Book review and a statement of principle.
Amazon description:
Anti-white racism, undisguised and unembarrassed, is now official policy in America.
One class of citizens—whites—is openly discriminated against in every sphere of public and private life. The Unprotected Class is a comprehensive explanation of how we got here and what we must do to correct a manifest—and dangerous—injustice.
Launched with an appeal to justice for all, the civil rights movement went off the rails even as it achieved its original goals. Soon its excesses and failures were exploited to justify discrimination against whites in business, education, law, entertainment, and even the church. With the death of George Floyd and the shedding of all pretense of racial justice, vindictiveness, resentment, and hatred were unleashed in America.
Basically, an executive summary of this book is that it is excellent with respect to description (stating what the problems are – it is doom and gloom outrage porn that would make “Gregory Hood” proud) but terribly wrong and destructive with respect to prescription (what should be done about these problems). The latter issue is not surprising given the author’s Jewish ancestry (more about that below).
Among the description are passages such as that one could read from my work; for example, consider these comments about White Flight:
…the rather pathetic spectacle of groups of non-whites following whites as whited move like vagabonds from place to place, looking for a community free from crime and chaos – all while the non-whites yell at whites about how racist they are. Of course, if whites later move back into the heavily minority neighborhoods they once left, they are accused of gentrifying” “them.”
Indeed. And it seems that Carl’s warnings about expropriation were prescient.
As regards prescription, particularly the major overarching themes of his prescriptions, I note that Carl in this book advocates in favor of Kaufmann’s genocidal Whiteshifting agenda (*), and the uses the assimilation of Southern Europeans as a historical example of how this can be successful; after all, there’s no difference between a Southern European and a mestizo or mulatto Hispanic or a Eurasian, amirite?
Lessons –
1. Never trust a conservative.
2. Never trust “right-wing Jews.” Carl describes himself as a “…an actively engaged Christian of Jewish descent…” I’ll comment about that at the end.
Carl also favorably mentions Sailer’s citizenism. So, here we have someone who has the descriptive down pat, but is peddling a dangerous and genocidal prescriptive formula. And of course this civic nationalist cul-de-sac gets promoted by Tucker Carlson (who favorably interviewed Carl), who never seems to interview any of the “we’re winning” Quota Queens. Fact is, White anger and increasing White receptiveness to a racial message is being deflected into aracial cuckservatism, and the failed “movement” cannot do anything about it. For all their talk of “optics,” they have zero appeal to the White masses.
Carl rejects White nationalism (surprise!) as being something that “would be completely destructive of the fabric of American society.” To that I say – good. Any society that would be destroyed by White nationalism deserves to be destroyed. Carl is delusional if he believes that this “American will be destroyed” argument is going to convince White nationalists who have given up on America. Of course, this argument by Carl is aimed more generally at disgruntled Whites who have a choice between aracial civic nationalism (Carl’s choice) and a more race-based form of hardcore identity politics (my choice). Today, his argument has power for deluded Whites, but as the racial situation worsens and as America becomes more and more an alien and hostile land for Whites, it is possible – we can hope – that increasing numbers of Whites will respond to Carl’s argument that White nationalism will destroy America as I have, with a resounding “good.” However, given how feckless and pathetic White Americans are, I wouldn’t bet on it. Hope springs eternal, but since a majority of White Americans are Color-loving Eloi – even those on the Far Right love Color – let’s just say I’m skeptical. Aliens like Carl don’t make the situation any easier by providing to Whites a safe, dead-end civic nationalist alternative that some Whites will hold on to even when America’s rotting corpse begins to stink. But, again, we can hope for at least some Whites to, finally, turn their back on the America delusion. The increasing numbers of Whites pondering a “national divorce” (but do they really mean it and would that “divorce’ be about ideology and not race?) allows for some mild optimism (VERY mild).
Thus, Carl, who endorses Kaufmann’s Whiteshift and Sailer’s citizenism, promotes a general strategy of conservative compromise. While I agree with some details of his prescription – such as stopping mass immigration and using lawfare against the anti-White Left – I totally disagree with his overall strategy of Whites accepting a multiracial America, accepting their long-range demographic eclipse, and accepting a “widening” of “Whiteness” to include non-European and mixed-race peoples, Whites accepting mongrelization, and Whites accepting a permanent dilution and diminution of their European genetic and cultural heritage. Carl also approvingly quotes the execrable Razib Khan regarding Magyar genetic extinction coupled to cultural continuity, with implications about the future for Whites. Carl assures us that there are too many Whites to become extinct as did the Magyars, but isn’t that what Whiteshift inevitably will lead to? Why mention the Magyars unless that is considered an acceptable possible outcome for White America?
Statement of principle: Instead, I promote the opposite. Whites should give up on America, which is a dead country with no future. Whites should coalesce around their specific European racial/genetic/biological and cultural heritage. They must absolutely reject Whiteshift and absolutely reject civic nationalist citizenism. They must reject “non-White allies” (including Jews) and they must reject “non-White Whites (sic).” They must reject compromise, they must reject easy short-term solutions, and they must accept the reality that there must be short-term and medium-term pain in order to achieve a stable, long-term real solution to our race’s racial problems. Instead of conservative compromise, we should instead move in the direction of uncompromising radical and revolutionary activism. Whites must hold the line with respect to defining themselves as people of indigenous European stock. They must take an “ourselves alone” attitude, eschew “alliances” with other groups, and have a long-term goal of radical change (although, smaller changes to weaken the System can form part of the strategic “Suvorov’s Law” approach – see below). That must be the fundamental overarching strategy.
In fact, Carl’s last chapter is incoherent. He admits that Whites are being subjected to “cultural” (only cultural???!!!) genocide, yet for Whites to fight that genocide by coalescing around a racial White identity and struggling for White nationalism is somehow bad and “unfair” to all those nice decent non-White “ Americans. After all, if you are being targeted for genocide based on RACE (with “culture” a proxy for that), then that existential threat must be opposed by an equally powerful counterforce. If we are being subjected to genocide, is the proper response to say, “right-o, I’ll help my own race’s destruction, only can we do it a bit slower and more painless, please?” I do not think so. Carl worries about “violence” yet advocates for “bodies in the streets” for protest and the need for “sacrifice.” Sacrifice? For what? To beg and plead to all those “decent” non-Whites to please, pretty please, don’t genocide us? Carl states that we need Asian allies, but then also states that Whites need to be the ones to speak out on their own behalf and should not depend on non-Whites (like him?) to do it for them. And getting back to his promotion of Whiteshifting – of course, Carl would describe the genocide that he opposes as “cultural” because his solution would lead to racial genocide, so he can’t well complain about the same sort of genocide that his own prescription would lead do, right? While Carl gets the “small stuff” right in the last chapter, he gets the “big stuff” all wrong.
And another reason for rejecting Carl’s prescription if compromise, besides that it will be destructive specifically for Whites in America, is that the racial crisis is worldwide, in every majority White country, including and especially our European homelands. This is an existential crisis for Whites, and there is no place to run to if White America is destroyed. We have to make a racial stand because Whites are being attacked as a race everywhere, it is not just an “American sociopolitical problem.” If we compromise in America, what about elsewhere? Europe as well? Will Whites not have any home of their own?
Reading Carl’s book, I see that there are two sets of battles going on for the soul of the American Right. On the broader Pan-Right scale, there is the struggle between conservative aracial civic nationalism that wants to salvage a multiracial America and is willing to throw European-American racial integrity under the bus to do so, and the racialist Far Right, which wants to safeguard European-American racial identity and realizes – at least some of us do – that America is a dead country with no future and we need to move toward a post-American future. Then, within the Far Right itself, there is a struggle between Der Movement and the nascent New Movement that needs to replace it. The former is characterized by freakish failure, Nordicism, HBD, ethnonationalism, perverts, grifters, and WN 3.0 multiracial “White nationalism.” The latter supports Pan-European White nationalism, a Whites-only movement, and an adherence to facts and logic. I can’t help but notice that from my perspective, the Eloi are enriched in the wrong side of both sets of struggles. Given that the Eloi are junior partners to the Jews, Eloi support for Carl’s book will come as no surprise.
Reading the Jerome Carl book, for all of its faults, does clarify once more what an utter failure Der Movement is, and doubly so. First, the litany of woe clearly demonstrates that things are worse than ever for Whites and there is no effective push-back, real world pro-White activism that influences on-the-ground outcomes is non-existent. Second, the inability of Der Movement to take advantage of this desperate situation to recruit disgruntled Whites also clearly demonstrates what an inept failure Der Movement is, and how unappealing it is to potentially receptive Whites. That Der Movement tries to obfuscate their failure by noting their “page views” – while of course panhandling for donations – shows what dishonest grifters they all are.
One positive of Carl’s book is that any sensible and intelligent Whites out there reading the book can get motivated by Carl’s descriptions and thus become activists, while at the same time opposing Carl’s more destructive prescriptions. Conservative compromise is how we got to the sorry state we are in now; Carl’s general approach to prescription is precisely what has led to the description that his wrong-headed prescription is supposed to “solve.”
Is it any wonder Der Right always loses?
Instead, we can invoke Suvorov’s Law (“revolutions do not take place during the time of greatest repression, but when that repression is suddenly relaxed”). Even if Carl actually believes the cuckservative drivel of his last chapter, if Whites become mobilized and win the small-scale victories Carl envisions, then that can embolden previously cowardly Whites to do even more’ further, having the System be forced to make concessions would reveal weakness and hopefully lead to more radical change beyond that which Carl hopes for. Relaxing the repression because of the pressure of White activist mobilization can be the precursor to revolution. In this sense, Carl and others like him can serve as “useful idiots.”
But I’m not optimistic. Thus, the Carl book spends 200+ pages outlining how bad things are for White Americans (“we’re winning?”). Then at the end he urges Whites to engage in protest and sacrifice. OK. Now, here’s the thing. I agree with Carl’s descriptions of the sorry state of White America today. Things really are terrible and we’re losing, and badly. But therein lies one of the reasons we are losing so badly. If Whites are persecuted so badly – and they are – why do they need to be so urged to fight back, protest, sacrifice, etc.? Any other group would have rebelled against this treatment long ago, any other group would not require 200+ page books outlining to them in gory detail all of the abuse and humiliations they face and then, even with that, would not then require urging to actually do something about it. Whites are a particularly feckless and self-abasing race (it’s not only Italians, lest you get the idea that I believe that, based on my criticism of that ethny). And the problem goes further – even among racially aware Whites, the ones who claim to believe in White Genocide and The Great Replacement, even those cannot be prompted to do anything useful, no matter how minor (as I have learned to my bitter disappointment); these “activists” believe leaving comments at retarded “movement” sites and giving some shekels to shameless grifters, constitutes “fighting back.” A major reason why Whites are in the sorry state they are in is related the lack of any significant response to being in that state. It’s the White Man’s Disease – an inability to act in their own racial interest; in many cases, not even being able to understand that they have racial interests, coupled to continuous catering to the interests of others.
We are losing and will no doubt will continue to lose, since no one wants to put in even the slightest effort for the serious political and metapolitical work required to win. “Right-wing activism” is an oxymoron.
Now about Carl’s ancestry – can we be surprised that a Jew peddles poison to us in the guise of “I’m one of you?” On the Left, we have the “fellow Whites” phenomenon, where Jews posing as Whites promote White guilt and White surrender – “we need to atone for our sins”- “we” meaning Whites. On the Right, we have Carl, Michael “multiracial White separatist state” Hart (“Asians and others” included), Weissberg and the “racial status quo,” etc. Then there is Unz with his love of Hispanic immigration and the well known affiliation of rightist Jews with the anti-White HBD cult. In the mainstream, we have Kaufmann who is half-Jewish. In virtually every single case where a Jew peddles some sort of racial advice to Whites it is invariably racially destructive. They can’t help themselves; they are not us, they can never be us, and their interests are different from ours. Jews fear racial and cultural homogeneity in the nations they live in as part of their Diaspora, they have an innate tropism for diversity and for mixing other groups, so they will oppose strict White nationalism, oppose homogeneous White ethnostates, and oppose a European-based definition of Whiteness – everything necessary for our long term racial survival will be opposed by Jews. And of course, the same holds for other non-White “allies,” who always oppose Pan-European White solidarity and instead promote anything that will divide Whites (e.g., HBD, Nordicism, etc.).
Do not listen to Carl and his pro-Whiteshift siren song leading you to racial destruction.
* Note:
More on Whiteshifting:
eginotes 
You must be logged in to post a comment.