An interesting article. I often challenge my liberal friends to refute my arguments. They try to change the subject. They will say, “Reparations will never happen.” I say, “Who will say no?” They have no answer. They think things “will turn out all right.”

One does wonder if there are many liberals who think like the author of this piece, but would be afraid to say so.

About the sites maintained by David Horowitz, Jared Taylor, and James Kalb; and visions of race.

Sir,

In my opinion, no one has done as much as David Horowitz to make it possible for people who are not Nazi psychopaths to say out loud what whites have silently recognized for some decades: there is a tremendous lot of fierce, anti-white racial hatred out there, its aims and aspirations are evil, and it is legitimated, endorsed and encouraged by the liberal and leftist white elites who dominate America and “the rest of the West.” His book, “Hating Whitey,” and the many articles and blogs on the topic at his web site, www.frontpagemag.com, have gone a great way to make it possible for whites to openly talk about, and openly protest, this racism and its role in contemporary political conflicts.

Speaking for myself, I have more than once surfed the web, looking for some recognition of the problem, some expression of natural white protest, on sites devoted to political groups, parties, or commentators. It seemed that, for many years, conservatives were silent, liberals “soft on anti-white racism,” and the more radical Left rabidly hateful towards whites. Needless to say, hostility, blame-shifting, and casual racial attacks were and are, in varying degrees, the order of the day on most (but not all) black sites.

For a long time, the only spots I could find on the web that showed any willingness to recognize and protest the problem while openly speaking up in defense of the history, culture, religion and ways of whites belonged to groups with words like “Aryan” or “Nazi” in their names, who were devoted to perpetuating the old-time mix of racial hates that contains at least as much rancor toward Jews and others of “the wrong kinds of whites” as toward anyone else.

But I eventually found Jared Taylor’s American Renaissance site, www.amren.com, and read many articles in several of his free back-issue PDF files. The pieces in his journal seemed to tell the truth without all the venom and distortion of the propaganda of the “Aryans”. Then, too, I found the remarkable set of pages maintained by Mr. Kalb and a few associates here at www.counterrevolution.net. Here, again, a great deal of truth is faced frankly, without all the neo-Nazi baggage.

Nevertheless, the sites of these three impressive writers espouse quite different views on the matter of race. Mr. Taylor’s site, and that of Mr. Kalb, generally endorse white separatism and, pending that, group rights for whites at least equal to those of non-whites. Mr. Horowitz, on the other hand, rejects both separatism and such efforts at white self-defense as advocacy of white group rights and protections, advocating a future of color-blindness in at least all our political, and perhaps also our social, arrangements. But the course we will actually have to follow is, I think, between these two extremes.

Outright separatism is, I think, is a very natural reaction of people who find themselves under unrelenting attack that shows no sign of diminishing. For instance, when majority rule came to South Africa, the whites there asked for their own “Bantustan,” and were denied such refuge. Today, in both Rhodesia and South Africa, we see the kinds of violence and hate that drive whites to seek separation.

In Europe, sporadic but persistent anti-Semitism over centuries gave birth to Zionism. In America, the racial hostilities and contempt of whites toward blacks gave rise to the enduring currents of Black Nationalism manifest in the escapism of Marcus Garvey and the separatism of the Black Muslims. Today, in America, in Europe, and wherever whites are aware of the rising tide of hate surrounding them, we see the same separatist impulse.

Such desires, though understandable, always have their dark side. Very dark, indeed. T-shirts encouraging America’s blacks to dream of a black world and novels like “The Turner Diaries” show how close the impulse to separatism is to the will to have done with one’s enemies, once and for all. The screaming accusations of Palestinians and their sympathizers, shouting “genocide” at the Israelis, reveal at once the fantasy underside of every separatism, including that of the Israelis’ justified insistence on their own Bantustan, and the daylight reality of the Arabs’ own will to destroy both the Jewish state and the Jews.

Nevertheless, separatism, I think, is in fact a legitimate stand for peoples under more or less permanent and extreme threat, like the Jews, and perhaps also like the whites of southern Africa. But it is increasingly unsuitable for the New World, where the ubiquitous cohabitation of at least three races (some count more) and large mestizo and mulatto populations make separatism itself more a fantasy than a policy.

Does this mean that we can, or should, pretend our racial divisions and hostilities do not exist? Apart from the evident fact that only intimidated whites could even consider such a head-in-the-sand outlook somehow an option, I think that Mr. Horowitz, Mr. Kalb, Mr. Taylor, and many others now, have already rejected the cowed, and cowardly, silence of so much of the Euro-white leadership.

Does it mean that, while openly recognizing the problem and protesting its injustice, we can go forward, despite the rising roars of hate, advocating what Mr. Horowitz has defended as America’s historic aim, a color-blind society focused on individual rights and duties, refusing collective, racial entitlements or obligations, and rejecting the “balkanization” of America that Pat Buchanan and many others have objected to?

No, I don’t think so. While there will always be a place for that, and while we must hope to eventually (and perhaps periodically) move back a few steps in that direction, we cannot force color-blindness on huge populations who insist on racial loyalties, racial causes, racial grievances and hates, racial demands. Nothing is proof against the universal chorus of racial resentments that refuse to accept entirely race-neutral regimes and institutions.

Globally, what drives today’s hatred of whites is a well-known, and stark, contrast. White enclaves in black Africa, Jews in the Middle East, now-vanished euro-white enclaves in the Mahgreb, white colonial societies in the New World and elsewhere, prospered or prosper. Beside them, sometimes cheek by jowl, the native populations of Arabs, blacks, American Indians, and aborigines languished and languish in their traditional poverty and misery. And, in the New World, the blacks, long freed from slavery and in some places long in political control, still generally lag well behind the whites.

In the Americas, Africa, Australia and New Zealand, the natives were mostly living in Stone Age conditions when the Europeans, already in late Iron Age civilization, arrived. While here and there piratical entrepreneurs conquered and looted, euro-white settler enclaves were built, which expanded over the centuries as they developed and modernized along with Western Europe, with which they were and are culturally continuous. For the most part, the natives beside them simply remained natives beside them, and underwent the “separate development” to be expected of their initial cultural level. They were and remain so many barbarians in hovels at the gates and in the hinterlands.

Extensive conversion of the natives to Christianity has done nothing much to overcome these differences. Nor, really, has the accompanying – and to this day very far from complete – spread of the European languages among the native populations. Opportunities and circumstances rarely combined in just the right way to make the work of the Christian missions one of complete assimilation into the cultural and economic life of the local enclaves of the developing euro-white civilization. Rather, they were generally simple schools of basic Christianity whose role was to catechize, to teach a European language, and to put an end in most places to indigenous cannibalism, slavery, human sacrifice, recreational torture, and a wide variety of non-monogamous “marriage” customs. But even this work was much less fully accomplished in some places than in others in the East Indies, in Africa and in the New World.

At the same time, there is persistent evidence that there are real differences in the natural endowments of the races with respect to intelligence and other psychological traits presumptively relevant to the development and rise of civilization, as well as physical ones. In the case of blacks, American Indians and the Aborigines of Australia, these differences may account in some measure for the poor showing of these peoples. But that native endowment alone fully explains these things is contradicted by the evident inferiority of Semitic and other white, non-European, Islamic countries; and of much of East and South Asia – all areas populated by pretty good IQ test takers.

But whatever the causes behind it, the fact that the euro-white world is largely successful while the non-European, red, brown and black worlds in such close proximity are so dismally not, fuels the hatred and envy all around us. And there is nothing we can do to put an end to it, or even to much slow its spread.

The anti-white mythology that blames Euro-whites for everyone else’s troubles, that seems committed to the view that “man is born rich, but everywhere we see him in rags thanks to the sub-human European devils,” finds more centers of support every day. The indigenista racism that regards all whites outside of Europe as thieves, home-invaders, the world’s only slavers, and the inventors of genocide is already the official doctrine of the UN and the unofficial but universal claim of Harvard University, all our elite institutions, and the entire global Left.

Millions everywhere believe these things. Millions more who do not nevertheless welcome this message as license to kill and rob the rich whites beside them, much as the lumpen-poor of the world in the past have welcomed Leftist ideologies for the same reasons. The more stupid they are, the more obvious their brutal delight in this, as in any, permission for crime and sadism. More and more, every day, more people are more firmly convinced that it is OK, and perhaps even a sign of special righteousness, to hate us, to attack us, to loot us and even to kill us.

Both globally and locally, we are entering a period when white people and civilization will be more and more openly denigrated and despised in accordance with this vicious, anti-white ideology, even as our society is more and more openly looted and favorable positions in it are simply stolen.

In contrast to those of Mr. Horowitz, Mr. Kalb and Mr. Taylor, my view is that our strategy of self-defense must be three-fold. First, we must uphold euro-white rights and honor. Second, we must insist that we euro-whites are entitled to at least keep a “piece of the pie” proportionate to our frequency in the population. And third, we must finally seriously undertake the task of assimilation.

As to the first point, today, and more and more as time passes, even our simple physical safety requires a self-conscious and aggressive defense of white people against the potentially genocidal anti-white ideology that has invaded and taken over our elite, and even popular, culture. It is essential that we consciously work to defend the unique and matchless achievements of our history and our culture, and thus our right to our high place in the world. Every concession to the ideologies of cultural equivalence, indigenism, or anything else that disparages or demonizes whites, amounts to a grant of permission to loot us and kill us off. The elite and publicly controlled institutions of the West are already in the hands of our enemies. We must fight to close or control them, and create our own private ones, or go under. All of our enemies know this full well. So do we, but we do not always dare to say so.

As to the second, as we become minorities in the US and elsewhere in the New World, as well as in other places, thanks to the dynamics and influence of our own every-spreading civilization, we will have to attempt the use of quotas, government imposed race-conscious policies, and such things as exclusively white schools and research centers, to defend our own position and rights, and to fight the ideological battle alluded to above. As the day wears on, it will be clear that the best deal we are likely to get will be one that says even we stinking and wicked whites are entitled to a place in the sun proportional to our numbers. We will not be able to avoid the sort of “mini-” or “demi-” separatism involved in these expedients.

Finally, we will at the same time at last be forced to undertake a task we have not seriously attempted at any time since Columbus found what was, for us, a New World. We will now, finally, have to make a sustained, generations-long, and no doubt very expensive, effort to assimilate these wretched, backward, non-euro-white populations into the civilization built by our ancestors.

Civilized peoples have always faced this problem. When the barbarians around them are too strong and too numerous to ignore or push aside, real efforts to convert them from pirates, raiders, destroyers and looters to settled and integrated participants in civilized life must be made. Because we don’t want them to remain Vikings, we must, as far as we can, make them Romanized Celts.

Our task will be enormously complicated by the fact that, now that we must really “take up the white man’s burden,” the darker races without the law will have none of it. Nor, for that matter, will our own hateful leadership, as corrupt and hostile to our survival as were the Patricians of later days to that of Rome. The barbarian peoples will spit in our faces as they demand to be taught, to be guided and aided, to be in part supported, by us. Their Leftist allies and our decadent and worthless elites will continue to endorse universal scorn for all things euro-white. They will all angrily reject assimilation, insisting on the superior values and wisdom of native, non-Western cultures, even as they all single-mindedly pursue a twisted version of assimilation that will make it both perpetuate and reward their anti-white hate.

We in America already know well what this is like. They will wear war paint and feathers as they attend classes at elite universities. They will watch DVDs on their PCs celebrating Custer’s defeat at the Little Bighorn and Chelmsford’s at Isandlwana. They will conceive of their integration into the global civilization we have built, and are building, in part on their labor, but mostly despite their hateful attitudes, interference and bad behavior, not as assimilation to, but appropriation of our world. Or perhaps even as taking it back, on those days when they repeat to themselves and to us that they built America, and that their fictitious ancestral black Egypt built the first civilization, from which we whites are already said to have stolen all we have.

This, I think, is the inescapable reality of our future: neither racial separatism nor color-blind individualism. Instead, a long and painful struggle to deal with the tigers we sometimes rode on and mostly ignored, but now must tame, or else be eaten.