Pure anti-whiteness—and the racial conservatism that is needed to oppose it

The “anti-white-skin privilege” campaign that was started last year by the mayor and the municipal government of Duluth, Minnesota (see our discussions about it) has now been adopted by the University of Minnesota-Duluth, and, under the title “Not Fair to Be White,” it is more insidious than ever. Its formal claim, promoted through video ads, is that whites enjoy unfair white skin privilege, because this society was set up by and for the benefit of whites. But what the campaign is really saying is that whites are racist—i.e., whites are repulsively morally wicked—simply and purely by virtue of being white, because of the unfair privileges that whiteness carries with it.

However, on an even deeper though unconscious level, what these quintessentially white-liberal, anti-white videos and billboards are saying is that whites really are superior—inherently superior—to other races, particularly to blacks, in intelligence, in looks, in the fineness of their vibrations, in every way; and since any inequality is unfair, it is unfair to be white. Therefore whites must in perpetuity impose unearned withering moral censure and material disadvantages on themselves, including allowing themselves to be terrorized and murdered by blacks, while bestowing unearned effusive moral approval and material advantages on nonwhites, particularly blacks, in an endless but never successful effort to cancel out the hideous unfairness of being white.

There is one silver lining in the “Not Fair to Be White” campaign: it is reported at, and strongly criticized by, a tea party website. Of course the tea parties from their inception have been about economic and size-of-government issues, not about cultural, let alone racial, issues. Liberals’ constant Orwellian attack on tea partiers as racist has forced them to counter that big lie, which means, at least to a certain extent, defending themselves as whites. Thus liberals through their insane deployment of the racism card against people who weren’t remotely concerned about race, may be pushing those people to become race-conscious for the first time.

The fatal weakness of mainstream conservatives has always been their race blindness, their sincere belief in humanity as a collection of equal right-bearing individuals, their rejection of any concern about the white race and white civilization as such. If liberals keep indicting all non-liberal whites as racists in need of totalitarian reconstruction, conservatives may be propelled, even against their own desires, but simply as a matter of survival, to become what I have always hoped they would become: moral racialists. And if they can’t relate to the term moral racialist, here’s another label that may, at some point, become acceptable to them: racial conservative. A conservative believes in conserving such things as our Constitution, our nation, our liberties, our culture, our religious and moral heritage. But if the white race which created and (until the mid-twentieth century) preserved our Constitution, our nation, our liberties, our culture, and our religious and moral heritage is not also conserved, if we allow it—meaning us—to be persecuted, dispossessed, and destroyed, all those other things that conservatives want to conserve will also be inevitably lost. So it is not enough to be an economic, constitutional, or cultural conservative; one must also be a racial conservative.

- end of initial entry -

Alexis Zarkov writes:

Print out your post on high-quality bond paper and frame it. Perfection. A milestone in clear thinking about the central issue of our time. I am reminded of a conversation I had with a colleague some ten or fifteen years ago. He kept on being critical of white people. Finally out of frustration, I said to him, “Alan, go take a look in the mirror. What do you see—a white guy. Stop it already.” In my opinion, self loathing is the worst of attitudes. You cannot be a whole person without belief in yourself, and without self respect. At one time, most American men could not live without honor—they would rather die than submit to cowardice and dishonor. Andrew Jackson took a bullet, which remained in his body all his life, to defend his wife’s honor. These campaigns against white people just for being white must be resisted with our last ounce of strength.

David B. writes:

I just read your post in which you used the term racial conservative. I saw it a couple of times around 1970-71. It referred to Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew’s Silent Majority as “racial conservatives” or as being “racially conservative.” It might have been in National Review or in a newspaper column by Kevin Phillips. Now that I think of it, I’m fairly sure it was Phillips. It never caught on.

Brandon F. writes:

Much damage! You are on fire and inspiring the troops with this one.

Hannon writes:

Lawrence,

Normally I read a majority of what you post every day on your site. Now, thanks to the following paragraph, I can give myself a break for a few weeks:

However, on an even deeper though unconscious level, what this quintessentially white-liberal, anti-white campaign is saying is that whites really are superior—inherently superior—to other races, particularly to blacks, in intelligence, in looks, in the fineness of their vibrations, in every way; and since any inequality is unfair, it is unfair to be white. Therefore whites must in perpetuity impose unearned withering moral censure and material disadvantages on themselves, including allowing themselves to be terrorized and murdered by blacks, while bestowing unearned effusive moral approval and material advantages on nonwhites, particularly blacks, in an endless but never successful effort to cancel out the hideous unfairness of being white.

It is brilliant in substance and style. It is like a meal (or portion of a meal) that is so good you feel guilty for having anything but plain food for a while.

Thank you.

Brandon F. writes:

I think some of this is inspired by the prospect of Obama losing the election. The last one is past them. Obama is on the ropes and their worse fear is his losing the election. By making a video like this they hope to kindle a similar feeling Obama voters had in ‘08. Whites that voted for him largely, in my opinion, did so for the same reason white women marry blacks. In order to satisfy the moral desire to be seen as race blind. Of course they are not otherwise they would not seek such satisfaction. This election is critical as a moral victory and I imagine they will get more desperate as time goes on.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at June 24, 2012 04:44 PM | Send