From my 2011 review of Jared Taylor’s book White Identity: Racial Consciousness in the 21st Century in VDARE:
This is not to say that white identity politics won’t continue to manifest itself de facto. We saw that, for example, with the Tea Parties and the emergence of an overwhelmingly white movement to protect Medicare in 2009.
But, white people aren’t supposed to say: we’re doing this “to promote the general welfare” of “ourselves and our posterity” (to quote the Constitution’s Preamble). Whites aren’t supposed to say that—and they don’t like to, either. They like to come up with some principled reason, such as: the philosophy of Ayn Rand says so.
Nevertheless, an explicit white identity movement is unlikely to be tolerated. It’s not so much that blacks, Asians, and Hispanics don`t want this to happen. None of these groups are really all that powerful. Blacks tend to be colorful but not too competent; East Asians competent but colorless; Latinos culturally lethargic and unenterprising.
Perhaps Taylor can persuade enough Jews to get onboard to make white identity respectable in the MSM and thus with the media’s consumers, the public. He’s striven manfully and graciously over the years to make Jews feel welcome in his movement and many Jews have written for American Renaissance.
Recall that neoconservatism emerged in the late 1960s, largely due to Jewish shopkeepers’ fear of black crime and Jewish civil servants’ fear of being fired by black politicians. Brilliant Jewish intellectuals like Nathan Glazer and Norman Podhoretz took their relatives’ complaints seriously.
Taylor has worked out strong justifications for why a white identity movement would be good for average, and particularly good for below-average, whites. But not many Jews are below the white average.
My alternative philosophy of “citizenism” proposed attacking identity politics at its most vulnerable points: Affirmative Action quota preferences for Hispanics and Asians. (See the 2005 debate between me and Jared Taylor on VDARE.com.)
Indeed, there’s no good reason for the “Hispanic” category even to exist in government data. It`s not a race, it’s not an ethnicity, it’s not a linguistic group, it’s just a rent-seeking special privilege. Abolish the category! Once the data isn’t collected anymore, nobody can use it in government lawsuits alleging “disparate impact”.
Sure—in the sense that a two percent probability is twice a one percent probability. You’ll note that, after all these years, I’m still using quotes around “citizenism” because nobody knows what the word is. It hasn’t exactly swept the intellectual world.
This is a pretty depressing way to wrap up. But I do think it’s safe to say that the conventional wisdom will change when it has to change. It probably won`t change until it has to, but it will have to when it has to.
In other words, what historian Hugh Davis Graham called attention to in the title of his 2002 book, Collision Course: The Strange Convergence of Affirmative Action and Immigration Policy in America, can’t go on forever. The mounting “racial ratio“ of nonwhite beneficiaries to white benefactors means the system will inevitably break down under the weight of numbers. At that point, white consciousness could be forced into existence.