An Indian immigrant on Indian anti-white animus and America’s suicide

Aditya B. writes (April 7):

In the Derbyshire firing, the first thing I noticed was how Ramesh Ponnuru, NRO’s Indian hack, was quick to condemn Derb. [LA replies: I personally wouldn’t call Ponnuru a hack. He’s an intelligent person, a decent writer. But, at the same time, one cannot help asking, how much is there there? Like his frequent writing partner Lowry, his main interest in politics seems to be figuring out how the winds are blowing, and advising conservatives how to adjust to that. Hmm, on second thought…]

As I indicated in a prior email, I was raised in a political family. Not just local two-bit politics, national politics. I’ve had the misfortune of meeting Indian politicians of all stripes including a former Prime Minister, and a former President.

I’ve had the further misfortune of being involved with Indian politicking in the U.S., specifically in California.

I’ve come into contact with Indians of all castes and creeds, political and non-political. Whilst there are many things that divide them, one thing that unites almost every species of Indian is an anti-white animus. Obviously, no statistical evidence is available, but I’ve observed that greater material prosperity, here and in India, seems to correlate positively with anti-white animus. This observation seems to verify Eric Hoffer’s observations about minority discontent; that greater proximity to the majority reinforces the realization that one can never be the majority, no matter how hard one attempts to assimilate. That acute awareness seems to breed discontent.

Almost every Indian I have met, here and in India, has insufferable contempt for whites. They are convinced that they are morally and materially superior to America’s historic majority. But when pressed to explain how their country of origin is so obviously inferior to the U.S., an inferiority that compelled them to become strangers in a strange land, they mumble about things like “corruption” and such, as if these things are alien—almost supernatural phenomena—that have captivated their society, as opposed to humbly concluding that there is something intrinsically rotten with the country and its people.

In any event, Indians believe in neither rule of law nor equality before the law. And they especially don’t believe in freedom of expression. The Indian Constitution and Penal Code both forbid expressions that would “hurt religious sentiment.” The Penal Code was drafted by Lord Macaulay in 1832 after a diligent study of the Indian condition which compelled him to conclude that free speech and expression would lead to nightmarish social conflict.

Furthermore, the Indian Constitution provides for a racial spoils system (or caste spoils). Indians have no intrinsic opposition to such a system: they simply want a piece of the action, which is demonstrated by the ever-increasing scope of Indian “affirmative action.”

The point is, that outside of whites, no one believes in the fundamental tenets of Western civilization, specifically white, Anglo-Saxon civilization. And whites are foolish enough to keep importing non-whites en masse and cede power to such groups. White zombies are destroying their beautiful house, a structure that took two thousand years to construct, with their own, perfectly manicured hands.

Men such as myself who escaped a nation of perpetually offended ethnic groups, racial spoils systems, and incompetent, corrupt and resentful government officials have found ourselves in a different version of that hell. What enrages me is that whites simply don’t have to do this. There is no good reason to destroy this civilization. I simply cannot understand why they are doing this. And why they are taking us down with them.

National Review has done more damage to America than almost any liberal institution by hijacking conservatism and giving aid and comfort to the enemy. I don’t know if they have given a moment’s thought to the dystopia they are engineering: a balkanized nation where aggrieved groups are constantly at each other’s throats, accompanied by a dramatic depletion of quality of life. A government staffed by minorities out to settle scores with whites. A world where it will eventually be impossible for white girls to safely walk down the streets, attend school and college, or even go to work. Do these people think that non-whites will afford whites the protections afforded to minorities? Or will they do their level-best to humiliate and otherwise abuse whites?

Men like Ponnuru are animated by the same resentments as Sharpton, Jackson, Obama and Derb’s “DMV lady.” [LA replies: I don’t think we know that about Ponnuru. How is Ponnuru any more anti-white than your typical mainstream conservative?] They are doing their best to bring about a world where they can openly express their contempt for whites. Whites (or liberal whites) parochially assume that all people want the same things: more consumer goods, “opportunity,” “tolerance,” and all the other garbage that passes for serious thought in this semi-barbarous nation. The truth is that most non-whites want power: naked, aggressive power, which power can be wielded against that group’s historic enemies, real or imagined, and especially against whites.

Such is the evil that NRO, Weekly Standard, Commentary and every other garbage institution is helping to being about. If this Republic is to survive, these men should be compelled to put their beliefs to the test and be forced to relocate to their favorite communities and experience the practical effects of their philosophy. Ponnuru should simply be expelled and returned to India, where he and the hideous Dinesh D’Souza can spend the remainder of their miserable lives talking about how wonderful Indians are and how whites are all stupid and racist.

I hope NRO goes under, along with the monstrous Bill Kristol’s idiotic rag. I hope that this controversy forces whites, political and otherwise, to read Derb’s article and silently agree with the gist of his message. And I hope that this event, along with the Trayvon travesty, causes some awareness of the fact that the U.S. is currently being occupied by enemy aliens who hate whites with a passion. Perhaps this could precipitate the Great Awakening that we have been waiting for. Without being overly optimistic, I can safely conclude that the seemingly limitless capacity for self-delusion may be on its way to exhaustion, as whites are increasingly exposed to the naked thuggery and injustice of minority rule.

This could be a very interesting year.

- end of initial entry -

LA replies:

Thank you very much for this. I don’t think white Americans know much about Indian anti-whiteness. Chinese anti-whiteness, for example, is a more familiar phenomenon. If you would like to give some examples of this, that would be helpful

Also, you write:

There is no good reason to destroy this civilization. I simply cannot understand why they are doing this.

I think I have explained it. The cause is liberalism, namely the rejection of all discrimination, the belief that it is morally wrong to be a white-majority country with a white culture.

James P. writes:

Aditya B. writes,

“Almost every Indian I have met, here and in India, has insufferable contempt for whites. They are convinced that they are morally and materially superior to America’s historic majority.”

They are probably correct that they are morally superior to American whites today.

“Men like Ponnuru are animated by the same resentments as Sharpton, Jackson, Obama and Derb’s “DMV lady.” They are doing their best to bring about a world where they can openly express their contempt for whites.”

Bring about such a world? That world already exists! Nothing holds back any non-white from openly expressing contempt for whites in America today. In contrast, whites are not merely prevented from expressing contempt for non-whites, but even rational criticism based on observation and fact.

LA replies:

James P.’s last point is worth repeating. In America and the West today, nonwhites are permitted and encouraged to express contempt for whites, while whites are not permitted to express even rational criticism of nonwhites based on observation and fact.

Andrew E. writes:

I have many American-born friends of Indian and South Asian descent. The following is a comment I made a year ago in a discussion at What’s Wrong with the World about the concept of the proposition nation. My comment was meant to briefly convey my understanding, arrived at from my personal life experiences, of how Indian-Americans and others of South Asian descent relate to the American nation. And it was intended to rebut the claim that America’s assimilationist policies, or lack thereof, are primary in determining the nature of their relation to the country rather than the characteristics of the peoples themselves. Rather than say that every Indian I have met has an “insufferable contempt” for white people—if that were the case I wouldn’t be good friends with so many—I would say they generally have an abiding suspicion of white America. And I think the suspicion is borne not of leftist education and cultural influences but fundamentally of the inherent otherness of white Americans (That is white Americans as a group, a political entity) from themselves.

Here is my comment at WWWW:

I am very close with many people of South Asian ancestry, first generation Americans whose parents immigrated in the 70’s (Hindu, Muslim, Catholic), some are more “patriotic” than others, none of them hate America, all of them are very grateful to be citizens of this country, all of them are Westernized though none have Anglicized their names nor plan to with their children, all are well-educated, productive citizens living relatively moral lives within liberal society. Also, as far as one is able to know, very few have a deep and abiding attachment to the American founding, the events or the peoples. They do not identify with Washington, Jefferson or Davy Crockett, the New England Puritans or back-country Scots, nor the Irish or the Germans and are frankly somewhat suspicious of conservative “white” America. They understand that those who colonized, created, civilized and settled America are different from them in important, unbridgeable ways. Again, as far as an outsider can ascertain, most feel separated from the beginning of the American story for reasons that seem to me entirely unrelated to what they learned in school or what they see in movies or on tv. If so, no nation can survive this kind of immigration.

LA replies:

I agree entirely with your point, and, going back to my earliest published writings on the subject, it was first thing I said about why mass non-Western immigration must undo and destroy the American nation: that nonwhites, other than small numbers of atypical individuals, are simply not going to identify with the American nation—its history, its historic people, its founding, its heroes, its culture. It’s not a matter of hatred of whites, but of seeing whites as other and different from oneself and one’s group. (See Chapter II of The Path to National Suicide, especially the section, “The Problem of Cultural Identity,” and my 1992 article at NR, “The Forbidden topic”),

VFR’s long-time commenter, an Indian living in the West, writes:

Aditya sounds like a very interesting man and the sort of person that I would like to meet sometime.

I am from a very similar background to him and have met a number of Indian politicians, know a number of people in the upper echelons of the Indian bureaucracy—essentially what you would call the Indian establishment into which I was born.

I have to say that I do not completely agree with Aditya on his characterisation of Indian anti-white “hatred.” I think much of what he describes is dependent upon the type of people in question. I will admit, however, that the majority of Indians (regardless of whether they are first or second generation) tend to have a strong resentment of white people. In Britain, I would say the number is close to 98 percent among Indians. I think in the U.S. the number would be a lot lower. Of course, I have no way of proving this by empirical studies and you could say that personal anecdotal experience is not a real substitute for data. However, in my anecdotal experience, Indians settled or raised in the U.S. tend to have a lower level of “resentment” on an average. I would say unhesitatingly, however, that the resentment still characterises the majority.

I think it is important to distinguish between hatred and resentment. Hatred is what blacks who violently attack whites in America feel for whites. This is hatred. Indians do not feel that kind of hate. Indians feel, however, extremely strong resentment (you could say, for example, that this resentment is not dissimilar to what Jews or Italians may have felt towards WASPs in the 1920s). In Britain, most Indians that came to that country, came from peasant families in India. They started from the bottom. Most migrated to Britain in the 1960s and 1970s. Back then there was open hostility to them. One close friend whose father was Indian and mother British, told me that use of racial slurs was commonplace in schools. People who experience that during childhood develop a very strong resentment and carry it through their lives. Essentially they have to swallow the insult and live with it. This is demeaning to them and it builds up resentment. When they have children, they teach their children that “whitey” is always going to put you down.

I was dating an Indian girl raised in Canada a couple of years ago and it didn’t last beyond a few dates. Every conversation veered off into “Yeah, you know it is so hard to succeed when you know the whites control everything and there’s a glass ceiling.” I found it obnoxious after a while and extremely irritating. I told her to go find someone else who would be willing to listen to that drivel on a daily basis. At the other end of the scale, I have Indian friends who have been living in the West (mostly Britain) for a few years and have never expressed any hostility for whites. This may have something to do with the fact that they are extremely intelligent, went to top schools in India and have been paid extremely well for their abilities. There is also a realisation that the West is still a meritocracy which is still not the case in India. Their abilities would not be appreciated the same way in India (where political and family connections mean everything). I have another family friend who is in a top drawer position in a major U.S. Fortune 500 firm who has nothing but the greatest admiration for America. He once told me that America is the only reason he is what he is today.

However, in general, I think all non-white immigrant groups in Western countries will harbour anti-white animus. This is just how it is. Race is a fact of life. Modern egalitarianism paradoxically heightens the race distinction because it preaches absolute total uncompromising equality to the point where any distinctions created by nature become a source of constant mental distress. Think about this: George W Bush was the most liberal American President in history up until that point. And yet, liberals reacted with such visceral uncontrollable hatred against him. It was completely irrational. Why the hatred? Bush was mildly religious and may have expressed doubts about gay marriage. That was enough to make him a bigot who deserved to be shot. In the same fashion, even if non-white immigrants are otherwise middle class and have all the rights that whites do in Western countries, it is not enough. There is still a difference because they are a minority and they can never really become English or French, for example (protestations to the contrary notwithstanding).

I don’t know what all this is going to lead to. I really have no idea. But if you look at polling data, all the foolish theories the Republicans believe are blown to smithereens. Indians are one of the highest earning groups in the United States. They are as lopsidedly Democrat as blacks. Isn’t that amazing? Indians do not benefit from affirmative action (it actually penalises them) and they are not going to benefit from high taxes as high earners. How is it in their interest to vote for Democrats? And yet that is how they vote. That example I think shows that all this assimilation theory that is in vogue among white Republicans is nonsense. I think what this means is that politically, the Republican party is finished in the long run. It simply cannot win. If half of all children born in 2011 were non-white, that is half the future vote in the hands of the Democrats. Then you have white gays, white women, liberal white men, white government employees and government largesse beneficiaries also voting for the Democrats. This is the cause of great celebration among many white liberals. They cannot wait for the day when whites become a numerical minority in America because they would have won their victory. I have even read some really amazing comments online in response to John Derbyshire’s recent article by white women who are married to black men saying that they will do their part in making sure whites become a minority so that “racists” like Derbyshire cannot be born!

I think it is fair to say that in most Western countries, there is no longer any sense of “peoplehood.” In countries like Japan and South Korea (where I have travelled quite often recently), there is an over-arching sense of being one people which transcends any ideological boundaries. You won’t find Japanese leftists trying to score points over Japanese rightists by importing Somalis into Japan. That is just a no-no and except for a few oddballs, everyone agrees on that. That type of basic sanity shown by the Japanese is non-existent in the West today. This means that the few that want to preserve the traditional demographics of those countries are now on the fringes and no longer respectable.

If you will permit me to ramble a little more, I will respond to some of the specifics of what Aditya wrote in more detail in a separate email.

LA replies:

This is excellent and of course I encourage you to say more.

Indian living in the West writes:

Further responses to Aditya. He writes:

Almost every Indian I have met, here and in India, has insufferable contempt for whites. They are convinced that they are morally and materially superior to America’s historic majority. But when pressed to explain how their country of origin is so obviously inferior to the U.S., an inferiority that compelled them to become strangers in a strange land, they mumble about things like “corruption” and such, as if these things are alien—almost supernatural phenomena—that have captivated their society, as opposed to humbly concluding that there is something intrinsically rotten with the country and its people.

Indians have a “schizophrenic” attitude towards the West. They covet its wealth and its power. But they find its “culture” contemptible. Most Indians who have grown up in India are not used to seeing the kind of open licentiousness that has become commonplace in the West now. This is a source of contempt to some degree. But as Aditya rightly points out, if you go beyond these things and look at their actions and where they choose to live and work, their actions speak louder than words.

You also have to understand that Indians are the biggest hypocrites on earth (ok, may be not the biggest. That title goes to the white liberals). I remember meeting a schoolmate in Paris a few years ago. We hadn’t seen each other in years and I felt thrilled to see him. We were classmates in school and much time was spent comparing notes and old experiences. He asked me if I was married. I told him that I wasn’t. He castigated me that I should find a decent Indian girl and get married. Then our conversation veered off into what he had been doing in the two days he had been in Paris until we met. He told me that he was really busy in business meetings the first day but he spent the afternoon that day (the day of the evening we met) with a hooker in a brothel. He really wanted to see a “proper” French brothel. He also said it with a straight face. Next he showed me his family photos with pictures of his wife and daughter. I was astonished more than I was disgusted. But he was fine with all that. He also boasted to me that he regularly gets call girls in Bombay (Mumbai) where he works and his wife doesn’t suspect anything because he only sees her on weekends in Delhi. This kind of male behaviour is rampant in India. I hope he discovers some day that his wife has a few paramours as well—just to even the score a bit.:)

In any event, Indians believe in neither rule of law nor equality before the law. And they especially don’t believe in freedom of expression. The Indian Constitution and Penal Code both forbid expressions that would “hurt religious sentiment.” The Penal Code was drafted by Lord Macaulay in 1832 after a diligent study of the Indian condition which compelled him to conclude that free speech and expression would lead to nightmarish social conflict.

This is not unique to Indians. Do the Chinese abide by the law? How about Italians or Greeks or the Ukrainians or the Russians? Respect for the law is a phenomenon limited to very few countries in the world—mostly countries of Northern European origin. A business associate who is from Spain was describing the rampant corruption in Spain during Franco’s regime. It got better after Franco but not by much. Portugal is not that different either. An English friends jokes in a rather sarcastic manner that this is a problem endemic to the “garlic zone.”:)

Furthermore, the Indian Constitution provides for a racial spoils system (or caste spoils). Indians have no intrinsic opposition to such a system: they simply want a piece of the action, which is demonstrated by the ever-increasing scope of Indian “affirmative action.”

It is not entirely correct that high-caste Indians have no problem with the insidious caste/reservation spoils system. Back in 1990 when the Indian caste/reservation spoils system was being massively expanded by the then Prime Minister V.P.Singh, some Brahmin students committed suicide in Delhi by immolating themselves in public. They could have simply protested for a Brahmin “quota” but they didn’t. All they wanted was a meritocracy. It should also be said here that private sector corporate India does not have a system of “reservation” and it has fought the Indian government tooth and nail every time some politician has come out with a plan to expand it to the private sector.

The point is, that outside of whites, no one believes in the fundamental tenets of Western civilization, specifically white, Anglo-Saxon civilization. And whites are foolish enough to keep importing non-whites en masse and cede power to such groups. White zombies are destroying their beautiful house, a structure that took two thousand years to construct, with their own, perfectly manicured hands.

At the risk of starting an internecine war at VFR, let me suggest that the whole system began to unravel when the WASPs decided to broaden the scope of immigration in the 19th century beyond the British Isles and Holland (starting with immigration from Ireland in the 1840s). The political effects of the “Great Wave” were eventually felt in 1965. While WASPs were also to blame for not resisting the legislation, there is no doubt that one of the major reasons it passed was because many of the more recent immigrant groups felt that the “insult” of 1924 had to be obliterated. Is this not true?

I am an agnostic on the question. Canada, for example, only ever had immigration from the British Isles and France initially and yet it ended up importing a massive non-white population as well. Australia did the same after 1961. Something obviously changed in the philosophy of the Western countries. Some blame Britain and France’s immigration policies on their imperial history. But Sweden had no empire. And yet it has imported hundreds of thousands of Muslims.

I think the causes are open to debate.

By the way, it is not entirely true that all non-white “ethnic groups” fit within the characterisation that Aditya makes above. The most notable exception to this are the Parsis of India. Parsi immigration to Britain was “considerable” in the 19th century (but small in absolute numbers due to their small population). They became MPs and pillars of British society. The British, in turn, had the greatest regard for them as a people. Disclosure: I am not Parsi!

Men such as myself who escaped a nation of perpetually offended ethnic groups, racial spoils systems, and incompetent, corrupt and resentful government officials have found ourselves in a different version of that hell. What enrages me is that whites simply don’t have to do this. There is no good reason to destroy this civilization. I simply cannot understand why they are doing this. And why they are taking us down with them.

I have similar thoughts sometimes but unlike Aditya I am a vagabond and have been all over the place. I have also never believed that I would become a settled “immigrant” in the West. If I have children, they will certainly not grow up in the West given what it has become. I would rather not have my seven year old son taught how he may have homosexual “feelings” or my nine year old daughter about how to have sex the right way. But until I have children, I can live and travel throughout the West. I often have a feeling that I am living through a unique period in history. May be some men felt that way in the dying days of the Roman Empire. I will find out when I am in my 70s I guess.

April 10

Aditya B. writes:

With your kind permission, I’d like to add something to ILW’s superb critique of my ramblings. Also, I’d be honored to buy him dinner and (several) rounds of drinks if he’s ever in the Los Angeles area.

First and foremost, I agree that I should have said “resentment” instead of “hate.” “Resentment” perfectly captures the Zeitgeist that I was attempting to articulate. It is the world-view of a peoples who, as ILW states, “have a ‘schizophrenic’ attitude towards the West. They covet its wealth and its power. But they find its ‘culture’ contemptible.”

But I beg to differ with ILW. The abhorrence for licentiousness is simply the hypocrite’s ruse for making a virtue out of weakness. Male-female relations are dismal in India. There you will witness the horror of the Madonna-Whore dichotomy. Indian men have no problem with licentiousness, provided they get a piece of the action. ILW’s friend in Paris is one example. I can cite dozens. Just for kicks and giggles, go to “google trend” and type in a pornographic term. You will note that nations like India, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, places that allegedly abhor our modern day Sodom & Gomorrah on stilts, are the greatest consumers of that which they abhor.

I would also like to state that my observations about anti-white resentment apply to Koreans, Persians, and Hispanics. I have considerable dealings with these communities, personal and business, and have detected the same insufferable superiority. Almost to a man, they believe they are intellectually and morally superior to whites, yet not one of them is prepared to up and leave these white barbarians and join his noble countrymen in the land of his birth.

Also, while I sympathize on a human level with immigrants into Blighty who went there in the ’50s, and ’60s, I can’t say I really care about their suffering. You must remember, their compatriots had just fought the Very Evil Empire and the Very, Very Evil Englishmen. How supremely ironic that these proud Home-rulers, these brave patriots, grabbed the first opportunity to high-tail it for the West, and into the very Heart of the Most Evil of All Empires. Sorry, you can’t agitate for Home Rule, defame the English race and its Empire, and then dash off to the land of your former Lords and Masters, and demand equality!

While there was a time when high-caste Brahmins violently objected to “reservations,” they have decided it’s smarter to get on the gravy train. Each year, a new caste discovers that its an “OBC” (Other Backward Caste) in order to finagle university seats, government jobs, and other pieces of the State pie. Sikhs, Muslims, Christians, everyone is getting in on the act

I agree that respect for rule of law is a very English thing. The point is, that not even educated Indians believe in it. With the exception of eccentric persons, and eccentric races like the Parsees, most Indians aspire to a status where they would receive preferential treatment. There can be no other outcome in a rigidly hierarchical society where social rank determines virtually every aspect of one’s life. And in fact, without high status, one can’t even get a phone line installed. Everything requires political pull. The one thing any man of distinction hates more than anything else, is to be treated just like anyone else.

Finally, like ILW, I am an Indian, and sympathetic to a Hindu point of view on our current situation. The Aryadharma has a cyclical view of world history. One, I believe, espoused by Spengler. I am not familiar with Spengler, but I am acquainted with his most infamous disciple, Francis Parker Yockey. Yockey speculates that every civilization has 40 generations. Civilization, like the Earth, has its seasons. Maybe we are in the Winter of this Civilization. We may or may not see the Spring, but we can logically conclude that there will be one.

Alternatively, we may be going through one of the periodic phases of mass delusions and hysteria painstakingly and entertainingly documented by Charles Mackay in Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds. Like “Tulipmania,” the quest for the Philosopher’s stone, witch-hunts and other hysteric and delusional movements that we look back with shame or amusement (often both), liberalism may be another fad. Albeit the most dangerous one thus far. Maybe this madness will end soon, and future generations will regard us with the same contempt we reserve for witch-burners of yesterday.

And if that happens, sanity will reign for a day. Or two. And then regularly scheduled insanity will start all over again.

LA replies:

You wrote:

You will note that nations like India, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, places that allegedly abhor our modern day Sodom & Gomorrah on stilts, are the greatest consumers of that which they abhor.

Apropos of nothing that will be of interest to anyone but myself, your phrase, “consumers of what they abhor,” reminds me of a line from Yeats’s poem “Vacillation,” which I wrote a paper on in my sophomore year of college:

A tree there is that from its topmost bough
Is half all glittering flame and half all green
Abounding foliage moistened with the dew;
And half is half and yet is all the scene;
And half and half consume what they renew.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at April 09, 2012 12:44 PM | Send