What’s the Idea?

What is America?

We are told that America is not defined by a core racial or ethnic group but is instead defined by an idea. We are told that Americans are not a particular ancestry group but people who agree with this idea.

Putting aside the laughable assertion that all of the competing groups in America actually agree on anything fundamental, we can ask a more basic question – what’s the idea?  What actually IS the idea that defines America?  Can anyone tell me?

Freedom? The current USA is defined by a social control apparatus that commands human behavior via myriad de jure and de facto mechanisms in order to manage the chaos of diversity and multiculturalism. We have numerous civil rights laws (de jure) and an endless array (de facto) of social pricing controls, as well as government-corporate cooperation, all in order to stifle dissent, particularly dissent from the disappearing White majority. Freedom of association does not exist, freedom of speech is being constantly eroded – what is this freedom? Where is this freedom?  It is all a lie; it is all a mirage.

Making a better life? Is that the idea? “The American Dream?” The current American ideology is one of “equity” – enforced equal outcomes, reducing all to the lowest common denominator. The American industrial economy has been outsourced to China and elsewhere, the remaining “economy” is a Ponzi scheme of shuffling money around, the middle class is in decline and income inequality constantly increases (likely a reason the elites, who benefit from this income inequality, push the “equity” nonsense to attack the White middle class/working class that they hate, and whose response to income inequality they fear), and Americans have become a herd of overweight, drug-addicted, dumb, cowardly sheep.

Democracy? We have a System that is essentially an oligarchy, with a suppressed and oppressed White majority, and when the people elect a President (who ends up being a lazy, useless, good-for-nothing) that the elites do not like, the elites conspire against him, and “our” military essentially behaves as if they want to have a coup, and plot treason with foreign governments.

Tolerance? The System is intolerant of Whites, White Identity, and pro-White activism; indeed, the System is defined by its totalitarian intolerance. Treating everyone fairly, everyone treated the same – equality?  No, Whites are a subaltern untouchable under-caste; the whole “equity” paradigm implies treated people non-equally, giving advantages to non-Whites. A half-century of affirmative action disadvantaging White men for the benefit of everyone else apparently hasn’t been enough, now the System is really going to show us how to discriminate against Whites, particularly against White men.

So – what’s the idea?  What is the defining idea of America?

Answer: The United States of America is nothing more or less than a group of (mostly fat and stupid) disparate peoples living together in the same territory under the same government, ruled by self-interested, rent-seeking elites who are fearful of losing their hold over a disintegrating nation.

Amren Opinion Poll

Polling.

See this. I have mixed feelings about that. On the one hand, I’ve been beating the drum about racial-based opinion polling of Whites for years, so it’s a step in the right direction. On the other hand, they left out the most important questions – asking all those “racial conservatives” (bad term – “conservative” – but this is Amren after all) what is stopping them from engaging in overt pro-White activism. Do they believe in aracial civic nationalism? If so, why? Like Sailer, do they support civic nationalism because they aver that White nationalism is “impossible?” Are they disgusted with Der Movement and see nothing worth following? Do they see WNs as a bunch of dangerous freakish extremists? Why? What about pro-White activism do they dislike? Are they afraid of social pricing consequences of being WN; are they are afraid of System retaliation? More fundamentally, how many of all of those “racial conservatives” are civic nationalist “citizenists” and how many actually are potential racial nationalists? The Quota Queens think they can “reach out to” all of the “racial conservatives” but without the answers to these questions, they are doomed to fail – as usual.

Thursday Thoughts

On activism.

Attention, Greg Johnson; comment from YouTube:

LaserGuidedLoogie

1 day ago

Tell us again how “WN 2.0” is doing it better, because you know, “we are all so much smarter guies!”

WN 1.0 guys figured out 20 years ago:  You don’t talk to the enemy media.

WN 2.0 is a joke, and WN 3.0 is a plan for pathetic failure.  WN 1.0 was a failure as well, but at least it didn’t pretend to be anything other than it was – a tiny group of Nutzi freaks.

Does Hood really believe this is a realistic possibility?

Interesting comment:

Publius

I recently watched the movie “a beautiful mind” for the first time in a long time and it got me thinking. The greatest mathematical achievement that any scientist could achieve would be to solve the problem of the prisoners’ dilemma. The whole civilized world knows what is needed (Just look at the comments on any web location where comments are permitted), but anybody who acts is a Lonewolf who goes straight to jail or death by cop. No one man can do anything. How can a person act and have faith that 100 million brothers will act with him simultaneously?

I have written about this before.  Even though the great mass of Whites are useless cucks, and our situation is grim, there is likely many more people who could be on our side, but are, practically speaking, not, in the sense of being completely inactive.

Whites are atomized, not knowing who is a friend or an enemy, racial-politically speaking.  If you were to speak out, would any of the “six percenters” come to your aid? Is it possible to organize all (or any) of this unused human material, when everyone mistrusts each other?  If everyone is waiting for “the other guy” to get something started, then obviously nothing will ever get started (the current “movement” tragicomedy does not constitute such a “something’).  This is one reason the System cracks down on any public expression of pro-White attitudes, and why pro-Whites are deplatformed, and why the System uses a private army of leftist thugs to physically attack people like Spencer, and do so with impunity.  They are afraid that once a nucleus is formed (once again – this is NOT the current Der Movement), then all sorts of possibilities emerge that would not be conducive to the long term stability of the multicultural System.  

And, by the way, this is why all of the infiltration that Johnson so blithely shrugs away is so destructive, even though the direct and immediate impact was not so great. Besides the issue of revealing the horrifically bad judgement of “movement leaders,” and besides the public humiliation for the “movement,” it also reinforces the narrative that fellow Whites cannot be trusted, that your potential allies may be infiltrators, and that it is better to just hunker down alone (snug in your hobbit hole, perhaps?) and do nothing.  The damage done by Hermansson and Lewis was incalculable.

Once again: The existential meaning of Asians is hatred of Whites.  Even if every Jew in America were to disappear tomorrow, South Asians would fill the gap as the verbally-adept hectoring anti-White elite, with East Asian providing the technical “muscle” for the anti-White pan-colored alliance.  But, isn’t that what HBDers like Sailer want?  Wouldn’t his buddies from GNXP object to any skepticism about a Camp of the Saints invasion of America from the Ganges?  

This is interesting, but remember that Crick was a scientist, not an HBDer.  Ultimately, it was about facts and the truth, not politically-motivated “just so” stories to push a Jewish-Asian agenda at the expense of Whites.

Shockingly, Zman makes good sense here:

This is why civic nationalism is a dead end movement. It’s trying to reanimate an Enlightenment concept that was killed off by the post-war cultural revolution of the last fifty years. Reviving the old notions of civic identity is about as promising as reviving the monarchy in Germany. Thinking about it is a nice escape for those struggling to face the reality of identity politics, but that’s all it is, a fantasy. The world created by the Left is a post-nationalist world and therefore a post-citizen world.

Paying attention, Breezy?

This is incorrect.  What the Alt Right was really all about: Pepe, Kek, Beavis-and-Butthead drunken podcasts, Trump worship, complete misunderstanding of population genetics, covering typical fossilized “movement” dogma with a veneer of “youth culture” juvenile jackassery, cosplay rallies – in other words, WN 2.0.

Stupid Derbyshire: 10/11/17

Another incoherent quota queen.

Read this nonsense.

Just like Derbyshire debated Taylor on miscegenation (it’s all good, according to the Derb, at least for him, and if you don’t like it, come to his house and he’ll punch you in the face – his essential position), he is now opposing Taylor on racial separation: No Sale, says Derb, it’s impossible, simply impossible.

Hmmm…why would a White male (not man) married to a Chinese woman with half-Chinese children, oppose the idea of people in America actually separating, in a political sense, on the basis of race?  Just like we can productively speculate why such a person would be so opposed to criticism of miscegenation.  Just like we know why he insists the major racial dividing line is Blacks vs. non-Blacks as opposed to Whites vs. non-Whites.  We just can’t acknowledge the bizarre alien nature of Mrs. Derbyshire and the kids now, can we?

Anyway, and predictably, Derbyshire’s self-interested position is incoherent.  He’s all for “freedom of association” don’t you know (so, we can be free to eschew him and his family?), but actual separation is “no sale” because Blacks need Whites

Derbyshire:

Of that fraction of blacks with something on the ball, all but the most saintly and self-sacrificing will decamp to the nearest nonblack area, as you see happening today across the Mediterranean. Jared’s white enclaves are going to need some very serious border control. His proposed multicultural enclave, where people who want diversity can enjoy it, will get way less diverse really fast. It’ll just turn black.

There is simply no stable solution here. Whites don’t need blacks, but blacks need whites, if they are to have any kind of civilized life.

Jared’s second clip is similarly flawed, even setting aside the mayhem that attended the breakup of Yugoslavia. The racial gap in what was formerly Soviet Central Asia is nowhere near the size it is between American blacks and nonblacks.

So, sorry to Jared and those of his followers who emailed in, but on the matter of separation: no sale.

I do, though, fully agree with Jared on the desirability of striking down all legal constraints on private freedom of association. Forced racial integration is an outrageous assault on our liberties.

With freedom of association restored there would, I believe, be enough voluntary separation to lower the racial temperature and ease us forward to the calm acceptance of reality that the race issue so badly needs.

Look, if Blacks need Whites, and if we cannot have racial separation because there is no way to keep Blacks out (but doesn’t Derbyshire think that Europe can and should prevent the migrant invasion?), then how can we have freedom of association?  Blacks are going to want to live in the “non-Black” areas formed by “voluntary separation.”  How are you going to keep them out?  You can strike down “legal constraints on private freedom of association” but you still need some way to ENFORCE that separation.  If Blacks start coming into Derb’s pristine White-Yellow neighborhood paradise, what’s the solution? Call the police?  The National Guard?  Will law enforcement be segregated as well?

The other incoherent aspect of Derbyshire’s stupidity is his idea that we can have racial peace if we can all just accept HBD race realism and enjoy our voluntary separation and “cool down the racial temperature.”  As if Blacks, with their militancy and low intelligence and inflated self-esteem (all HBD-approved factoids, no?), will just accept being viewed as dumb and violent sub-altern Americans and if they would just accept being eschewed by “voluntary separation.”

Just like Sailer’s citizenism fails because it is no more realistic than racial nationalism (Trump’s citizenism didn’t last past the election) and won’t accomplish anything, Derbyshire’s idea that acceptance of racial differences and freedom of association will solve the race problem is ludicrous.

Derbyshire’s position is self-contradictory, and is reflective of his personal situation, his cognitive deficiency, or both.