy of the elites to pit different sections of society against each other.
     
    This seems to be a common theme here lately, addressed to people (at Unz of all places!) who legitimately think race is an issue.

    "Why do you obsess over blacks?" "Can't you see you're being manipulated by "the elites"?" (Or by "the ruling class" for those more explicitly adopting Marxist twaddle as their guide to reality).

    1 Race and the routine censorship of honest discussion of it is the reason many come to Unz, where that censorship does not take place. [And by the way, if "the elites" are keen to promote race as an divisive issue, why do they so efficiently suppress one side of the debate over it so as to make it less of a divisive issue? See the next paragraph for the answer.]

    2 Your (and that of all the other antiracist hand-wringers here) pretence that there is no real issue over race is literally absurd. There are probably few greater sources of conflict in US sphere communities, despite the efforts of "the elites" to suppress the white side of the argument in order to keep the doors open for the mass immigration that feeds their profits, breaks down communities and established authorities and norms, and - yes - divides society.

    An intelligent strategy – and a morally worthy one – would be to form an alliance with all factions against our psychopathic elite
     

    This hippy notion that if only we could all just get along, we goodies would easily overwhelm the baddies of "the elite" seems incredible for an adult to actually believe in.

    Try to grasp this, please: the other factions do not agree with you about who are the goodies and who are the baddies, and their interests are not necessarily your interests, or mine.


    That so many white nationalists are willing to accept Jewish supetiority, but are harsh on blacks and Hispanics, shows not only or even primarily stupidity, but a collapse in self respect, motivation, and willpower. A real cultural collapse.

     

    What white nationalists "accept Jewish superiority"? Do you mean those IQ-ists who believe in a supposed higher average IQ for a minority of jews? That's hardly a majority white nationalist thing, nor is it really "accepting Jewish superiority".

    Granted you could argue that the Jared Taylor wing "accepts Jewish superiority" in a de facto kind of way by refusing to confront the real problems caused by jewish lobby power (though that seems more like plain political cowardice or opportunism, and if not then it is presumably an idiosyncratic kind of judeophilia on their part), but the reality is that white nationalists in general are castigated overwhelmingly more for going in the opposite direction and embracing swastikas and "Holocaust denial".


    The current generation of so called white nationalists seem hopeless – they are too close to, and too conditioned by, the culture of pessimism and defeat that created our current predicamemt, and have proven themselves unable to recover vitality, but rather to embody many of the attitudes that define our cultural collapse and perpetuate them and expand their reach.

     

    This appears to be a classic case of "blaming the victim". In reality it's not a "culture of pessimism and defeat" that created our current predicament, rather the other way around, combined with people like you insisting that there is no real issue with race. Pissing on our feet and telling us to our faces that it's raining.

    It's not the white nationalists that lack vitality, but the establishment whites who apologise for black underachievement and black crimes and excuse it all by demonising and scapegoating white history, in collaboration with the various identity lobbies with an interest in doing so. They have (by virtue of having lots of money and dominating the media megaphone) imposed that worship on the wider white population, enabled in part by people like you telling anyone standing up against it that they are objecting to something that isn't real.

    Granted that reflects a profound loss of confidence and failure to resist within the white races in general, but that itself dates back many decades, and "white nationalism" in its various forms (often just resistance to mass immigration and to pc antiracist discrimination) is a response to that weakness (and likely the only one that, in the long run, will allow any return to normal self-confidence).


    Finally – and this would be the most astonishing thing to someone from the Victorian age – white cultural self-confidence has fallen so low that many today seem to feel genuinely competitive with blacks. To make themselves feel better, they need to put blacks down. 100 years ago, whites would have been so secure in their superiority that the idea of feeling competitive with blacks would be absurd.
     
    100 years ago there were not huge government schemes to transfer wealth to blacks and laws to enforce discrimination against whites to supposedly benefit blacks, nor as many indoctrinated people like you telling whites that "race isn't an issue" and that they are getting all upset over nothing, as black thugs in their schools bully their children and armed black thugs menace them in their own disarmed streets and homes.

    1. I made clear that my strategy does not involve denying race, black misbehavior, or the negative aspects of black culture. However, the exclusive focus on race – to the detriment of culture, religion, spirit, and willpower – does grave and serious damage to everyone in this country,emphatically including whites, and I am really sorry that you can’t see that.

    As I’ve repeatedly mentioned, I’m half-Jewish and grew up as an orthodox Jew. I have seen time and again how mediocrities obtain success through “spirit” – willpower, persistence, focus, and relentlessness.

    The current exclusive focus on “innate ability” which only whites are guilty of, is a millstone around your neck – it’s a mask for white demotivation, defeatism, despair, and loss of cultural self-confidence, and it perpetuates these destructive attitudes. The

    I’m not suggesting it’s realistic for blacks as a group to achieve parity with whites, but they can do much better – and whites can help both themselves and blacks by returning to an emphasis on culture, character, and the “spirit” .

    Finally, you whites seem to have lost the ability think strategically and multi-dimensionally – probably through the “flattening out” effect of materialism – which I believe actually makes people stupid. Even if your “race realism” is true, political considerations may dictate subordinating this issue to higher considerations.

    That you think “race realism” is the most crucial front in the culture war – and not toppling the psychopathic elite that, far more strategically flexible and politically dextrous than you, utilizes race-denial without believing in it for one second – merely makes clear that you are a dupe of our psychopathic elite.

    In the civil rights era, do you think Jews believed in the equality of blacks? Why can’t whites now use blacks against Jews? The possibility doesn’t even occur to you – a stupid concern with “realism” dominates your thoughts.

    Believe me, blacks know full well they have serious deficiencies relative to whites – but they are not going to admit this when they are constantly mocked by you. Context is very important in presenting certain truths. In the context of genuine moral concern for blacks, out of a genuine effort to uplift them, they would be much more likely to meet you halfway. But the stupid bluntness of your concern with “realism” – regardless of any other consideration – this flat, one-dimensional stupidity that afflicts white culture, does everyone harm and ends up not even being “realistic” – but becomes a code word for “matertialism”. Nothing is more realistic than admitting the role of effort, motivation, and willpower – but white “realism” denies it.

    “Realism” is white code for materialism – and suicide.

    2. Fascinating. I guess it’s just an illusion than that Jews joined with other minorities to undermine the white majority. Such hippy thinking can’t possibly be believed by an adult. Thank you for exposing me to that dose of “realism”, and bringing me back from my hippy fantasies.

    As for whether other groups would join with whites, certainly not when they are constantly mocked and vilified by whites, and not shown an once of sympathy or respect. But then “realism” demands that we must in the public sphere say all obnoxious and hurtful truths with maximum bluntness and brutality, without any moral, strategic, or political considerations, and without a larger context of moral concern and humans sympathy.

    Gaining a propaganda edge in this are a is not impossible, and surrendering the field to Jews to exploit is not inevitable. You would merely have to recover the moral dimension.

    You are allowing the terms to be defined by your enemies – either complete denial of necessary truths in favor of spurious moral concern, or blunt mockery without any moral intention. Sickened by their fake morality, you swing to an opposite extreme – instead of showing them what genuine moral concern looks like, which does not eschew necessary truths but deploys them in order to help and uplift.

    What I’m suggesting is that in the context of paternalism and moral concern, criticism of blacks and non-whites will be much more likely to be well received, will elevate the moral stature of any white movement that adopts this attitude, will soften the edge of “race realism” and make it far more palatable (and more “realistic” by admitting the spiritual and moral dimension), will not detract from necessary and true criticism of black culture, and will be strategically good policy.

    Moreover – any successful political movement must have a moral dimension. Your obsession with “realism” has blinded you to important truths.

    3. Steve Sailer, Derb, Cochran, Peterson – all accept Jewish superiority despite the math not hearing it out, argue in favor of it to an almost uncanny degree, and bluntly mock and revile blacks without any morally redeeming intention.(Peterson may be an exveption)

    This faction, substantial and respectable, are dupes of the elites. Yes, there are some factions like Vox Day, who do not accept Jewish superiority. But they also generally fail to understand the strategic advisabilty of alliances, are stuck in a fantasy of white supremacy that has long passed, and do a very poor job of generating a high moral level, and emphasize selfishness and contempt of others, rather than situating legitimate self-interest in a larger moral vision.

    And all revolutions are won by some kind of idealism – naked self-interest cannot motivate more than a few people for long, unless self-interest is identified with the advancement of spiritual ideals – as it is for Jews, Japanese, Victorian Christians, and pretty much every successful group, down to the individual Asian studying hard and sacrificing fun for the glory of his ancestors and connunity.

    4. “Blame the victim” –

    Materialism and the focus on innate ability to the detriment of character and spiritual factors – unique to whites and not found among Asians or Jews – has created a culture of pessimism and defeat. Derb and Sailer daily spew forth a stream of defeatist poison, and willingly bend the knee to any group that happens to be for the moment ascendant.

    Whites destroyed their religion, and their connection to poetry and myth, through the Enlightenment. With it went cultural self-confidence, motivation, and passion, and apathy, purposelessness, and listlessness grew. The new materialism flattened out thinking and restricted the range of permissible thoughts to an increasingly tiny set of “clear, precise” ideas that are inadequate to the rich complexity of the world and insufficient for the purposes of mature political policies based on complex strategy.

    It was an own goal. Whites made themeselves stupid and lethargic.

    At the same time Jews, sensing an opportunity, amplified white weaknesses while remaining inwardly aloof from them and never allowing their inner life to be entirely shaped by enlightenment ideals, and themselves maintained a rich connection to the non-rational sources of motivation while seeking to destroy it for you.

    5. I am not saying we shouldn’t say race is an issue, as you falsely claim. We should be quite honest and critical about black deficiencies but within a context of paternalism and moral concern.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal
    There are two particular issues that concentrate at Unz, in part because they are the most important amongst the ones that are most actively suppressed in the establishment media: race and the jewish question. As a result there are many people here who focus excessively on addressing the race issue, and equally there are many people who focus excessively on the jewish issue. Your comment makes it clear you are one of the latter, and you don't agree with the former.

    As someone who recognises the vital importance of both these issues, and the reality that both are actively excluded and suppressed in the wider political, social and media landscapes, I see no benefit to be had from attacking those who go a bit too far here in either direction. The flipside is that the thing that annoys me the most is the fanatics of one of those two groups devoting their energy here to attacking the fanatics (and indeed the reasonable folk) on the other issue, as you did here, and as, for instance, several commenters did here and on numerous other Unz threads.

    What a waste and complete misdirection of energy! You will not convince or convert any of those who perfectly legitimately see race as the most important issue facing us by accusing them of being dupes for your personally preferred kind of elite conspiracy, just as they will not convince or convert you by accusing you of being an anti-Semite and a dupe for some kind of global anti-Semitic conspiracy.

    Both problems exist and are of potentially existential importance. Neither is the whole story. Recognise that, and act appropriately.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. AaronB says:
    @Yan Shen
    Excellent comment. I sound like a broken record at this point, but since white Americans are always complaining about how racist Chinese people are towards blacks, I've been trying to counter that misconception by pointing others to this highly informative YouTube clip.

    This in a nutshell is the difference between white and East Asian cultural mindsets today and probably explains why there are no real Chinese equivalents to guys like John Derbyshire, Jared Taylor, or Robert Weissberg. I can't but lament how destructive an influence men like Derbyshire, Weissberg, or Ta-Nehisi Coates have been on the black community in this country.

    And Mr. Weissberg, please get someone to spell-check your articles in the future before they're published!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtsa0MT2H4I

    Thank you.

    And that video deserves widespread dissemination, and is a good model for how whites may realistically criticize blacks without surrendering moral concern. This bizarre idea that “race realism” demands harsh mockery and gleeful pointing out of others deficiencies, or that moral concern demands glossing over deficiencies and lying about them – the two poles of the white response to blacks today – is a sad reflection of the radical loss of both genuine realism and genuine morality – in other words, maturity and depth – in our increasingly tawdry and superficial culture.

    I hear you about feeling like a broken record. I feel that way too.

    Read More
    • Agree: Yan Shen
    • Replies: @utu

    harsh mockery and gleeful pointing out of others deficiencies
     
    Yan Shen somehow keeps omitting Sailer in his "bad guys" list. Furthermore he is not credible claiming that there are no Chinese Derbyshires. What about Derbyshire's children?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. anonymous[266] • Disclaimer says:

    All public spaces and many private ones like coffeehouses are trashed disproportionately by blacks. It’s why we can’t have nice things. Cameras everywhere, security guards, extra police all over, the list is endless. In a city like Chicago where there’s a large black population a majority of the homeless population is black and most of them are ex-convicts, sex offenders, drug addicts and some who act out their mental problems in public. Public transport if full of stinko bums sleeping with their shoes off and laying on the seats. They’re always causing trouble at various establishments for one reason or another. These ex-convict trashbags are usually big, burly, well-fed types who are potentially dangerous and who occasionally assault a citizen here and there, sometimes fatally. The line has to be actively held constantly against these dirtballs and a craven company like this coffee chain has really undermined the effort to maintain a worthwhile society.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  28. Randal says:
    @AaronB
    1. I made clear that my strategy does not involve denying race, black misbehavior, or the negative aspects of black culture. However, the exclusive focus on race - to the detriment of culture, religion, spirit, and willpower - does grave and serious damage to everyone in this country,emphatically including whites, and I am really sorry that you can't see that.

    As I've repeatedly mentioned, I'm half-Jewish and grew up as an orthodox Jew. I have seen time and again how mediocrities obtain success through "spirit" - willpower, persistence, focus, and relentlessness.

    The current exclusive focus on "innate ability" which only whites are guilty of, is a millstone around your neck - it's a mask for white demotivation, defeatism, despair, and loss of cultural self-confidence, and it perpetuates these destructive attitudes. The

    I'm not suggesting it's realistic for blacks as a group to achieve parity with whites, but they can do much better - and whites can help both themselves and blacks by returning to an emphasis on culture, character, and the "spirit" .

    Finally, you whites seem to have lost the ability think strategically and multi-dimensionally - probably through the "flattening out" effect of materialism - which I believe actually makes people stupid. Even if your "race realism" is true, political considerations may dictate subordinating this issue to higher considerations.

    That you think "race realism" is the most crucial front in the culture war - and not toppling the psychopathic elite that, far more strategically flexible and politically dextrous than you, utilizes race-denial without believing in it for one second - merely makes clear that you are a dupe of our psychopathic elite.

    In the civil rights era, do you think Jews believed in the equality of blacks? Why can't whites now use blacks against Jews? The possibility doesn't even occur to you - a stupid concern with "realism" dominates your thoughts.

    Believe me, blacks know full well they have serious deficiencies relative to whites - but they are not going to admit this when they are constantly mocked by you. Context is very important in presenting certain truths. In the context of genuine moral concern for blacks, out of a genuine effort to uplift them, they would be much more likely to meet you halfway. But the stupid bluntness of your concern with "realism" - regardless of any other consideration - this flat, one-dimensional stupidity that afflicts white culture, does everyone harm and ends up not even being "realistic" - but becomes a code word for "matertialism". Nothing is more realistic than admitting the role of effort, motivation, and willpower - but white "realism" denies it.

    "Realism" is white code for materialism - and suicide.

    2. Fascinating. I guess it's just an illusion than that Jews joined with other minorities to undermine the white majority. Such hippy thinking can't possibly be believed by an adult. Thank you for exposing me to that dose of "realism", and bringing me back from my hippy fantasies.

    As for whether other groups would join with whites, certainly not when they are constantly mocked and vilified by whites, and not shown an once of sympathy or respect. But then "realism" demands that we must in the public sphere say all obnoxious and hurtful truths with maximum bluntness and brutality, without any moral, strategic, or political considerations, and without a larger context of moral concern and humans sympathy.

    Gaining a propaganda edge in this are a is not impossible, and surrendering the field to Jews to exploit is not inevitable. You would merely have to recover the moral dimension.

    You are allowing the terms to be defined by your enemies - either complete denial of necessary truths in favor of spurious moral concern, or blunt mockery without any moral intention. Sickened by their fake morality, you swing to an opposite extreme - instead of showing them what genuine moral concern looks like, which does not eschew necessary truths but deploys them in order to help and uplift.

    What I'm suggesting is that in the context of paternalism and moral concern, criticism of blacks and non-whites will be much more likely to be well received, will elevate the moral stature of any white movement that adopts this attitude, will soften the edge of "race realism" and make it far more palatable (and more "realistic" by admitting the spiritual and moral dimension), will not detract from necessary and true criticism of black culture, and will be strategically good policy.

    Moreover - any successful political movement must have a moral dimension. Your obsession with "realism" has blinded you to important truths.

    3. Steve Sailer, Derb, Cochran, Peterson - all accept Jewish superiority despite the math not hearing it out, argue in favor of it to an almost uncanny degree, and bluntly mock and revile blacks without any morally redeeming intention.(Peterson may be an exveption)

    This faction, substantial and respectable, are dupes of the elites. Yes, there are some factions like Vox Day, who do not accept Jewish superiority. But they also generally fail to understand the strategic advisabilty of alliances, are stuck in a fantasy of white supremacy that has long passed, and do a very poor job of generating a high moral level, and emphasize selfishness and contempt of others, rather than situating legitimate self-interest in a larger moral vision.

    And all revolutions are won by some kind of idealism - naked self-interest cannot motivate more than a few people for long, unless self-interest is identified with the advancement of spiritual ideals - as it is for Jews, Japanese, Victorian Christians, and pretty much every successful group, down to the individual Asian studying hard and sacrificing fun for the glory of his ancestors and connunity.

    4. "Blame the victim" -

    Materialism and the focus on innate ability to the detriment of character and spiritual factors - unique to whites and not found among Asians or Jews - has created a culture of pessimism and defeat. Derb and Sailer daily spew forth a stream of defeatist poison, and willingly bend the knee to any group that happens to be for the moment ascendant.

    Whites destroyed their religion, and their connection to poetry and myth, through the Enlightenment. With it went cultural self-confidence, motivation, and passion, and apathy, purposelessness, and listlessness grew. The new materialism flattened out thinking and restricted the range of permissible thoughts to an increasingly tiny set of "clear, precise" ideas that are inadequate to the rich complexity of the world and insufficient for the purposes of mature political policies based on complex strategy.

    It was an own goal. Whites made themeselves stupid and lethargic.

    At the same time Jews, sensing an opportunity, amplified white weaknesses while remaining inwardly aloof from them and never allowing their inner life to be entirely shaped by enlightenment ideals, and themselves maintained a rich connection to the non-rational sources of motivation while seeking to destroy it for you.

    5. I am not saying we shouldn't say race is an issue, as you falsely claim. We should be quite honest and critical about black deficiencies but within a context of paternalism and moral concern.

    There are two particular issues that concentrate at Unz, in part because they are the most important amongst the ones that are most actively suppressed in the establishment media: race and the jewish question. As a result there are many people here who focus excessively on addressing the race issue, and equally there are many people who focus excessively on the jewish issue. Your comment makes it clear you are one of the latter, and you don’t agree with the former.

    As someone who recognises the vital importance of both these issues, and the reality that both are actively excluded and suppressed in the wider political, social and media landscapes, I see no benefit to be had from attacking those who go a bit too far here in either direction. The flipside is that the thing that annoys me the most is the fanatics of one of those two groups devoting their energy here to attacking the fanatics (and indeed the reasonable folk) on the other issue, as you did here, and as, for instance, several commenters did here and on numerous other Unz threads.

    What a waste and complete misdirection of energy! You will not convince or convert any of those who perfectly legitimately see race as the most important issue facing us by accusing them of being dupes for your personally preferred kind of elite conspiracy, just as they will not convince or convert you by accusing you of being an anti-Semite and a dupe for some kind of global anti-Semitic conspiracy.

    Both problems exist and are of potentially existential importance. Neither is the whole story. Recognise that, and act appropriately.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AaronB
    Ok, by all means let us focus on race then and point out black misbehavior and the negative aspects of black culture. I can see why many regard this as a pressing issue, and my suggestion to ignore it in favor of a political alliance is perhaps misguided. One can reasonably differ in this, and I am not committed to that aspect of my position.

    But the main thrust of my argument is to introduce a moral dimension into our discussion of race - and to develop a more realistic conception of race by considering the role of character and values.

    Tell me this - would you support discussing black deficiencies - with unstinting honesty - but within the context of paternalism and moral concern? Connected to this, do you think the tendency to discount the role of character and values in achievement may be a leading factor in the loss of motivation among whites, and that once again introducing these factors into circulation may have the double-effect of revitalizing whites and uplifting blacks?

    Moreover, do you think Sailer's sycophantic fawning over Jews is unrelated to his gleeful and mocking tone when discussing blacks - and that his nullifying the role of character and values and exclusive focus on genes is the underlying factor in his attitude and conveys a damaging message to whites and black s?

    And do you think Jews - who manipulate blacks against whites and form a disproportionate share of our psychopathic elite - or blacks, a dysfunctional community incapable of serious mischief without political support, should be our main focus?

    You see, these questions are not neutral - and nothing good can be accomplished without genuine morality. Steve's mocking tone towards blacks is not trivial or incidental - but indicates lack of character, which underlay his fawning submisiveness to Jews, and worse - his spreading of the poison of fatalism among whites.

    No, character matters.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. AaronB says:
    @Randal
    There are two particular issues that concentrate at Unz, in part because they are the most important amongst the ones that are most actively suppressed in the establishment media: race and the jewish question. As a result there are many people here who focus excessively on addressing the race issue, and equally there are many people who focus excessively on the jewish issue. Your comment makes it clear you are one of the latter, and you don't agree with the former.

    As someone who recognises the vital importance of both these issues, and the reality that both are actively excluded and suppressed in the wider political, social and media landscapes, I see no benefit to be had from attacking those who go a bit too far here in either direction. The flipside is that the thing that annoys me the most is the fanatics of one of those two groups devoting their energy here to attacking the fanatics (and indeed the reasonable folk) on the other issue, as you did here, and as, for instance, several commenters did here and on numerous other Unz threads.

    What a waste and complete misdirection of energy! You will not convince or convert any of those who perfectly legitimately see race as the most important issue facing us by accusing them of being dupes for your personally preferred kind of elite conspiracy, just as they will not convince or convert you by accusing you of being an anti-Semite and a dupe for some kind of global anti-Semitic conspiracy.

    Both problems exist and are of potentially existential importance. Neither is the whole story. Recognise that, and act appropriately.

    Ok, by all means let us focus on race then and point out black misbehavior and the negative aspects of black culture. I can see why many regard this as a pressing issue, and my suggestion to ignore it in favor of a political alliance is perhaps misguided. One can reasonably differ in this, and I am not committed to that aspect of my position.

    But the main thrust of my argument is to introduce a moral dimension into our discussion of race – and to develop a more realistic conception of race by considering the role of character and values.

    Tell me this – would you support discussing black deficiencies – with unstinting honesty – but within the context of paternalism and moral concern? Connected to this, do you think the tendency to discount the role of character and values in achievement may be a leading factor in the loss of motivation among whites, and that once again introducing these factors into circulation may have the double-effect of revitalizing whites and uplifting blacks?

    Moreover, do you think Sailer’s sycophantic fawning over Jews is unrelated to his gleeful and mocking tone when discussing blacks – and that his nullifying the role of character and values and exclusive focus on genes is the underlying factor in his attitude and conveys a damaging message to whites and black s?

    And do you think Jews – who manipulate blacks against whites and form a disproportionate share of our psychopathic elite – or blacks, a dysfunctional community incapable of serious mischief without political support, should be our main focus?

    You see, these questions are not neutral – and nothing good can be accomplished without genuine morality. Steve’s mocking tone towards blacks is not trivial or incidental – but indicates lack of character, which underlay his fawning submisiveness to Jews, and worse – his spreading of the poison of fatalism among whites.

    No, character matters.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    Ok, by all means let us focus on race then and point out black misbehavior and the negative aspects of black culture. I can see why many regard this as a pressing issue, and my suggestion to ignore it in favor of a political alliance is perhaps misguided. One can reasonably differ in this, and I am not committed to that aspect of my position.
     
    Fair enough, and the minimum level of not de facto allying with the establishment by attacking each other's base concerns in a sweeping fashion is all I am really asking for here. I do not expect agreement from either side with the other's core concerns - that's up to every individual. Just the basic respect that the establishment intentionally denies to both those concerned with race and those concerned with the jewish issue.

    But the main thrust of my argument is to introduce a moral dimension into our discussion of race – and to develop a more realistic conception of race by considering the role of character and values.
     
    OK, clearly here your ideas of what constitutes a moral dimension and what counts as more realistic or as good character and values are not necessarily shared by others. I can't say I'm convinced by your arguments thus far. I don't agree with the idea you put forward that it is whites' hostility to blacks that is responsible for blacks' behaviour (clearly these are all gross generalisations, but one cannot talk about such big issues without generalisation). In the end, blacks and only blacks are responsible for how they behave. If they have been supplied with plenty of ammunition for their grievance obsession over historical issues by others, they have also chosen to take up and push those attitudes amongst themselves instead of turning their anger inwards and sorting out the gross problems in their own communities. The ones who blame whitey always seem to win out over the few who blame the black thugs who live by violence, demand subsidies and glorify bling and personal aggression.

    The lesson of the past century seems to be that the more civil rights and respect (state- and society-coerced), and the more equality and economic advantages blacks are given, the worse the black ghettos have become, and the more angry and embittered blacks have become.

    You blame "white nationalists" without any seeming awareness that "white nationalists" (no matter how wide you draw the net, to include even just casual racists) have been a marginalised and irrelevant force in US sphere societies for decades now. It is not white racists, but those who believe as you do in showing respect, even to the point of denying and suppressing basic inconvenient truths (such as the gross differences in violent crime rates) who have been in almost total control of these societies.

    Tell me this – would you support discussing black deficiencies – with unstinting honesty – but within the context of paternalism and moral concern?
     
    I would have no problem with this, so long as it doesn't require denying the right to raise unpleasant issues, but that doesn't mean I would share your assumptions as to what those terms mean. I tend to sympathise (and I doubt you would) with the argument that the loss of old school Christianity and of firm externally imposed discipline was a key factor in the decline of black society, and would say that they clearly need such a coercive religious and social structure to thrive. But that is not an easily tenable position within the context of universalist equality dogma. The implications are profound.

    I do not pretend to have an answer, either for blacks or for whites. All I know is that the current loss of confidence by white society is a profound and existentially threatening situation that must be dealt with somehow. One aspect though must be to stop apologising for past actions in very different contexts, and to stop pretending we are to blame for all the flaws of the world. Blacks must solve their own society's problems, and I have no answer for that, though I will not accept any solution that involves them indefinitely blaming my race and society, however.

    Connected to this, do you think the tendency to discount the role of character and values in achievement may be a leading factor in the loss of motivation among whites, and that once again introducing these factors into circulation may have the double-effect of revitalizing whites and uplifting blacks?
     
    Again, I do not see how you blame attitudes you impute to "white nationalists" for problems in wider society, when the "white nationalists" you blame have been such a marginalised force for so long. Above, you write: "The current exclusive focus on “innate ability” which only whites are guilty of, is a millstone around your neck – it’s a mask for white demotivation, defeatism, despair, and loss of cultural self-confidence, and it perpetuates these destructive attitudes". But outside of a few marginalised groups, the idea of innate ability has had zero influence in the societies of the US sphere for a generation or more. The triumph of the "blank slate" left has been almost complete at all powerful levels of society. A dogged idea of innate ability remains amongst the masses, mostly as a visceral understanding that stubbornly refuses to accept the dogmas that are everywhere assumed above them. How can the ideas of "white nationalists" be responsible for the demotivation, defeatism, despair, and loss of cultural self-confidence in white society when they were so comprehensively defeated and marginalised a generation and more ago.

    By the way, you attribute to me the positions of those I am defending, but as I noted above I am a fellow traveller of both those who see the importance of the race issue and those who recognise the significance of the jewish issue. I am not fully on board with the extremes of either group. In this case, I am not a believe in innate ability alone, rather in a mixed situation, much as I have little doubt that intellect is a product of a mix of nature and nurture, and probably a fairly even mix. As a matter of fact, I wonder how many even of the most extreme amongst those you criticise are actually as hard line as you suggest (Sailer, for instance, I have repeatedly seen suggesting that IQ is probably a result of an even mix of nature and nurture).

    Moreover, do you think Sailer’s sycophantic fawning over Jews is unrelated to his gleeful and mocking tone when discussing blacks
     
    Here, as I noted above, I don't see what you see, but perhaps I haven't read Sailer closely enough on these issues. I've noticed that he is reluctant to criticise jewish lobby power too openly, and that he is on board with those who believe in a higher average IQ for a particular subset of jews. The latter seems a relatively trivial detail to me, and the former I have tended to ascribe to his sharing the Jared Taylor faction approach, and doubtless for similar reasons (for my views on which, see my previous post). It's not ideal, but I don't see why I need him pointing out problems with excess jewish power any more than I need Saker pointing out problems with black behaviour and antiracism. Horses for courses.

    Inasmuch as there is any particular element of "gleeful mocking" in Sailer's views on blacks (and I don't see much of that), I would see it as a very understandable response to the active suppression of his opinions by society. One can hardly blame him for being unsympathetic each time he is proved right, in the circumstances.

    And do you think Jews – who manipulate blacks against whites and form a disproportionate share of our psychopathic elite – or blacks, a dysfunctional community incapable of serious mischief without political support, should be our main focus?
     
    Again, as noted above I'm not fully on board with the extremes of either faction. I recognise that jewish influence is a big problem, but I doubt many of the more comprehensive attributions to it. However, I see no need to actively attack them here - there's more than enough of that in the wider establishment media.

    I see both as problems, though on race here my focus is not particularly on blacks, but on the racial strife caused by mass immigration more widely, probably reflecting my British rather than US experience.

    No, character matters.
     
    Doubtless, but not necessarily in the way you apply it.

    Turning from the general to the specific, the above piece is aimed at criticising particular aspects of black behaviour, namely the tendency to rowdy and aggressive personal interactions and to violent crime, together with their aversion to higher culture which is seen as too white. As a result of the former, suspect looking blacks are entirely understandably even less welcome in public spaces than are suspect looking whites, because such behaviour is unpleasant for others. That's an issue that it is absolutely legitimate to address, and the approach adopted in the above piece is a perfectly reasonable response to the fact that the establishment media actively suppresses any approach critical of the stereotypically black behaviour at the root of the problem.

    If blacks dislike it, the solution is not to criticise the tone or the underlying attitudes (since suppressing even just the arguably unpleasant aspects of just one side of the debate will only push society further out of balance) but to solve the issues of black behaviour and cultural attitudes that underlie it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. utu says:
    @AaronB
    Focusing on blacks is easy, and a distraction from the real issues. It is also part of the general strategy of the elites to pit different sections of society against each other. That's also why they obsess over hispanics.

    That white nationalists leaders obsess over blacks and Hispanics shows that the alt-right hasnt been able to produce a high caliber leadership capable of long term thinking and clear seeing into the actual challenges facing this country, and instead are easy dupes of the elites.

    An intelligent strategy - and a morally worthy one - would be to form an alliance with all factions against our psychopathic elite - such an alliance may be temporary or long lasting, but it is certainly indicated by current circumstances.

    Moreover, white nationalists leaders being materialists, do not understand the moral level. They can't grasp that adopting an attitude of paternalism and support towards blacks is not only morally worthy, but is good strategy, and is perfectly consistent with continuing to point out the misbehavior of blacks and the negative aspects of black culture. Paternalism does not mean abandoning criticism - but criticism in an effort to support and uplift.

    Finally - and this would be the most astonishing thing to someone from the Victorian age - white cultural self-confidence has fallen so low that many today seem to feel genuinely competitive with blacks. To make themselves feel better, they need to put blacks down. 100 years ago, whites would have been so secure in their superiority that the idea of feeling competitive with blacks would be absurd.

    That so many white nationalists are willing to accept Jewish supetiority, but are harsh on blacks and Hispanics, shows not only or even primarily stupidity, but a collapse in self respect, motivation, and willpower. A real cultural collapse.

    The current generation of so called white nationalists seem hopeless - they are too close to, and too conditioned by, the culture of pessimism and defeat that created our current predicamemt, and have proven themselves unable to recover vitality, but rather to embody many of the attitudes that define our cultural collapse and perpetuate them and expand their reach.

    AaronB, this comment and the following ones in exchange with Randal could be distributed as leaflets. They deserve to be printed and framed. Congratulations. Consider writing a longer note. Perhaps Ron Unz would consider publishing it here. I think he is closer to your thinking than that of Sailer.

    One comment: Randal points out that us changing attitude towards Blacks will not necessarily change their attitude towards us. The way to think about it is the Prisoner Dilemma context in which your optimal strategy is to snitch because you expect that the other prisoner also will. But if the prisoners had higher moral standards where snitching is breaking the moral code then your chances of getting off by not snitching may increase. By snitching one only perpetuates the culture of snitching. While by taking a chance of more severe punishment and not snitching the cycle possible can be broken. (BTW, I was always surprised when I discovered how the Prisoner Dilemma was popular in social studies, psychology etc. at university departments. I always suspected that it was a sign of some sinister forces in actions that wanted us to not ever see morality as it was, say formulated by Kant. This is an Anglo-Saxon phenomenon which I call then bottom-lining, i.e, reducing all questions about your actions to the most god awful bottom line.)

    Yes, we may expect obnoxious behavior from Blacks but if we adopt equally obnoxious behavior we are going to Prisoner Dilemma scenario where we forget who is the Jailer and nothing will ever change. So I say yes to your paternalism and morality with the emphasis on the latter as it gives some hope.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AaronB
    Lol, thank you utu, I do appreciate your kind words. But really I am only pointing out common sense morality - none of this should be the least bit revolutionary, and to our forebears would have been common sense.

    And I must give credit to Yan Shen for introducing the idea of "paternalism" - I lifted it from him. I was thinking along similar lines, but he came up with that word, because of his connection with Confucianism.

    I take your point about game theory - indeed, one of the beliefs underlying white surrender of ethnic self consciousness was the hope that others would follow suit. We know it hasn't happened, with Jews conspicuously refraining.

    That's why I now advocate for whites to enter into amicable relations with other ethnic groups on the basis of a healthy ethnic self consciousness of their own, and even help build a new American community on this basis.

    I also agree that game theory is a typical example of anglo-Saxon materialist reductionism, and should be resisted.

    But I think the situation with blacks is a bit different. The major source of their ability to cause mischief is political support from our psychopathic elite, of which too large a number are Jews - which is why the focus should on them rather than blacks. Deprived of this support, and no longer whipped up into a frenzy of resentment and grievance, with efforts being made to instill character and good values, I believe blacks cam become acceptable members of the American community.

    Of course, paternalism towards blacks will not initially result in amicable relations, and much political hay will be made of it - but over time, I think we can pry loose substantial elements within the black community.

    The important thing is to not back down in the face of the accusations of racism that will inevitably come our way. And yet try as the establishment might to tarnish us, such a posture - which actually reflects moral concern - cannot help but burnish our moral image and earn some grudging respect, however reluctant they will be to accord it us.

    Morality *is* force in the world - a lesson we have forgotten to our peril.

    Glad to have you on board!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. utu says:
    @AaronB
    Thank you.

    And that video deserves widespread dissemination, and is a good model for how whites may realistically criticize blacks without surrendering moral concern. This bizarre idea that "race realism" demands harsh mockery and gleeful pointing out of others deficiencies, or that moral concern demands glossing over deficiencies and lying about them - the two poles of the white response to blacks today - is a sad reflection of the radical loss of both genuine realism and genuine morality - in other words, maturity and depth - in our increasingly tawdry and superficial culture.

    I hear you about feeling like a broken record. I feel that way too.

    harsh mockery and gleeful pointing out of others deficiencies

    Yan Shen somehow keeps omitting Sailer in his “bad guys” list. Furthermore he is not credible claiming that there are no Chinese Derbyshires. What about Derbyshire’s children?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Haxo Angmark
    they are mischlinge,

    neither chink nor White.
    , @Yan Shen
    Okay you're right, Steve Sailer can also fall into the same bad habit of counter-productively mocking blacks. I'm sorry that I left him out. :)

    I generally don't like to involve people's family members in these kinds of discussions, but obviously given the huge amount of abuse that various commenters have been directing towards Fred Reed's wife, it seems like many here don't exactly embrace that sort of etiquette.

    , @AaronB
    I think you're selling Yan a little short here, utu. He's been plenty scathing of Sailer all over the place on unz, but he does seem to reserve a special animus for the Derb.

    Well, we all have to have our special bete noir, I suppose, but yes, we could always use someore Sailer bashing.

    And lol, yes, Yan's satisfaction at having no Chinese Derb's will be short lived.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. joef says:
    @Randal

    Focusing on blacks is easy, and a distraction from the real issues. It is also part of the general strategy of the elites to pit different sections of society against each other.
     
    This seems to be a common theme here lately, addressed to people (at Unz of all places!) who legitimately think race is an issue.

    "Why do you obsess over blacks?" "Can't you see you're being manipulated by "the elites"?" (Or by "the ruling class" for those more explicitly adopting Marxist twaddle as their guide to reality).

    1 Race and the routine censorship of honest discussion of it is the reason many come to Unz, where that censorship does not take place. [And by the way, if "the elites" are keen to promote race as an divisive issue, why do they so efficiently suppress one side of the debate over it so as to make it less of a divisive issue? See the next paragraph for the answer.]

    2 Your (and that of all the other antiracist hand-wringers here) pretence that there is no real issue over race is literally absurd. There are probably few greater sources of conflict in US sphere communities, despite the efforts of "the elites" to suppress the white side of the argument in order to keep the doors open for the mass immigration that feeds their profits, breaks down communities and established authorities and norms, and - yes - divides society.

    An intelligent strategy – and a morally worthy one – would be to form an alliance with all factions against our psychopathic elite
     

    This hippy notion that if only we could all just get along, we goodies would easily overwhelm the baddies of "the elite" seems incredible for an adult to actually believe in.

    Try to grasp this, please: the other factions do not agree with you about who are the goodies and who are the baddies, and their interests are not necessarily your interests, or mine.


    That so many white nationalists are willing to accept Jewish supetiority, but are harsh on blacks and Hispanics, shows not only or even primarily stupidity, but a collapse in self respect, motivation, and willpower. A real cultural collapse.

     

    What white nationalists "accept Jewish superiority"? Do you mean those IQ-ists who believe in a supposed higher average IQ for a minority of jews? That's hardly a majority white nationalist thing, nor is it really "accepting Jewish superiority".

    Granted you could argue that the Jared Taylor wing "accepts Jewish superiority" in a de facto kind of way by refusing to confront the real problems caused by jewish lobby power (though that seems more like plain political cowardice or opportunism, and if not then it is presumably an idiosyncratic kind of judeophilia on their part), but the reality is that white nationalists in general are castigated overwhelmingly more for going in the opposite direction and embracing swastikas and "Holocaust denial".


    The current generation of so called white nationalists seem hopeless – they are too close to, and too conditioned by, the culture of pessimism and defeat that created our current predicamemt, and have proven themselves unable to recover vitality, but rather to embody many of the attitudes that define our cultural collapse and perpetuate them and expand their reach.

     

    This appears to be a classic case of "blaming the victim". In reality it's not a "culture of pessimism and defeat" that created our current predicament, rather the other way around, combined with people like you insisting that there is no real issue with race. Pissing on our feet and telling us to our faces that it's raining.

    It's not the white nationalists that lack vitality, but the establishment whites who apologise for black underachievement and black crimes and excuse it all by demonising and scapegoating white history, in collaboration with the various identity lobbies with an interest in doing so. They have (by virtue of having lots of money and dominating the media megaphone) imposed that worship on the wider white population, enabled in part by people like you telling anyone standing up against it that they are objecting to something that isn't real.

    Granted that reflects a profound loss of confidence and failure to resist within the white races in general, but that itself dates back many decades, and "white nationalism" in its various forms (often just resistance to mass immigration and to pc antiracist discrimination) is a response to that weakness (and likely the only one that, in the long run, will allow any return to normal self-confidence).


    Finally – and this would be the most astonishing thing to someone from the Victorian age – white cultural self-confidence has fallen so low that many today seem to feel genuinely competitive with blacks. To make themselves feel better, they need to put blacks down. 100 years ago, whites would have been so secure in their superiority that the idea of feeling competitive with blacks would be absurd.
     
    100 years ago there were not huge government schemes to transfer wealth to blacks and laws to enforce discrimination against whites to supposedly benefit blacks, nor as many indoctrinated people like you telling whites that "race isn't an issue" and that they are getting all upset over nothing, as black thugs in their schools bully their children and armed black thugs menace them in their own disarmed streets and homes.

    Your (and that of all the other antiracist hand-wringers here) pretence that there is no real issue over race is literally absurd. There are probably few greater sources of conflict in US sphere communities, despite the efforts of “the elites” to suppress the white side of the argument in order to keep the doors open for the mass immigration that feeds their profits, breaks down communities and established authorities and norms, and – yes – divides society.

    I agree with the above statement. Those who pontificate from afar in cupcake land, never having to deal with the real violent consequences of bad urban afro behavior, love to tell the rest of us what we should think. They also like to pretend that the multitude of victims (including other Blacks themselves), from afro criminal violence, do not exist.

    Their typical solution is: just ignore it, while pandering & praising ad nauseam, with forever increasing entitlements, and it will all get better. Well it hasn’t gotten better in the last fifty years, and arguably it has gotten much much worse. As once great American cities become their own versions of failed states, these enablers demand that we overlook all racial reality; however this unreasonable stipulation is detrimental to our own survival.

    We respond to afros, the way we do, because they are the primary aggressors (not because we hate them), and this simple cause and effect is lost upon these over credulous fools. If race relations are to get better, it is up to the afro american to repudiate their own antisocial actions. If these racial panderers want to ignore reality, and eventually die off from it, so be it… but don’t expect the rest of us to go along and be their willing victims. We did not ask for this, but it is what it is.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    Their typical solution is: just ignore it, while pandering & praising ad nauseam, with forever increasing entitlements, and it will all get better. Well it hasn’t gotten better in the last fifty years, and arguably it has gotten much much worse.
    ...
    If race relations are to get better, it is up to the afro american to repudiate their own antisocial actions
     
    Absolutely.

    At the least, it's necessary to stop pretending it's all the fault of white people. Though in truth, the worst offenders, and the ones who really matter on that, are not the black grievance mongers but the white apologists who enable them. To that extent, and to that extent alone, it is up to us. We need to disempower not the "racists" who merely point out unpleasant truths, but rather the race apologists who control the discourse in our own societies. Somehow.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. @utu

    harsh mockery and gleeful pointing out of others deficiencies
     
    Yan Shen somehow keeps omitting Sailer in his "bad guys" list. Furthermore he is not credible claiming that there are no Chinese Derbyshires. What about Derbyshire's children?

    they are mischlinge,

    neither chink nor White.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. llloyd says: • Website

    Blacks have a huge chip on their shoulder through the anti white indoctrination in the schools and media. In China and Hong Kong, the blacks are generally from Africa. They are merchants and workers. There is a black drug problem in China. But as far as I know no violence and crime problem. If they cause trouble, they are out of the country same as all other foreign visitors. America has that horrible ghetto culture which does not seem to permeate much of Africa. I suspect it does in South Africa. Now who invented and funded the ghetto culture?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  35. Yan Shen says:
    @utu

    harsh mockery and gleeful pointing out of others deficiencies
     
    Yan Shen somehow keeps omitting Sailer in his "bad guys" list. Furthermore he is not credible claiming that there are no Chinese Derbyshires. What about Derbyshire's children?

    Okay you’re right, Steve Sailer can also fall into the same bad habit of counter-productively mocking blacks. I’m sorry that I left him out. :)

    I generally don’t like to involve people’s family members in these kinds of discussions, but obviously given the huge amount of abuse that various commenters have been directing towards Fred Reed’s wife, it seems like many here don’t exactly embrace that sort of etiquette.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. AaronB says:
    @utu
    AaronB, this comment and the following ones in exchange with Randal could be distributed as leaflets. They deserve to be printed and framed. Congratulations. Consider writing a longer note. Perhaps Ron Unz would consider publishing it here. I think he is closer to your thinking than that of Sailer.

    One comment: Randal points out that us changing attitude towards Blacks will not necessarily change their attitude towards us. The way to think about it is the Prisoner Dilemma context in which your optimal strategy is to snitch because you expect that the other prisoner also will. But if the prisoners had higher moral standards where snitching is breaking the moral code then your chances of getting off by not snitching may increase. By snitching one only perpetuates the culture of snitching. While by taking a chance of more severe punishment and not snitching the cycle possible can be broken. (BTW, I was always surprised when I discovered how the Prisoner Dilemma was popular in social studies, psychology etc. at university departments. I always suspected that it was a sign of some sinister forces in actions that wanted us to not ever see morality as it was, say formulated by Kant. This is an Anglo-Saxon phenomenon which I call then bottom-lining, i.e, reducing all questions about your actions to the most god awful bottom line.)

    Yes, we may expect obnoxious behavior from Blacks but if we adopt equally obnoxious behavior we are going to Prisoner Dilemma scenario where we forget who is the Jailer and nothing will ever change. So I say yes to your paternalism and morality with the emphasis on the latter as it gives some hope.

    Lol, thank you utu, I do appreciate your kind words. But really I am only pointing out common sense morality – none of this should be the least bit revolutionary, and to our forebears would have been common sense.

    And I must give credit to Yan Shen for introducing the idea of “paternalism” – I lifted it from him. I was thinking along similar lines, but he came up with that word, because of his connection with Confucianism.

    I take your point about game theory – indeed, one of the beliefs underlying white surrender of ethnic self consciousness was the hope that others would follow suit. We know it hasn’t happened, with Jews conspicuously refraining.

    That’s why I now advocate for whites to enter into amicable relations with other ethnic groups on the basis of a healthy ethnic self consciousness of their own, and even help build a new American community on this basis.

    I also agree that game theory is a typical example of anglo-Saxon materialist reductionism, and should be resisted.

    But I think the situation with blacks is a bit different. The major source of their ability to cause mischief is political support from our psychopathic elite, of which too large a number are Jews – which is why the focus should on them rather than blacks. Deprived of this support, and no longer whipped up into a frenzy of resentment and grievance, with efforts being made to instill character and good values, I believe blacks cam become acceptable members of the American community.

    Of course, paternalism towards blacks will not initially result in amicable relations, and much political hay will be made of it – but over time, I think we can pry loose substantial elements within the black community.

    The important thing is to not back down in the face of the accusations of racism that will inevitably come our way. And yet try as the establishment might to tarnish us, such a posture – which actually reflects moral concern – cannot help but burnish our moral image and earn some grudging respect, however reluctant they will be to accord it us.

    Morality *is* force in the world – a lesson we have forgotten to our peril.

    Glad to have you on board!

    Read More
    • Replies: @lavoisier
    But I think the situation with blacks is a bit different. The major source of their ability to cause mischief is political support from our psychopathic elite, of which too large a number are Jews – which is why the focus should on them rather than blacks.

    Very true this--but blacks are responsible for their behavior first and foremost.

    I enjoy reading your commentary Aaron. I can sense a spiritual struggle that is ongoing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. AaronB says:
    @utu

    harsh mockery and gleeful pointing out of others deficiencies
     
    Yan Shen somehow keeps omitting Sailer in his "bad guys" list. Furthermore he is not credible claiming that there are no Chinese Derbyshires. What about Derbyshire's children?

    I think you’re selling Yan a little short here, utu. He’s been plenty scathing of Sailer all over the place on unz, but he does seem to reserve a special animus for the Derb.

    Well, we all have to have our special bete noir, I suppose, but yes, we could always use someore Sailer bashing.

    And lol, yes, Yan’s satisfaction at having no Chinese Derb’s will be short lived.

    Read More
    • LOL: Yan Shen
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:

    Thanks to those thoughtful, articulate commenters above, including both AaronB and Randal.

    Can we all agree that Mr. Weissberg’s columns are eyesores on an excellent website?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  39. Randal says:
    @AaronB
    Ok, by all means let us focus on race then and point out black misbehavior and the negative aspects of black culture. I can see why many regard this as a pressing issue, and my suggestion to ignore it in favor of a political alliance is perhaps misguided. One can reasonably differ in this, and I am not committed to that aspect of my position.

    But the main thrust of my argument is to introduce a moral dimension into our discussion of race - and to develop a more realistic conception of race by considering the role of character and values.

    Tell me this - would you support discussing black deficiencies - with unstinting honesty - but within the context of paternalism and moral concern? Connected to this, do you think the tendency to discount the role of character and values in achievement may be a leading factor in the loss of motivation among whites, and that once again introducing these factors into circulation may have the double-effect of revitalizing whites and uplifting blacks?

    Moreover, do you think Sailer's sycophantic fawning over Jews is unrelated to his gleeful and mocking tone when discussing blacks - and that his nullifying the role of character and values and exclusive focus on genes is the underlying factor in his attitude and conveys a damaging message to whites and black s?

    And do you think Jews - who manipulate blacks against whites and form a disproportionate share of our psychopathic elite - or blacks, a dysfunctional community incapable of serious mischief without political support, should be our main focus?

    You see, these questions are not neutral - and nothing good can be accomplished without genuine morality. Steve's mocking tone towards blacks is not trivial or incidental - but indicates lack of character, which underlay his fawning submisiveness to Jews, and worse - his spreading of the poison of fatalism among whites.

    No, character matters.

    Ok, by all means let us focus on race then and point out black misbehavior and the negative aspects of black culture. I can see why many regard this as a pressing issue, and my suggestion to ignore it in favor of a political alliance is perhaps misguided. One can reasonably differ in this, and I am not committed to that aspect of my position.

    Fair enough, and the minimum level of not de facto allying with the establishment by attacking each other’s base concerns in a sweeping fashion is all I am really asking for here. I do not expect agreement from either side with the other’s core concerns – that’s up to every individual. Just the basic respect that the establishment intentionally denies to both those concerned with race and those concerned with the jewish issue.

    But the main thrust of my argument is to introduce a moral dimension into our discussion of race – and to develop a more realistic conception of race by considering the role of character and values.

    OK, clearly here your ideas of what constitutes a moral dimension and what counts as more realistic or as good character and values are not necessarily shared by others. I can’t say I’m convinced by your arguments thus far. I don’t agree with the idea you put forward that it is whites’ hostility to blacks that is responsible for blacks’ behaviour (clearly these are all gross generalisations, but one cannot talk about such big issues without generalisation). In the end, blacks and only blacks are responsible for how they behave. If they have been supplied with plenty of ammunition for their grievance obsession over historical issues by others, they have also chosen to take up and push those attitudes amongst themselves instead of turning their anger inwards and sorting out the gross problems in their own communities. The ones who blame whitey always seem to win out over the few who blame the black thugs who live by violence, demand subsidies and glorify bling and personal aggression.

    The lesson of the past century seems to be that the more civil rights and respect (state- and society-coerced), and the more equality and economic advantages blacks are given, the worse the black ghettos have become, and the more angry and embittered blacks have become.

    You blame “white nationalists” without any seeming awareness that “white nationalists” (no matter how wide you draw the net, to include even just casual racists) have been a marginalised and irrelevant force in US sphere societies for decades now. It is not white racists, but those who believe as you do in showing respect, even to the point of denying and suppressing basic inconvenient truths (such as the gross differences in violent crime rates) who have been in almost total control of these societies.

    Tell me this – would you support discussing black deficiencies – with unstinting honesty – but within the context of paternalism and moral concern?

    I would have no problem with this, so long as it doesn’t require denying the right to raise unpleasant issues, but that doesn’t mean I would share your assumptions as to what those terms mean. I tend to sympathise (and I doubt you would) with the argument that the loss of old school Christianity and of firm externally imposed discipline was a key factor in the decline of black society, and would say that they clearly need such a coercive religious and social structure to thrive. But that is not an easily tenable position within the context of universalist equality dogma. The implications are profound.

    I do not pretend to have an answer, either for blacks or for whites. All I know is that the current loss of confidence by white society is a profound and existentially threatening situation that must be dealt with somehow. One aspect though must be to stop apologising for past actions in very different contexts, and to stop pretending we are to blame for all the flaws of the world. Blacks must solve their own society’s problems, and I have no answer for that, though I will not accept any solution that involves them indefinitely blaming my race and society, however.

    Connected to this, do you think the tendency to discount the role of character and values in achievement may be a leading factor in the loss of motivation among whites, and that once again introducing these factors into circulation may have the double-effect of revitalizing whites and uplifting blacks?

    Again, I do not see how you blame attitudes you impute to “white nationalists” for problems in wider society, when the “white nationalists” you blame have been such a marginalised force for so long. Above, you write: “The current exclusive focus on “innate ability” which only whites are guilty of, is a millstone around your neck – it’s a mask for white demotivation, defeatism, despair, and loss of cultural self-confidence, and it perpetuates these destructive attitudes“. But outside of a few marginalised groups, the idea of innate ability has had zero influence in the societies of the US sphere for a generation or more. The triumph of the “blank slate” left has been almost complete at all powerful levels of society. A dogged idea of innate ability remains amongst the masses, mostly as a visceral understanding that stubbornly refuses to accept the dogmas that are everywhere assumed above them. How can the ideas of “white nationalists” be responsible for the demotivation, defeatism, despair, and loss of cultural self-confidence in white society when they were so comprehensively defeated and marginalised a generation and more ago.

    By the way, you attribute to me the positions of those I am defending, but as I noted above I am a fellow traveller of both those who see the importance of the race issue and those who recognise the significance of the jewish issue. I am not fully on board with the extremes of either group. In this case, I am not a believe in innate ability alone, rather in a mixed situation, much as I have little doubt that intellect is a product of a mix of nature and nurture, and probably a fairly even mix. As a matter of fact, I wonder how many even of the most extreme amongst those you criticise are actually as hard line as you suggest (Sailer, for instance, I have repeatedly seen suggesting that IQ is probably a result of an even mix of nature and nurture).

    Moreover, do you think Sailer’s sycophantic fawning over Jews is unrelated to his gleeful and mocking tone when discussing blacks

    Here, as I noted above, I don’t see what you see, but perhaps I haven’t read Sailer closely enough on these issues. I’ve noticed that he is reluctant to criticise jewish lobby power too openly, and that he is on board with those who believe in a higher average IQ for a particular subset of jews. The latter seems a relatively trivial detail to me, and the former I have tended to ascribe to his sharing the Jared Taylor faction approach, and doubtless for similar reasons (for my views on which, see my previous post). It’s not ideal, but I don’t see why I need him pointing out problems with excess jewish power any more than I need Saker pointing out problems with black behaviour and antiracism. Horses for courses.

    Inasmuch as there is any particular element of “gleeful mocking” in Sailer’s views on blacks (and I don’t see much of that), I would see it as a very understandable response to the active suppression of his opinions by society. One can hardly blame him for being unsympathetic each time he is proved right, in the circumstances.

    And do you think Jews – who manipulate blacks against whites and form a disproportionate share of our psychopathic elite – or blacks, a dysfunctional community incapable of serious mischief without political support, should be our main focus?

    Again, as noted above I’m not fully on board with the extremes of either faction. I recognise that jewish influence is a big problem, but I doubt many of the more comprehensive attributions to it. However, I see no need to actively attack them here – there’s more than enough of that in the wider establishment media.

    I see both as problems, though on race here my focus is not particularly on blacks, but on the racial strife caused by mass immigration more widely, probably reflecting my British rather than US experience.

    No, character matters.

    Doubtless, but not necessarily in the way you apply it.

    Turning from the general to the specific, the above piece is aimed at criticising particular aspects of black behaviour, namely the tendency to rowdy and aggressive personal interactions and to violent crime, together with their aversion to higher culture which is seen as too white. As a result of the former, suspect looking blacks are entirely understandably even less welcome in public spaces than are suspect looking whites, because such behaviour is unpleasant for others. That’s an issue that it is absolutely legitimate to address, and the approach adopted in the above piece is a perfectly reasonable response to the fact that the establishment media actively suppresses any approach critical of the stereotypically black behaviour at the root of the problem.

    If blacks dislike it, the solution is not to criticise the tone or the underlying attitudes (since suppressing even just the arguably unpleasant aspects of just one side of the debate will only push society further out of balance) but to solve the issues of black behaviour and cultural attitudes that underlie it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. Randal says:
    @joef

    Your (and that of all the other antiracist hand-wringers here) pretence that there is no real issue over race is literally absurd. There are probably few greater sources of conflict in US sphere communities, despite the efforts of “the elites” to suppress the white side of the argument in order to keep the doors open for the mass immigration that feeds their profits, breaks down communities and established authorities and norms, and – yes – divides society.
     
    I agree with the above statement. Those who pontificate from afar in cupcake land, never having to deal with the real violent consequences of bad urban afro behavior, love to tell the rest of us what we should think. They also like to pretend that the multitude of victims (including other Blacks themselves), from afro criminal violence, do not exist.

    Their typical solution is: just ignore it, while pandering & praising ad nauseam, with forever increasing entitlements, and it will all get better. Well it hasn't gotten better in the last fifty years, and arguably it has gotten much much worse. As once great American cities become their own versions of failed states, these enablers demand that we overlook all racial reality; however this unreasonable stipulation is detrimental to our own survival.

    We respond to afros, the way we do, because they are the primary aggressors (not because we hate them), and this simple cause and effect is lost upon these over credulous fools. If race relations are to get better, it is up to the afro american to repudiate their own antisocial actions. If these racial panderers want to ignore reality, and eventually die off from it, so be it... but don't expect the rest of us to go along and be their willing victims. We did not ask for this, but it is what it is.

    Their typical solution is: just ignore it, while pandering & praising ad nauseam, with forever increasing entitlements, and it will all get better. Well it hasn’t gotten better in the last fifty years, and arguably it has gotten much much worse.

    If race relations are to get better, it is up to the afro american to repudiate their own antisocial actions

    Absolutely.

    At the least, it’s necessary to stop pretending it’s all the fault of white people. Though in truth, the worst offenders, and the ones who really matter on that, are not the black grievance mongers but the white apologists who enable them. To that extent, and to that extent alone, it is up to us. We need to disempower not the “racists” who merely point out unpleasant truths, but rather the race apologists who control the discourse in our own societies. Somehow.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AaronB
    Your comment leads me to think we are not understanding each other and there is far more agreement between us than at first appeared. It is also clear that your response to me is shaped by your fears of wider cultural trends that you mistakenly think I represent, but in fact which I oppose, which I hope to make clear.

    You have also helped me understand that much of your - and the alt-rights - attitude is "reactive" to contemporary trends - which is understandable but constitutes a surrendering to the enemy the power to shape the terms of the debate.

    For instance, you claim that since the establishment stresses the "blank slate", we must emphasize "innate ability" equally hard. While understandable, such a reaction is deeply flawed and underscores the futility of merely being "reactive" without introducing a "positive" element into our program. We cannot merely deny what they say, however true - we must frame it within the context of a "positive" element that is capable of generating enthusiasm and creating allegiance.

    In other words, we must never lose sight of the moral level. The correct response to the emphasis on the blank slate is to insist on natural limitations while simultaneously emphasizing the supremely important role of character and willpower to realize our our innate potential, and create favorable outcomes as much as is feasible whatever our natural limitations.

    Because they insist on unbounded and unrealistic possibility, doesn't mean we must sink into a sense of fatalism and severely bounded incapacity. That is a tragic mistake. In fact, while their position has proven emotional and rhetorical appeal, it suffers from being unrealistic and creating aspirations that are doomed to disappointmrnt. I think there is far more emotional appeal in a genuinely realistic emphasis on effortful self-improvement tempered by a sense of natural limits. This is more likely to create aspirations that are realized, and is much better at cushioning failure - after all, there is no shame in trying your best and coming up against natural limits - and is a much better basis for long-term self-respect and personal satisfaction.

    You must remember that this is a war that is fought on the moral level, like all wars, and it is absolutely imperative that we include an uplifting and positive moral element in our program. Merely emphasizing innate ability while discounting the role of effort demoralizes everyone and guarantees that innate potential will never be realized, and that sub-optimal outcomes will be the rule, and produces grotesqueries like Sailer submissively accepting Jewish rule because it can't possibly be largely the product of tremendous effort, which we may hope to match, but must be the inevitable
    result of innate ability which we are powerless to do anything about.

    That the reaction has been primarily of this "reactive" nature so far convinces me that white nationalists have not yet been able to produce far-seeing leaders capable of transcending the terms created by our enemies, and becoming autonomous thinkers capable of internally-generated original ideas that outflank and undercut in appeal those created by our enemies.

    And this is likely caused by materialism - which makes everyone stupid.

    Now, the second - and perhaps primary - thread that runs through your entire comment is that I am blaming black dysfunction on whites, which is indeed a contemporary trends which you are understandably wary of, but which I cannot be accused of in any way shape or form. You have gotten me completely wrong here, and are seeing a bogeyman where none exists.

    What I did suggest is that blacks will never form an alliance with whites if they are not treated with respect and with moral concern. But that is a completely different thing.

    I fully concur with you that a major - the major - contributing factor in black dysfunction is the loss of "coercive" religious and social support provided by Christianity. In fact that is nothing less than one of the burdens of my argument. We all need this structure - emphatically including whites, who have lost it. Jews and Asians still posses it - and that is an underappreciated source of their strength by those who are too caught up in innate ability.

    You say it is perfectly reasonable to address the incident of black mischief -making in public spaces - I couldn't agree more, but it cannot be done in tones of contemptuous condemnation, but rather must include an element of morally uplifting concern. Criticism for the purpose of helping to improve - not for the purpose of establishing the others inferiority relative to your own.

    This would be a genuinely new element - neither the dismissive contempt of the alt-right, nor the excuse-making indulgence of the left, but a mature policy that reflects depth. It holds blacks to account while offering moral support, and fulfills our own moral responsibilities as a s stronger group with more social capital. The strong must help the weak. This does not mean excusing bad conduct - rather the opposite.

    And that is what I am saying. It should not be controversial.
    , @joef

    Though in truth, the worst offenders, and the ones who really matter on that, are not the black grievance mongers but the white apologists who enable them. To that extent, and to that extent alone, it is up to us. We need to disempower not the “racists” who merely point out unpleasant truths, but rather the race apologists who control the discourse in our own societies
     
    You are absolutely correct on this... but good luck with that. They can mold more public opinion through the MSM, and academia, than by word of mouth; especially since polite company refuses to believe any true bad experiences re: afros. I just do not see any reversal from this, and very bad times are coming. People like Reagan who saved this nation from stagflation, and Giuliani who saved NYC from urban decay, are not a common occurrences. Despite Trump being carelessly vocal, he is attempting to address today's problems, but the republicrats (our socialist/corporatist political coalition) is undermining him (who they are really undermining are the American voters). No one will save us from our future 1970s style decline again (and if continued unabated, we will eventually be stuck with the unfortunate choice of either "fight or die"... the only good part is many of these meddling destructive leftist progs will result as the later).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. Great suggestions, Robert Weissberg. Rapier wit.

    “Let’s return to Starbucks. Unfortunately, a restaurant’s first line of defense against such an invasion—its menu—is useless here.”

    Did anyone see the video in which a black woman news caster interviews the two? The reveal that something is seriously wrong here is when one of the dudes, in retelling his version of what went down, said that a server had come to their table and asked if she could start them off with a couple of drinks and whether they wanted water.

    At a Starbucks????

    Bullsh*t. No servers at Starbucks.

    The proverbial “dindu nuffins”, “we was jus sittin there minding our own bidnis” and these white people just ______ for no reason.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  42. @anonymous
    If I was the writer, I would be pretty embarrassed.

    “If I [were] the writer”, not “was”. It’s the hypothetical.

    You should be at least a little embarrassed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    As should Mr. Weissberg, again, by his tense-challenged comment immediately below yours.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. @unit472
    I am reminded of a long ago instance where a Denny's restaurant in, I believe, San Jose, Ca. was accused of staging 'black outs' when it saw negroes arriving late at night. It would shut off its lights and pretend to be closed. The why of this is not hard to understand as negroes loiter at tables, are poor tippers, are loud and make other customers uncomfortable. They also rob cashiers and can become violent if their meager orders are not prepared and served to their satisfaction. They just aren't worth the trouble.

    Unfortunately, as the author indicates, not a lot can be done to deny negroes service except to make the atmosphere as undesirable to the negro as possible but even that is now fraught with risk. Philadelphia wants to prohibit bullet resistant barriers between clerks and customers as being racist degrading affronts to negro dignity and who wants to have a cup of coffee and muffin in a shop that has an armed security guard?

    I often laugh when, after a so called, racist incident is alleged, blacks call for a boycott of the airline, restaurant, amusement park etc. Are they really so dim witted as to realize that if they did 'boycott' the business everyone else would be overjoyed? I've never gone to a Starbucks but if it became known as place negroes never went to I might just overcome my aversion to this companies leftist tilt and buy coffee there.

    Years back the NAACP call for blacks to boycott South Carolina over the Confederate battle flag. At least a few whites were thrilled and no doubt make travel plans to visit the state.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. AaronB says:
    @Randal

    Their typical solution is: just ignore it, while pandering & praising ad nauseam, with forever increasing entitlements, and it will all get better. Well it hasn’t gotten better in the last fifty years, and arguably it has gotten much much worse.
    ...
    If race relations are to get better, it is up to the afro american to repudiate their own antisocial actions
     
    Absolutely.

    At the least, it's necessary to stop pretending it's all the fault of white people. Though in truth, the worst offenders, and the ones who really matter on that, are not the black grievance mongers but the white apologists who enable them. To that extent, and to that extent alone, it is up to us. We need to disempower not the "racists" who merely point out unpleasant truths, but rather the race apologists who control the discourse in our own societies. Somehow.

    Your comment leads me to think we are not understanding each other and there is far more agreement between us than at first appeared. It is also clear that your response to me is shaped by your fears of wider cultural trends that you mistakenly think I represent, but in fact which I oppose, which I hope to make clear.

    You have also helped me understand that much of your – and the alt-rights – attitude is “reactive” to contemporary trends – which is understandable but constitutes a surrendering to the enemy the power to shape the terms of the debate.

    For instance, you claim that since the establishment stresses the “blank slate”, we must emphasize “innate ability” equally hard. While understandable, such a reaction is deeply flawed and underscores the futility of merely being “reactive” without introducing a “positive” element into our program. We cannot merely deny what they say, however true – we must frame it within the context of a “positive” element that is capable of generating enthusiasm and creating allegiance.

    In other words, we must never lose sight of the moral level. The correct response to the emphasis on the blank slate is to insist on natural limitations while simultaneously emphasizing the supremely important role of character and willpower to realize our our innate potential, and create favorable outcomes as much as is feasible whatever our natural limitations.

    Because they insist on unbounded and unrealistic possibility, doesn’t mean we must sink into a sense of fatalism and severely bounded incapacity. That is a tragic mistake. In fact, while their position has proven emotional and rhetorical appeal, it suffers from being unrealistic and creating aspirations that are doomed to disappointmrnt. I think there is far more emotional appeal in a genuinely realistic emphasis on effortful self-improvement tempered by a sense of natural limits. This is more likely to create aspirations that are realized, and is much better at cushioning failure – after all, there is no shame in trying your best and coming up against natural limits – and is a much better basis for long-term self-respect and personal satisfaction.

    You must remember that this is a war that is fought on the moral level, like all wars, and it is absolutely imperative that we include an uplifting and positive moral element in our program. Merely emphasizing innate ability while discounting the role of effort demoralizes everyone and guarantees that innate potential will never be realized, and that sub-optimal outcomes will be the rule, and produces grotesqueries like Sailer submissively accepting Jewish rule because it can’t possibly be largely the product of tremendous effort, which we may hope to match, but must be the inevitable
    result of innate ability which we are powerless to do anything about.

    That the reaction has been primarily of this “reactive” nature so far convinces me that white nationalists have not yet been able to produce far-seeing leaders capable of transcending the terms created by our enemies, and becoming autonomous thinkers capable of internally-generated original ideas that outflank and undercut in appeal those created by our enemies.

    And this is likely caused by materialism – which makes everyone stupid.

    Now, the second – and perhaps primary – thread that runs through your entire comment is that I am blaming black dysfunction on whites, which is indeed a contemporary trends which you are understandably wary of, but which I cannot be accused of in any way shape or form. You have gotten me completely wrong here, and are seeing a bogeyman where none exists.

    What I did suggest is that blacks will never form an alliance with whites if they are not treated with respect and with moral concern. But that is a completely different thing.

    I fully concur with you that a major – the major – contributing factor in black dysfunction is the loss of “coercive” religious and social support provided by Christianity. In fact that is nothing less than one of the burdens of my argument. We all need this structure – emphatically including whites, who have lost it. Jews and Asians still posses it – and that is an underappreciated source of their strength by those who are too caught up in innate ability.

    You say it is perfectly reasonable to address the incident of black mischief -making in public spaces – I couldn’t agree more, but it cannot be done in tones of contemptuous condemnation, but rather must include an element of morally uplifting concern. Criticism for the purpose of helping to improve – not for the purpose of establishing the others inferiority relative to your own.

    This would be a genuinely new element – neither the dismissive contempt of the alt-right, nor the excuse-making indulgence of the left, but a mature policy that reflects depth. It holds blacks to account while offering moral support, and fulfills our own moral responsibilities as a s stronger group with more social capital. The strong must help the weak. This does not mean excusing bad conduct – rather the opposite.

    And that is what I am saying. It should not be controversial.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    There is one problem with paternalism. It can be applied only if one posses power. Children dream of murdering their parents. In every Negro's mind there is a desire to bring down the White Man. They want to dominate. They do not know what would they do once they achieve the domination. They want to kill. Children grow up and grow out form murderous fantasies once the begin seeking fulfillment in they own lives. Negros will never grow up.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @ThreeCranes
    "If I [were] the writer", not "was". It's the hypothetical.

    You should be at least a little embarrassed.

    As should Mr. Weissberg, again, by his tense-challenged comment immediately below yours.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. Truth says:
    @anonymous
    Look back over the past six months, and you'll see others that are even more poorly edited. (He's also a witless and predictable humorist, piling on silly stuff until he hits a word count.)

    No matter what Mr. Weissberg purports to write about, his purpose is nearly always to denigrate black people.

    Why is Mr. Weissberg so obsessed with black people?

    He and Derb and Paul Kersey are enrolled in the same PhD in Blackpeopleology program. Weissberg is a legacy admit though.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. Truth says:
    @Them Guys
    Yes agree and as another suggestion when and if such methods in article fail to work.

    Just call, 1-800-Rent A Biker....Guarenteed and easy to locate 1/2 dozen hard core bad ass biker guys willing to suplement income willing to hang out inside or outside store or both for cheep! Say like $10 per hr cash money, and a free hand when necessary to defend selves and store patrons from an savage acts by brutal savages and undesirables.

    99.99% of time no such defense actions will take place...Just the fact of being there will defintly cause inner city ghetto types to pass store by.

    And now that for past two decades, and due to unknown reasons???, unlike back in 1960-70's eras, todays bikers are well liked and appreciated by most non-colored folks.

    Used to be signs at almost every type store-bars-resturants, that stated "NO Motorcycles Allowed on Premises" and "NO Black Leather motorcycle Attire inside".

    Back then zero such boycots and payment demands occured....Everyone basically understood a private buis has a right to who is allowed in etc.

    Meanwhile it seems all a sudden around 20 some odd yrs ago or so, so many non biker type people and most buisness' alike began to Like and welcome bikers in!

    Its some form of a wired phenomonon this occured...But ever since then a majority of folks in usa like bikes and bikers so much, many even hold deep inner secret desires to Be a biker!

    Even 85 yr old ladies out for a hair perm or whatever, stop off at seeing bikes parked to make nice sincere comments on how swell the bikes look or how cool pint jobs are on custom jobs.

    I mention all that as proof that Now today there has never before been a better time to hire such guys to act as deterents to unwanted riff raff that refuse all other forms or methods.

    Best of all the very meere presence of a few bad ass biker types is more than enough to get job done, and done via no need for phys actions nor even verbal warnings issued by them guys.

    Consider....Who else can have just Two guys on harleys, ride thru worst ghettos of Detroit at 2 to 3:00 A.M when headed back home and need take short route to save time and get out of cold nite temps and do so withOUT any worry of being two white guys cruising thru some of americas absolute worst ground zero ghetto inner city rats nest....And never get harmed nor threat's of such?

    It is The Perfect solution....Whites Love bikers and colored folks get very scared of and avoid em.

    Just call, 1-800-Rent A Biker….Guarenteed and easy to locate 1/2 dozen hard core bad ass biker guys willing to suplement income willing to hang out inside or outside store or both for cheep!

    The sheer brilliance brought to you by the 150+ IQ crowd…

    Read More
    • Replies: @sayless
    I didn't like having five kids who were all bigger than me threatening to cut my eyes out on the subway. What would you suggest.

    Bikers would've been nice to have around.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Truth says:
    @AaronB
    Focusing on blacks is easy, and a distraction from the real issues. It is also part of the general strategy of the elites to pit different sections of society against each other. That's also why they obsess over hispanics.

    That white nationalists leaders obsess over blacks and Hispanics shows that the alt-right hasnt been able to produce a high caliber leadership capable of long term thinking and clear seeing into the actual challenges facing this country, and instead are easy dupes of the elites.

    An intelligent strategy - and a morally worthy one - would be to form an alliance with all factions against our psychopathic elite - such an alliance may be temporary or long lasting, but it is certainly indicated by current circumstances.

    Moreover, white nationalists leaders being materialists, do not understand the moral level. They can't grasp that adopting an attitude of paternalism and support towards blacks is not only morally worthy, but is good strategy, and is perfectly consistent with continuing to point out the misbehavior of blacks and the negative aspects of black culture. Paternalism does not mean abandoning criticism - but criticism in an effort to support and uplift.

    Finally - and this would be the most astonishing thing to someone from the Victorian age - white cultural self-confidence has fallen so low that many today seem to feel genuinely competitive with blacks. To make themselves feel better, they need to put blacks down. 100 years ago, whites would have been so secure in their superiority that the idea of feeling competitive with blacks would be absurd.

    That so many white nationalists are willing to accept Jewish supetiority, but are harsh on blacks and Hispanics, shows not only or even primarily stupidity, but a collapse in self respect, motivation, and willpower. A real cultural collapse.

    The current generation of so called white nationalists seem hopeless - they are too close to, and too conditioned by, the culture of pessimism and defeat that created our current predicamemt, and have proven themselves unable to recover vitality, but rather to embody many of the attitudes that define our cultural collapse and perpetuate them and expand their reach.

    That so many white nationalists are willing to accept Jewish supetiority, but are harsh on blacks and Hispanics, shows not only or even primarily stupidity

    Good post.

    If it ain’t primary, we’re going to a photo-finish.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. Anonymous[378] • Disclaimer says:

    Blasting Mozart to drive criminals (Blacks) away

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/blasting-mozart-to-drive-criminals-away/2011/10/11/gIQAgDqPEQ_story.html?utm_term=.abeebb833bcb

    Some months ago, I was sitting at the Port Authority Bus Terminal in New York with enough time on my hands that I actually noticed the music coming over the speakers in the ceiling. It was the scherzo from Schubert’s first piano trio. Schubert’s piano trios are among my favorite pieces in the universe, but as I listened, I found that I wasn’t relaxing; quite the contrary. The music sounded awful: tinny, hard-edged, aggressive. I wanted to get away.

    I’ve long heard that the Port Authority is one of many public spaces across the country that uses classical music to help control vagrancy: to drive the homeless away. Listening to that Schubert rendition, I started to believe it.

    To many people, classical music is the perfect background music: soothing, attractive, undemanding. But for some time, it’s also been used as a form of crowd control: a kind of bug spray for people you don’t want hanging around. Early attempts in this direction date to the mid-1980s, when a 7-Eleven began playing music in the parking lot as a deterrent to the crowds of teenagers congregating there. Plenty of stores continue to use the technique, and other examples have been cropping up sporadically ever since. In 2001, police in West Palm Beach, Fla., blasted Mozart and Beethoven on a crime-ridden street corner and saw incidents dwindle dramatically

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  50. joef says:
    @Randal

    Their typical solution is: just ignore it, while pandering & praising ad nauseam, with forever increasing entitlements, and it will all get better. Well it hasn’t gotten better in the last fifty years, and arguably it has gotten much much worse.
    ...
    If race relations are to get better, it is up to the afro american to repudiate their own antisocial actions
     
    Absolutely.

    At the least, it's necessary to stop pretending it's all the fault of white people. Though in truth, the worst offenders, and the ones who really matter on that, are not the black grievance mongers but the white apologists who enable them. To that extent, and to that extent alone, it is up to us. We need to disempower not the "racists" who merely point out unpleasant truths, but rather the race apologists who control the discourse in our own societies. Somehow.

    Though in truth, the worst offenders, and the ones who really matter on that, are not the black grievance mongers but the white apologists who enable them. To that extent, and to that extent alone, it is up to us. We need to disempower not the “racists” who merely point out unpleasant truths, but rather the race apologists who control the discourse in our own societies

    You are absolutely correct on this… but good luck with that. They can mold more public opinion through the MSM, and academia, than by word of mouth; especially since polite company refuses to believe any true bad experiences re: afros. I just do not see any reversal from this, and very bad times are coming. People like Reagan who saved this nation from stagflation, and Giuliani who saved NYC from urban decay, are not a common occurrences. Despite Trump being carelessly vocal, he is attempting to address today’s problems, but the republicrats (our socialist/corporatist political coalition) is undermining him (who they are really undermining are the American voters). No one will save us from our future 1970s style decline again (and if continued unabated, we will eventually be stuck with the unfortunate choice of either “fight or die”… the only good part is many of these meddling destructive leftist progs will result as the later).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. utu says:
    @AaronB
    Your comment leads me to think we are not understanding each other and there is far more agreement between us than at first appeared. It is also clear that your response to me is shaped by your fears of wider cultural trends that you mistakenly think I represent, but in fact which I oppose, which I hope to make clear.

    You have also helped me understand that much of your - and the alt-rights - attitude is "reactive" to contemporary trends - which is understandable but constitutes a surrendering to the enemy the power to shape the terms of the debate.

    For instance, you claim that since the establishment stresses the "blank slate", we must emphasize "innate ability" equally hard. While understandable, such a reaction is deeply flawed and underscores the futility of merely being "reactive" without introducing a "positive" element into our program. We cannot merely deny what they say, however true - we must frame it within the context of a "positive" element that is capable of generating enthusiasm and creating allegiance.

    In other words, we must never lose sight of the moral level. The correct response to the emphasis on the blank slate is to insist on natural limitations while simultaneously emphasizing the supremely important role of character and willpower to realize our our innate potential, and create favorable outcomes as much as is feasible whatever our natural limitations.

    Because they insist on unbounded and unrealistic possibility, doesn't mean we must sink into a sense of fatalism and severely bounded incapacity. That is a tragic mistake. In fact, while their position has proven emotional and rhetorical appeal, it suffers from being unrealistic and creating aspirations that are doomed to disappointmrnt. I think there is far more emotional appeal in a genuinely realistic emphasis on effortful self-improvement tempered by a sense of natural limits. This is more likely to create aspirations that are realized, and is much better at cushioning failure - after all, there is no shame in trying your best and coming up against natural limits - and is a much better basis for long-term self-respect and personal satisfaction.

    You must remember that this is a war that is fought on the moral level, like all wars, and it is absolutely imperative that we include an uplifting and positive moral element in our program. Merely emphasizing innate ability while discounting the role of effort demoralizes everyone and guarantees that innate potential will never be realized, and that sub-optimal outcomes will be the rule, and produces grotesqueries like Sailer submissively accepting Jewish rule because it can't possibly be largely the product of tremendous effort, which we may hope to match, but must be the inevitable
    result of innate ability which we are powerless to do anything about.

    That the reaction has been primarily of this "reactive" nature so far convinces me that white nationalists have not yet been able to produce far-seeing leaders capable of transcending the terms created by our enemies, and becoming autonomous thinkers capable of internally-generated original ideas that outflank and undercut in appeal those created by our enemies.

    And this is likely caused by materialism - which makes everyone stupid.

    Now, the second - and perhaps primary - thread that runs through your entire comment is that I am blaming black dysfunction on whites, which is indeed a contemporary trends which you are understandably wary of, but which I cannot be accused of in any way shape or form. You have gotten me completely wrong here, and are seeing a bogeyman where none exists.

    What I did suggest is that blacks will never form an alliance with whites if they are not treated with respect and with moral concern. But that is a completely different thing.

    I fully concur with you that a major - the major - contributing factor in black dysfunction is the loss of "coercive" religious and social support provided by Christianity. In fact that is nothing less than one of the burdens of my argument. We all need this structure - emphatically including whites, who have lost it. Jews and Asians still posses it - and that is an underappreciated source of their strength by those who are too caught up in innate ability.

    You say it is perfectly reasonable to address the incident of black mischief -making in public spaces - I couldn't agree more, but it cannot be done in tones of contemptuous condemnation, but rather must include an element of morally uplifting concern. Criticism for the purpose of helping to improve - not for the purpose of establishing the others inferiority relative to your own.

    This would be a genuinely new element - neither the dismissive contempt of the alt-right, nor the excuse-making indulgence of the left, but a mature policy that reflects depth. It holds blacks to account while offering moral support, and fulfills our own moral responsibilities as a s stronger group with more social capital. The strong must help the weak. This does not mean excusing bad conduct - rather the opposite.

    And that is what I am saying. It should not be controversial.

    There is one problem with paternalism. It can be applied only if one posses power. Children dream of murdering their parents. In every Negro’s mind there is a desire to bring down the White Man. They want to dominate. They do not know what would they do once they achieve the domination. They want to kill. Children grow up and grow out form murderous fantasies once the begin seeking fulfillment in they own lives. Negros will never grow up.

    Read More
    • Agree: joef
    • Replies: @AaronB
    That is true. Every group has a side to them which wishes to dominate. But with a positive environment and culture, it can be dampened. Jews obviously exploited this urge by pitting blacks against whites, but a guy like Randal lacks the imagination to realize that neutralizing this tactic is possible through a return to genuine moral standards.

    And yes, no dissident faction right now would actually have the power to implement paternalistic measures towards the black community.

    It would be policy item.

    I wonder how the msm would report it, if the alt-right explained that they intend to help instill positive cultural values in the black community towards education and work, hold blacks accountable and stop excusing dysfunctional behavior and stop lying about black crime and the like, but generally using supportive language and expressing the belief that with proper guidance blacks can become a reasonably functional community...

    Whites can even admit their own culture has become dysfunctional over the years and pitch it as a nationwide cultural renewal, based on a return to values and away from materialism...

    None of this would involve abandoning race realism or honesty about black crime or bad behavior in general.

    An interesting thought experiment...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. Golobki says:
    @Svigor
    Good ideas, but simply playing Classical or Country music is much simpler and cheaper. Classical is my preference, but either will run off the diversity, sharpish.

    They could start with Merle Haggard and “Okie from Muskogee”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Golobki says:
    @Them Guys
    Yes agree and as another suggestion when and if such methods in article fail to work.

    Just call, 1-800-Rent A Biker....Guarenteed and easy to locate 1/2 dozen hard core bad ass biker guys willing to suplement income willing to hang out inside or outside store or both for cheep! Say like $10 per hr cash money, and a free hand when necessary to defend selves and store patrons from an savage acts by brutal savages and undesirables.

    99.99% of time no such defense actions will take place...Just the fact of being there will defintly cause inner city ghetto types to pass store by.

    And now that for past two decades, and due to unknown reasons???, unlike back in 1960-70's eras, todays bikers are well liked and appreciated by most non-colored folks.

    Used to be signs at almost every type store-bars-resturants, that stated "NO Motorcycles Allowed on Premises" and "NO Black Leather motorcycle Attire inside".

    Back then zero such boycots and payment demands occured....Everyone basically understood a private buis has a right to who is allowed in etc.

    Meanwhile it seems all a sudden around 20 some odd yrs ago or so, so many non biker type people and most buisness' alike began to Like and welcome bikers in!

    Its some form of a wired phenomonon this occured...But ever since then a majority of folks in usa like bikes and bikers so much, many even hold deep inner secret desires to Be a biker!

    Even 85 yr old ladies out for a hair perm or whatever, stop off at seeing bikes parked to make nice sincere comments on how swell the bikes look or how cool pint jobs are on custom jobs.

    I mention all that as proof that Now today there has never before been a better time to hire such guys to act as deterents to unwanted riff raff that refuse all other forms or methods.

    Best of all the very meere presence of a few bad ass biker types is more than enough to get job done, and done via no need for phys actions nor even verbal warnings issued by them guys.

    Consider....Who else can have just Two guys on harleys, ride thru worst ghettos of Detroit at 2 to 3:00 A.M when headed back home and need take short route to save time and get out of cold nite temps and do so withOUT any worry of being two white guys cruising thru some of americas absolute worst ground zero ghetto inner city rats nest....And never get harmed nor threat's of such?

    It is The Perfect solution....Whites Love bikers and colored folks get very scared of and avoid em.

    They could start with Merle Haggard and “Okie from Muskogee”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. Anon[248] • Disclaimer says:
    @Randal
    This is entertaining, but what would be really nice is if, just once, a major business or public figure would stand its or his or her ground and refuse to apologise or compromise in any way when confronted with this kind of offence-mongering shakedown attempt, and get away with it.

    My thoughts exactly.
    I keep waiting…for someone, anyone, to grow the tiniest set of balls and simply say “no”. When called racist, to simply say “Nope, now fck off”. Or even “So what?”

    Similarly, that NY DA is getting hung up by the balls because his past hypergamic party girls have turned on him post-rejection and told the world the dirty rought sex they did was not consensual. When will a man in the PountMeToo era simply say, “No, it was consensual, and if you want, I can countersue for defamation”. Ball-less white men, ball-less white men everywhere…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. AaronB says:
    @utu
    There is one problem with paternalism. It can be applied only if one posses power. Children dream of murdering their parents. In every Negro's mind there is a desire to bring down the White Man. They want to dominate. They do not know what would they do once they achieve the domination. They want to kill. Children grow up and grow out form murderous fantasies once the begin seeking fulfillment in they own lives. Negros will never grow up.

    That is true. Every group has a side to them which wishes to dominate. But with a positive environment and culture, it can be dampened. Jews obviously exploited this urge by pitting blacks against whites, but a guy like Randal lacks the imagination to realize that neutralizing this tactic is possible through a return to genuine moral standards.

    And yes, no dissident faction right now would actually have the power to implement paternalistic measures towards the black community.

    It would be policy item.

    I wonder how the msm would report it, if the alt-right explained that they intend to help instill positive cultural values in the black community towards education and work, hold blacks accountable and stop excusing dysfunctional behavior and stop lying about black crime and the like, but generally using supportive language and expressing the belief that with proper guidance blacks can become a reasonably functional community…

    Whites can even admit their own culture has become dysfunctional over the years and pitch it as a nationwide cultural renewal, based on a return to values and away from materialism…

    None of this would involve abandoning race realism or honesty about black crime or bad behavior in general.

    An interesting thought experiment…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. sayless says:
    @Truth

    Just call, 1-800-Rent A Biker….Guarenteed and easy to locate 1/2 dozen hard core bad ass biker guys willing to suplement income willing to hang out inside or outside store or both for cheep!
     
    The sheer brilliance brought to you by the 150+ IQ crowd...

    I didn’t like having five kids who were all bigger than me threatening to cut my eyes out on the subway. What would you suggest.

    Bikers would’ve been nice to have around.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    Bikers generally steal cars, sell heroin and meth and extort businesses for a living. They are criminals and are quite proud of it. Most of them, thus, have prison records. Why would someone with a prison record, who needs to make a living be interested in being a goody-two shoes to protect someone who was not a biker?

    Unless of course you are referring to the fat, tax-attorney's with tattoos who preen around on customized $30,000 Harleys?

    IF this is your biggest issue in life, old sport, I suggest you toughen up and move to Idaho or New Hampshire.

    There, problem quite easily solved.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. Truth says:
    @sayless
    I didn't like having five kids who were all bigger than me threatening to cut my eyes out on the subway. What would you suggest.

    Bikers would've been nice to have around.

    Bikers generally steal cars, sell heroin and meth and extort businesses for a living. They are criminals and are quite proud of it. Most of them, thus, have prison records. Why would someone with a prison record, who needs to make a living be interested in being a goody-two shoes to protect someone who was not a biker?

    Unless of course you are referring to the fat, tax-attorney’s with tattoos who preen around on customized $30,000 Harleys?

    IF this is your biggest issue in life, old sport, I suggest you toughen up and move to Idaho or New Hampshire.

    There, problem quite easily solved.

    Read More
    • Replies: @sayless
    Them Guys was offering protection. I'm all for it. I'm a five foot tall woman.

    And why should I have to move? I was reading a book on the train.

    My biggest issue in life, making it home in one piece, it's up there, yes.

    People offered to go to jail for Bernard Goetz. That tells you something right there, Tiny Duck!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. sayless says:
    @Truth
    Bikers generally steal cars, sell heroin and meth and extort businesses for a living. They are criminals and are quite proud of it. Most of them, thus, have prison records. Why would someone with a prison record, who needs to make a living be interested in being a goody-two shoes to protect someone who was not a biker?

    Unless of course you are referring to the fat, tax-attorney's with tattoos who preen around on customized $30,000 Harleys?

    IF this is your biggest issue in life, old sport, I suggest you toughen up and move to Idaho or New Hampshire.

    There, problem quite easily solved.

    Them Guys was offering protection. I’m all for it. I’m a five foot tall woman.

    And why should I have to move? I was reading a book on the train.

    My biggest issue in life, making it home in one piece, it’s up there, yes.

    People offered to go to jail for Bernard Goetz. That tells you something right there, Tiny Duck!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. lavoisier says: • Website
    @Randal

    Focusing on blacks is easy, and a distraction from the real issues. It is also part of the general strategy of the elites to pit different sections of society against each other.
     
    This seems to be a common theme here lately, addressed to people (at Unz of all places!) who legitimately think race is an issue.

    "Why do you obsess over blacks?" "Can't you see you're being manipulated by "the elites"?" (Or by "the ruling class" for those more explicitly adopting Marxist twaddle as their guide to reality).

    1 Race and the routine censorship of honest discussion of it is the reason many come to Unz, where that censorship does not take place. [And by the way, if "the elites" are keen to promote race as an divisive issue, why do they so efficiently suppress one side of the debate over it so as to make it less of a divisive issue? See the next paragraph for the answer.]

    2 Your (and that of all the other antiracist hand-wringers here) pretence that there is no real issue over race is literally absurd. There are probably few greater sources of conflict in US sphere communities, despite the efforts of "the elites" to suppress the white side of the argument in order to keep the doors open for the mass immigration that feeds their profits, breaks down communities and established authorities and norms, and - yes - divides society.

    An intelligent strategy – and a morally worthy one – would be to form an alliance with all factions against our psychopathic elite
     

    This hippy notion that if only we could all just get along, we goodies would easily overwhelm the baddies of "the elite" seems incredible for an adult to actually believe in.

    Try to grasp this, please: the other factions do not agree with you about who are the goodies and who are the baddies, and their interests are not necessarily your interests, or mine.


    That so many white nationalists are willing to accept Jewish supetiority, but are harsh on blacks and Hispanics, shows not only or even primarily stupidity, but a collapse in self respect, motivation, and willpower. A real cultural collapse.

     

    What white nationalists "accept Jewish superiority"? Do you mean those IQ-ists who believe in a supposed higher average IQ for a minority of jews? That's hardly a majority white nationalist thing, nor is it really "accepting Jewish superiority".

    Granted you could argue that the Jared Taylor wing "accepts Jewish superiority" in a de facto kind of way by refusing to confront the real problems caused by jewish lobby power (though that seems more like plain political cowardice or opportunism, and if not then it is presumably an idiosyncratic kind of judeophilia on their part), but the reality is that white nationalists in general are castigated overwhelmingly more for going in the opposite direction and embracing swastikas and "Holocaust denial".


    The current generation of so called white nationalists seem hopeless – they are too close to, and too conditioned by, the culture of pessimism and defeat that created our current predicamemt, and have proven themselves unable to recover vitality, but rather to embody many of the attitudes that define our cultural collapse and perpetuate them and expand their reach.

     

    This appears to be a classic case of "blaming the victim". In reality it's not a "culture of pessimism and defeat" that created our current predicament, rather the other way around, combined with people like you insisting that there is no real issue with race. Pissing on our feet and telling us to our faces that it's raining.

    It's not the white nationalists that lack vitality, but the establishment whites who apologise for black underachievement and black crimes and excuse it all by demonising and scapegoating white history, in collaboration with the various identity lobbies with an interest in doing so. They have (by virtue of having lots of money and dominating the media megaphone) imposed that worship on the wider white population, enabled in part by people like you telling anyone standing up against it that they are objecting to something that isn't real.

    Granted that reflects a profound loss of confidence and failure to resist within the white races in general, but that itself dates back many decades, and "white nationalism" in its various forms (often just resistance to mass immigration and to pc antiracist discrimination) is a response to that weakness (and likely the only one that, in the long run, will allow any return to normal self-confidence).


    Finally – and this would be the most astonishing thing to someone from the Victorian age – white cultural self-confidence has fallen so low that many today seem to feel genuinely competitive with blacks. To make themselves feel better, they need to put blacks down. 100 years ago, whites would have been so secure in their superiority that the idea of feeling competitive with blacks would be absurd.
     
    100 years ago there were not huge government schemes to transfer wealth to blacks and laws to enforce discrimination against whites to supposedly benefit blacks, nor as many indoctrinated people like you telling whites that "race isn't an issue" and that they are getting all upset over nothing, as black thugs in their schools bully their children and armed black thugs menace them in their own disarmed streets and homes.

    Your (and that of all the other antiracist hand-wringers here) pretence that there is no real issue over race is literally absurd. There are probably few greater sources of conflict in US sphere communities, despite the efforts of “the elites” to suppress the white side of the argument in order to keep the doors open for the mass immigration that feeds their profits, breaks down communities and established authorities and norms, and – yes – divides society.

    Indeed. It is absurd.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. lavoisier says: • Website
    @AaronB
    Lol, thank you utu, I do appreciate your kind words. But really I am only pointing out common sense morality - none of this should be the least bit revolutionary, and to our forebears would have been common sense.

    And I must give credit to Yan Shen for introducing the idea of "paternalism" - I lifted it from him. I was thinking along similar lines, but he came up with that word, because of his connection with Confucianism.

    I take your point about game theory - indeed, one of the beliefs underlying white surrender of ethnic self consciousness was the hope that others would follow suit. We know it hasn't happened, with Jews conspicuously refraining.

    That's why I now advocate for whites to enter into amicable relations with other ethnic groups on the basis of a healthy ethnic self consciousness of their own, and even help build a new American community on this basis.

    I also agree that game theory is a typical example of anglo-Saxon materialist reductionism, and should be resisted.

    But I think the situation with blacks is a bit different. The major source of their ability to cause mischief is political support from our psychopathic elite, of which too large a number are Jews - which is why the focus should on them rather than blacks. Deprived of this support, and no longer whipped up into a frenzy of resentment and grievance, with efforts being made to instill character and good values, I believe blacks cam become acceptable members of the American community.

    Of course, paternalism towards blacks will not initially result in amicable relations, and much political hay will be made of it - but over time, I think we can pry loose substantial elements within the black community.

    The important thing is to not back down in the face of the accusations of racism that will inevitably come our way. And yet try as the establishment might to tarnish us, such a posture - which actually reflects moral concern - cannot help but burnish our moral image and earn some grudging respect, however reluctant they will be to accord it us.

    Morality *is* force in the world - a lesson we have forgotten to our peril.

    Glad to have you on board!

    But I think the situation with blacks is a bit different. The major source of their ability to cause mischief is political support from our psychopathic elite, of which too large a number are Jews – which is why the focus should on them rather than blacks.

    Very true this–but blacks are responsible for their behavior first and foremost.

    I enjoy reading your commentary Aaron. I can sense a spiritual struggle that is ongoing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. AaronB says:

    Thank you, lavoisier.

    Part of what I have come to believe from my studies of traditional cultures that are spiritually healthy, is that responsibility is shared between the individual and the larger community. Modern individualism – which has proven a death cult – always places the blame entirely on the individual.

    American society valorizes selfishness, greed, materialism, and competition over cooperation – in such an environment, can we place the blame for black dysfunction entirely on blacks? Are they not affected by these values? Are not poor whites who today are growing increasingly dysfunctional? Are not we all?

    In my view, the behavior of blacks is no different than those at the very top of society, it’s just their depredations are economic and social, while blacks are violent. This seems more dramatic and serious – but the top levels of our society are just as predatory as blacks.

    Now, please understand that I am not one of those who blame black behavior on white racism or prejudice or whatever. I think everyone in America behaves bad in their own way – and everyone does it because of the materialist culture.

    In a way, I perfectly support everything that the alt-right is now saying about blacks, and I think it’s important they continue saying these things, just add a element of moral concern. Everyone here thinks I’m saying we should stop saying the truth about blacks. But I’m only saying we should add something to what were saying about blacks, a moral element.

    And I also agree that we have to squarely point out problems with blacks and not lie about them one bit – but not with contempt, in a sneering tone like a Sailer, but with moral concern, as part of a national moral renewal based on a turn away from materialism.

    Blacks have to share the blame for their bad behavior. But instead of just condemning them we can help them. And doing so means first and foremost helping ourselves by realizing the values of this country have become tertible.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    I have been thinking recently after the discussion here how could we get away from this toxic individualism and reconnect with some communitarian values in society. And I am rather skeptical that it could work because American society is where it is because the vector pointing in this direction was oriented very long time ago and long before the so called Jewish problem revealed itself.

    But I was thinking about the words that could be used with which we could refocus. You need to start with words that sound good. The two words that came to my mind were: solidarity and harmony.

    Fo the sake of harmony we must end extreme individualism and extreme group identity politics. No more we do this or that because we are Blacks or because we are Jews. We do this or that because we are f. humans. Your f. blackness or f. Jewishness or f. whiteness comes on the very f. end. We are in this boat together and must reduce what may divide us. This means that f. feminist must shut the f. up and all the Sailers of this world must shut the f. up and so on. There is no place for the derisive smart alecks after the mid school anyway. Grow up you old Sailer prick. How old is he btw? 60 or so?

    For the sake of solidarity we look at the f. capitalism and trim down. Certainly all libertarian will become enemies of the people except for the ones who advocate only human liberties but one they utter a single word about economy and property they...

    Can you imagine anything like this happening without using force? But just in case this happens and you become the leader keep my name in mind for the position of the head Dept. of Solidarity and Harmony Enforcement. You could think of me like kind of your Beria or Himler. (BTW, when Stalin introduced Beria to Americans and British at Potsdam he said: This is our Himler.)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. Stealth says:

    Robert, considering the fact that black guys go to Starbucks mostly to hit on white women, I think your strategy might not work.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  63. utu says:
    @AaronB
    Thank you, lavoisier.

    Part of what I have come to believe from my studies of traditional cultures that are spiritually healthy, is that responsibility is shared between the individual and the larger community. Modern individualism - which has proven a death cult - always places the blame entirely on the individual.

    American society valorizes selfishness, greed, materialism, and competition over cooperation - in such an environment, can we place the blame for black dysfunction entirely on blacks? Are they not affected by these values? Are not poor whites who today are growing increasingly dysfunctional? Are not we all?

    In my view, the behavior of blacks is no different than those at the very top of society, it's just their depredations are economic and social, while blacks are violent. This seems more dramatic and serious - but the top levels of our society are just as predatory as blacks.

    Now, please understand that I am not one of those who blame black behavior on white racism or prejudice or whatever. I think everyone in America behaves bad in their own way - and everyone does it because of the materialist culture.

    In a way, I perfectly support everything that the alt-right is now saying about blacks, and I think it's important they continue saying these things, just add a element of moral concern. Everyone here thinks I'm saying we should stop saying the truth about blacks. But I'm only saying we should add something to what were saying about blacks, a moral element.

    And I also agree that we have to squarely point out problems with blacks and not lie about them one bit - but not with contempt, in a sneering tone like a Sailer, but with moral concern, as part of a national moral renewal based on a turn away from materialism.

    Blacks have to share the blame for their bad behavior. But instead of just condemning them we can help them. And doing so means first and foremost helping ourselves by realizing the values of this country have become tertible.

    I have been thinking recently after the discussion here how could we get away from this toxic individualism and reconnect with some communitarian values in society. And I am rather skeptical that it could work because American society is where it is because the vector pointing in this direction was oriented very long time ago and long before the so called Jewish problem revealed itself.

    But I was thinking about the words that could be used with which we could refocus. You need to start with words that sound good. The two words that came to my mind were: solidarity and harmony.

    Fo the sake of harmony we must end extreme individualism and extreme group identity politics. No more we do this or that because we are Blacks or because we are Jews. We do this or that because we are f. humans. Your f. blackness or f. Jewishness or f. whiteness comes on the very f. end. We are in this boat together and must reduce what may divide us. This means that f. feminist must shut the f. up and all the Sailers of this world must shut the f. up and so on. There is no place for the derisive smart alecks after the mid school anyway. Grow up you old Sailer prick. How old is he btw? 60 or so?

    For the sake of solidarity we look at the f. capitalism and trim down. Certainly all libertarian will become enemies of the people except for the ones who advocate only human liberties but one they utter a single word about economy and property they…

    Can you imagine anything like this happening without using force? But just in case this happens and you become the leader keep my name in mind for the position of the head Dept. of Solidarity and Harmony Enforcement. You could think of me like kind of your Beria or Himler. (BTW, when Stalin introduced Beria to Americans and British at Potsdam he said: This is our Himler.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @AaronB
    You say many good things, utu.

    I think ultimately the only thing that will inspire people is the prospect of losing our selves in something larger and more significant.

    For most of history, people were inspired by being part of some larger more significant unit - a family, a clan, a nation, - as well as the feeling that one is submitting to and working with some cosmic or divine order, the largest snd most significant unit of all.One was not merely asserting oneself, but submitting to a cosmic pattern. This need not be dramatic or violent - the Chinese concept of working with the Tao was peaceful enough.

    Today, the only source of motivation is personal self-interest - for most people, that is not enough. So everyone is bewildered and apathetic, except narcissists and psychopaths

    The only groups who retain some motivation are those who still feel part of something larger and still retain some sense of working with a cosmic order - Jews, Asians, and Muslims. Jews, however, are losing this sense - immorality is at epidemic proportions among them, and they are in the grip of a mass psychosis. That happens. But they are on the downward slope from their peak.

    Solidarity and harmony are hugely important, but they are results of being part of a unit of significance higher than oneself.

    What will inspire people and get us out of this mess cannot be instrumental - it has to fundamentally address our sense of values, morals, wonder, awe, and not merely our practical sense.

    Most people I believe feel pretty empty and valueless in themselves - even psychopaths, who just over compensate. That is the nature of their malady. Most people crave to gain significance by being part of something larger than themselves, but the culture tells them they must find significance only in their puny selves. Hence widespread depression.

    Once people are given the chance to lose themselves in a larger unit of significance, to be part of a cosmic order (tao) rather than merely assert their self-interest, they will jump at it. They just need to be freed from the shackles of individualism and liberated to join the larger reality

    Lol re himmler :) I am about the last person to ever gain power, but certainly you shall have your department of solidarity and harmony utu! And long may you reign as its head!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. Hacienda says:

    Mozart and company are pesticide to black youth. Unfortunately, also to 80% of Starbucks clientele. Starbucks is out of business in 2 years. You want more of a disinfectant. Start with Avril Lavigne, Taylor Swift, Celine Dion, Cold Play. Then begin to ease in some Bee Gees (their non-disco stuff), ABBA (gotta be very careful not go too early with this one). Occasional nods with Ed Sheeran, Eminem (only Mockingbird though). Confuse and obfuscate with Sinatra, Glen Miller, Johnny Cash. Then you start the heavy hitting- Beach Boys, the Association, the Carpenters. Just unload with the classic period of the Osmonds. Finish off with Rodgers and Hammerstein. Fire any barista who puts on Dylan, no Beatles until the dust settles.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    So much for the under-25 white clientele.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. Starbuck’s CEO (((Shultz))) just virtue-signaled the company’s death warrant. Love it!!

    https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/05/11/610337214/starbucks-will-give-people-the-key-to-restroom-regardless-of-purchase-ceo-says

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    I hate touching the restroom key.
    , @utu
    He could rename Cafe Americano as Shvartze.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. utu says:
    @BigJimSportCamper
    Starbuck's CEO (((Shultz))) just virtue-signaled the company's death warrant. Love it!!

    https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/05/11/610337214/starbucks-will-give-people-the-key-to-restroom-regardless-of-purchase-ceo-says

    I hate touching the restroom key.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. utu says:
    @BigJimSportCamper
    Starbuck's CEO (((Shultz))) just virtue-signaled the company's death warrant. Love it!!

    https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/05/11/610337214/starbucks-will-give-people-the-key-to-restroom-regardless-of-purchase-ceo-says

    He could rename Cafe Americano as Shvartze.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. Truth says:
    @Hacienda
    Mozart and company are pesticide to black youth. Unfortunately, also to 80% of Starbucks clientele. Starbucks is out of business in 2 years. You want more of a disinfectant. Start with Avril Lavigne, Taylor Swift, Celine Dion, Cold Play. Then begin to ease in some Bee Gees (their non-disco stuff), ABBA (gotta be very careful not go too early with this one). Occasional nods with Ed Sheeran, Eminem (only Mockingbird though). Confuse and obfuscate with Sinatra, Glen Miller, Johnny Cash. Then you start the heavy hitting- Beach Boys, the Association, the Carpenters. Just unload with the classic period of the Osmonds. Finish off with Rodgers and Hammerstein. Fire any barista who puts on Dylan, no Beatles until the dust settles.

    So much for the under-25 white clientele.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hacienda
    Yeah, I don't know how much of a demographic there is for Weissberg's Starbucks. Early 20th century frustrated white feminists or white men kind of homoerotically buzzed by Archimedes, Newton, Einstein, or Colonel Klink looking Max Planck. Can't be that many. Enough to keep maybe one Starbucks afloat, assuming the two groups can tolerate each other.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. AaronB says:
    @utu
    I have been thinking recently after the discussion here how could we get away from this toxic individualism and reconnect with some communitarian values in society. And I am rather skeptical that it could work because American society is where it is because the vector pointing in this direction was oriented very long time ago and long before the so called Jewish problem revealed itself.

    But I was thinking about the words that could be used with which we could refocus. You need to start with words that sound good. The two words that came to my mind were: solidarity and harmony.

    Fo the sake of harmony we must end extreme individualism and extreme group identity politics. No more we do this or that because we are Blacks or because we are Jews. We do this or that because we are f. humans. Your f. blackness or f. Jewishness or f. whiteness comes on the very f. end. We are in this boat together and must reduce what may divide us. This means that f. feminist must shut the f. up and all the Sailers of this world must shut the f. up and so on. There is no place for the derisive smart alecks after the mid school anyway. Grow up you old Sailer prick. How old is he btw? 60 or so?

    For the sake of solidarity we look at the f. capitalism and trim down. Certainly all libertarian will become enemies of the people except for the ones who advocate only human liberties but one they utter a single word about economy and property they...

    Can you imagine anything like this happening without using force? But just in case this happens and you become the leader keep my name in mind for the position of the head Dept. of Solidarity and Harmony Enforcement. You could think of me like kind of your Beria or Himler. (BTW, when Stalin introduced Beria to Americans and British at Potsdam he said: This is our Himler.)

    You say many good things, utu.

    I think ultimately the only thing that will inspire people is the prospect of losing our selves in something larger and more significant.

    For most of history, people were inspired by being part of some larger more significant unit – a family, a clan, a nation, – as well as the feeling that one is submitting to and working with some cosmic or divine order, the largest snd most significant unit of all.One was not merely asserting oneself, but submitting to a cosmic pattern. This need not be dramatic or violent – the Chinese concept of working with the Tao was peaceful enough.

    Today, the only source of motivation is personal self-interest – for most people, that is not enough. So everyone is bewildered and apathetic, except narcissists and psychopaths

    The only groups who retain some motivation are those who still feel part of something larger and still retain some sense of working with a cosmic order – Jews, Asians, and Muslims. Jews, however, are losing this sense – immorality is at epidemic proportions among them, and they are in the grip of a mass psychosis. That happens. But they are on the downward slope from their peak.

    Solidarity and harmony are hugely important, but they are results of being part of a unit of significance higher than oneself.

    What will inspire people and get us out of this mess cannot be instrumental – it has to fundamentally address our sense of values, morals, wonder, awe, and not merely our practical sense.

    Most people I believe feel pretty empty and valueless in themselves – even psychopaths, who just over compensate. That is the nature of their malady. Most people crave to gain significance by being part of something larger than themselves, but the culture tells them they must find significance only in their puny selves. Hence widespread depression.

    Once people are given the chance to lose themselves in a larger unit of significance, to be part of a cosmic order (tao) rather than merely assert their self-interest, they will jump at it. They just need to be freed from the shackles of individualism and liberated to join the larger reality

    Lol re himmler :) I am about the last person to ever gain power, but certainly you shall have your department of solidarity and harmony utu! And long may you reign as its head!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. Hacienda says:
    @Truth
    So much for the under-25 white clientele.

    Yeah, I don’t know how much of a demographic there is for Weissberg’s Starbucks. Early 20th century frustrated white feminists or white men kind of homoerotically buzzed by Archimedes, Newton, Einstein, or Colonel Klink looking Max Planck. Can’t be that many. Enough to keep maybe one Starbucks afloat, assuming the two groups can tolerate each other.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS
PastClassics
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?