Print this post Print this post

May the Whiter Man Win

2,306 words

Mitt Romney is my guy! Not that I actually intend to vote for him. I probably won’t – unless certain things stirring within me just overcome my better judgment and catapult me into a voting  booth. And it bothers me to admit that this might just happen.

So just what is stirring in me?

On the night of the Presidential debate I had completely forgotten that the event was taking place. I’m usually quite detached from things. I’m always the last one to hear that it’s time to set the clocks forward or back because I seldom turn on the television or read a newspaper. Well, on the evening of October 3rd I was driving home from the gym and turned my car radio to the local NPR station (always good for a few laughs). To my surprise, I found myself in the midst of the debate.

Now, I never watch (or listen) to these things. They simply make me cringe. The last one I watched was one of the Bush-Kerry bouts and I came away so embarrassed for Bush I almost felt sympathy for the guy. So, my first instinct on tuning into Obama-Romney Round One (an appropriate choice of words, as we shall see) was to change the channel. But something staid my hand. And it wasn’t bright-eyed Athena. It was a morbid curiosity; the kind that makes me look at road kill.

And so I listened. It was Romney’s turn and as I listened to him I thought to myself, “This guy isn’t half as stupid as I thought he was.” I had formed the impression (no doubt under the influence of the “liberal media,” as they call it on Fox News) that Mitt was another Bush. Not so, I quickly discovered. He’s actually quick on his feet and pretty articulate. And he was obviously extremely well prepared.

Now, my reaction had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with anything that the man actually said. To repeat: I was not reacting to the content of his statements at all. I usually assume that whatever comes out of a politician’s mouth is a lie. And I think that people who take the trouble to learn the details of the differences between “Obama’s plan for X” and “Romney’s plan” are mostly just wasting their time. No, what I was reacting to was pure appearance, pure style.

Now please don’t castigate me for privileging style over substance. If there is no substance, then there’s no problem in talking about style instead. And the media pundits, whose reactions I would follow in the next few hours, basically agreed with me: they really weren’t interested in anything these guys said at all; they were solely preoccupied with how it was said.

When I arrived home I immediately switched on the TV and began watching the debate. And then I got another surprise. On the radio both men sounded poised, though Obama seemed a bit low-key. On television, however, it was apparent that Mitt was trouncing the guy. I’m not going to go into all the reasons why, because it’s all been endlessly discussed in the last several days: Romney looked directly at Obama, while Obama avoided looking at Romney; Romney seemed very upbeat and bright-eyed, while Obama seemed weary and bored, etc.

The most surprising thing of all, however, was the genuine pleasure I took in all of this. I was on the edge of my seat, hooting and cheering as I watched Romney ground and pound Obama. And then I realized it: this is like watching the UFC.

In the evenings after the day’s work is done I frequently mix myself a vodka and tonic and end the day by watching the latest DVD release of the Ultimate Fighting Championship. I’m not one of those big fans who has a head full of statistics and can tell you, for example, how many fights Stephan Bonnar has won by KO or how many times Kyle Kingsbury has been submitted. Primarily I enjoy the UFC as sheer spectacle, and I only follow the careers of certain fighters.

Nevertheless, every time I watch a fight I always take sides. There’s always a guy I want to win. It’s seldom because I think he’s the most skilled. It usually has something to do with his spirit or his character. I have one cardinal rule, however. One Prime Directive: if the match is between a White man and a non-White I always root for the White man. This is not a rule I have to make myself follow. It’s a rule that expresses my own natural inclinations. Even if the White man is a total asshole and the non-White (usually Black or Latino) is a saint, I still root for the White man.

Here are my basic rules for watching the UFC:

1. If it’s White vs. White I root for the one whose spirit or character I admire the most; or I root for the one who seems to come from a background similar to mine; or the one I just like the best. If I don’t know anything at all about them, I root for the one who looks like he’s in the best condition. I will not back a lard ass.

2. If it’s White vs. non-White I root for the White man no matter what.

3. If it’s sorta-White vs. sorta-White or sorta-White vs. Clearly-Non-White (as is often the case with the UFC) I root for the Whiter one.

4. If it’s Clearly-Non-White vs. Clearly-Non-White I just don’t care. Or I fast forward to the next fight.

The Obama-Romney bout actually falls into a fifth category: White vs. sorta-White. People keep telling me Obama is Black, even though he’s only half Black. Nobody ever points out that if his being 50% Black is enough to make him Black, then why isn’t his being 50% White enough to make him White? I’m kinda glad, though, that nobody ever points this out. Notice that, implicitly, everyone is drawing on the old “one drop” rule in the case of Obama. He’s just too Black to be White. So, in the case of Obama vs. Romney the application of my UFC rules is clear: root for Romney.

You cannot imagine the joy I feel in my heart (and the sounds the neighbors hear) when I see a White fighter beat a non-White. Now, if you are an interloper, not yet initiated in the ways of Counter-Currents, let me immediately set you straight. No, I don’t hate the non-White fighters. No, I don’t want Whites to go around beating up non-Whites – outside the octagon, that is. I root for the White fighters because they’re White like me. I can’t help it and I feel no need to apologize for it – because I know that the Blacks in the audience are rooting for the Black fighters, and the Latinos are rooting for the Latino fighters, etc. It’s just natural.

I was jubilant at the end of that first Obama-Romney debate. I jumped off the sofa and cheered as Romney pummeled Obama, knocked him on his bony ass, then got his back and submitted him – just before Mario Yamasaki stepped in and stopped the fight. My heart thrilled as I watched Romney do a back flip and strut across the octagon as his fans cheered. Then came, of course, the obligatory moment when Romney went striding over to a limping Obama to embrace him in true sportsmanlike fashion. But Obama wasn’t having any of it. He was pissed. He turned away from Romney then sank to his knees and pounded the canvass, screaming obscenities inaudible from my vantage point in the crowd. Then Obama got up and, as Joe Rogan approached Romney for the post-fight interview, he began pacing the octagon, mouthing something to the camera, teeth bared. I could just read his lips and make out what he was saying, over and over again: “I been robbed! I been robbed!”

Well, of course, most of the above is fantasy. But it felt like that was what I had just witnessed. And I stuck around for the commentary – the endless commentary on Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC. Then I read the online papers the next day. Everyone – everyone – declared Romney the winner. And now I’m hooked, folks. I’m emotionally involved. I really didn’t expect this to happen.

As a candidate, as a leader, and as a human being I’m sure that Mitt Romney probably isn’t worth a s***. But goddamnit I want the White guy to win!

Please don’t misunderstand me. This is not a rational choice. I don’t know anything about Romney’s plans or policies and, as I said before, I wouldn’t believe anything he says about them anyway. The little I’ve heard about what he thinks about foreign policy (especially with respect to the Middle East) suggests that if Romney means what he says we could be in for real trouble if he wins the election.

And yes, I’m aware of all the arguments – posed, for example, by Greg Johnson – to the effect that four more years of Obama would actually be better for White Nationalism. I accept all of that. Truly. But mine is not a rational response. This comes from the heart or the gut or wherever these things come from. I probably won’t even get off my White ass and vote for Romney (especially if it rains), but goddamnit I want the White guy to win!

And though I know that mine is not a sensible response – and again, though I accept that it is probably better for us if Romney loses – there’s also a part of me that thinks that this very irrational and emotional reaction is a sign of something really good.

Ultimately, White Nationalism cannot be built upon claims regarding, shall we say, “White exceptionalism.” It’s a mistake to try to turn Whites into White Nationalists by arguing that Whites are better than other people. After all, Asians are smarter than we are, and Blacks can run faster and jump higher. White identity and White Nationalism can’t be based primarily on intellectual arguments at all. If we buy into the idea that we need to give Whites a reason to love their own then we’re doomed from the start. That’s like trying to convince people to be good parents by giving them “reasons” to love their children. If the love isn’t there already, it’s hopeless.

So what we have to do is to get Whites to feel the love. We have to tap into something deeper than reasons. We have to tap into the capacity of Whites to identify with other Whites just because they are White, and for no other reason. It is this capacity – the capacity to love one’s own simply because they are one’s own – that is the strength of other races. Black would identify with other Blacks even if there were not one good thing to say about Blacks as a whole. Have Whites lost this capacity? If we have we are doomed, no question about it.

But I don’t think we have. We have just been so cowed by political correctness that we are not only afraid to speak about it, we are afraid to acknowledge this capacity in ourselves even in the privacy of our own minds. But that we still have this capacity is undeniable. We demonstrate it daily in the decisions we make about where to shop, where to live, where to send our kids to school, what organizations to join, what television shows to watch, etc. We demonstrate it daily in all the “implicitly White” things that we do. All that needs to happen now is for the implicit to become explicit.

In the last election, 96% of Blacks voted for Obama. Nobody thinks this is because they coolly evaluated the platforms of the two candidates and came to the rational decision that Obama was the lesser of evils. No. They voted for Obama because they looked at him and said “He’s like me.” And many of them are willing to openly admit this. It is time we played the same game – also openly. Because if it’s legitimate for one (and it is), then it’s legitimate for the other. There is no effective argument against this position.

My joy at Romney’s debate victory is thus – I think – a healthy expression of my White Nationalism. And I am pleased to realize that that White Nationalism is not just an intellectual commitment, but so deep a part of my emotional makeup that it can override intellectual commitments (like my commitment to the idea that a Romney win would be bad for the cause of White Nationalism). At the risk of seeming self-aggrandizing I must say: if only all Whites felt as I do, and as automatically. Maybe more do than I realize . . .

I am trying not to get emotionally involved in this election. And this essay should not be interpreted as encouraging my readers to vote for Romney. I agree with Greg Johnson that if Romney gets in all it will do is give Whites the illusion that someone is now in the White House who will look after their interests – while, for example, the same suicidal immigration policies continue. My calm, sober, reasoned opinion is that a vote for Romney is a vote wasted. It would be better for us if Obama won. If anti-White policies wear a Black face, White Americans are much more likely to become wise to them. If they wear a White face, many Whites will not catch on, and slumber still deeper.

So, yes: Romney must lose. Don’t vote for Romney. I really want him to lose.

But goddamnit I want the White guy to win!

 

If you enjoyed this piece, and wish to encourage more like it, give a tip through Paypal. You can earmark your tip directly to the author or translator, or you can put it in a general fund. (Be sure to specify which in the "Add special instructions to seller" box at Paypal.)
This entry was posted in North American New Right and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

13 Comments

  1. Ted
    Posted October 15, 2012 at 5:16 am | Permalink

    The Obama-Romney bout actually falls into a fifth category: White vs. sorta-White. People keep telling me Obama is Black, even though he’s only half Black. Nobody ever points out that if his being 50% Black is enough to make him Black, then why isn’t his being 50% White enough to make him White? I’m kinda glad, though, that nobody ever points this out. Notice that, implicitly, everyone is drawing on the old “one drop” rule in the case of Obama. He’s just too Black to be White.

    Maybe having a Kenyan father and being as “phenotypically black” as many African-Americans is a bit more than “one drop” and sufficient reason for many Americans to dismiss Obama’s half-White ancestry?

    Further, I tend to doubt Mitt returns the emotional sentiments of this essay. He’s too busy taking instructions from his good friend Bibi. Do you imagine any of these wealthy White guys like Romney think in terms of race? Or is it only class? The latter is more likely.

  2. crowley
    Posted October 15, 2012 at 8:13 am | Permalink

    Jef, I instinctively root for the White guy in team sports too. Black pitcher, White man at bat, I root for the batter. White pitcher, black at bat, I root for the pitcher. In the general emotional background I may be rooting for the Giants, but in the particular I root for my own. One’s own should trump national competition too, and it does. I couldn’t imagine rooting for an American black against a Russian White in, for instance, the Winter Olympics. Great article!

  3. WG
    Posted October 15, 2012 at 10:22 am | Permalink

    Another fantastic piece from JC. I arrived at similar conclusions via same thought-process. (Our daily routine sounds a bit similar, too).

    WNs have a tendency to over-intellectualize things. This is fine as long as we’re discussing the issues among ourselves. But if we’re trying to reach out to the White public we ought to take a different approach. Our (future) leaders might want to cultivate and demonstrate charisma, optimism, confidence, boldness, style, and charm. For better or worse, these are qualities most people (including our potential supporters) react to in a positive way.

    It’s not what we say we intend to do, but how we do it. Make your life a living example, a kind of “performance art”. We already have the content. Loads of it, in fact. Let’s focus on form, and put strategy into action.

  4. Donar van Holland
    Posted October 15, 2012 at 10:45 am | Permalink

    I must admit that I too loved Obama getting beaten up by Romney, and exactly for this reason. The fury about white humiliation made me savour each sweet second of the scene.

    That a rational white man still has to vote for this Obama creature, or not vote at all, is one of the sacrifices we have to make for our race. Just like refraining from race mixing, for example. It may hurt, but fickle emotion should not direct our lives.

    • phil white
      Posted October 16, 2012 at 1:44 pm | Permalink

      I will vote for local dog catcher, school borad rep, county commissioner and all.
      But when it comes to U.S. President, I’ll have to write in Andrew Jackson (if write ins are allowed).
      That is to show the Republicans that my not voting for Romney wasn’t due to the lack of will to waddle to the polls in the rain. It was that I refuse to vote for a neo-con anti-white even if the Dems run a black Bolshevik.

  5. Posted October 15, 2012 at 11:46 am | Permalink

    According to some bio of Cioran, back in the 30s, his fascist group protested the presents of Transylvanians [trannies?] or something on the Romanian Olympic team, saying “The idea is not to win, but to win with one’s own people.”

    stuffblackpeopledon’tlike has indicated that sports have been the #1 means of creating the false reality of “blacks are just like us, only better.” It’s the only area of life that seems to present images of successful black folks.

    This is because unlike you,

    “I’m not one of those big fans who has a head full of statistics”

    American sports fans are just that: heads full of stats. Unlike any other ethnic group, they don’t care who’s playing.

    castefootball.us documents all this in general, but they had one essay that was particularly good. Asking “where have all the Jewish baseball players gone,” they note that when the Dodgers were in Brooklyn, they had a whole field of Jews, but when they moved to LA, the Jews disappeared and suddenly Hispanics were the rage. The point being, White folks will watch anyone, so the teams are tailored to attract ethnic audiences that will only watch their own kind.

  6. Sandy
    Posted October 15, 2012 at 2:15 pm | Permalink

    You had me going there Jef until I read So, yes: Romney must lose. Don’t vote for Romney. I really want him to lose. All is forgiven.

    • Ted
      Posted October 15, 2012 at 4:45 pm | Permalink

      But he also says that because of the emotional “stirring” within him, there’s a chance he may actually vote for Romney. Now, if a WN writer for Counter-Currents can be so strongly influenced by GOP “implicit Whiteness” – what does that say about the general population?

      I really think Kurtagic (and WG in this thread) is right. We are going to have to tap into “irrational” impulses in order to motivate not only the masses, but even some of the “elites.”

  7. JMorphy
    Posted October 15, 2012 at 4:14 pm | Permalink

    It’s a bit silly to use Whiteness as the primary criterion for choosing sides in a spectator sport. UFC is not tribal warfare; it is entertainment, which although not entirely devoid of political significance can hardly be said to be an important arena in which to advance White aims. Thinking of everything purely along racial lines feels like a dress-up version of other ethnic groups’ unwavering loyalty to their own; “Hispanics and Chinese cheer for their own instinctively, so I am too!” Whites today simply don’t have this inborn tribal mentality and to assume it as a matter of choice seems cheap and phony. I realize you are using UFC to illustrate a political point, but it’s important not to fall into blind ethnocentrism while ignoring that there are plenty of Whites out there that we’d want nothing to do with.

  8. guiscard
    Posted October 15, 2012 at 5:27 pm | Permalink

    Americans are a little unlucky in that your key sports seem to favor attributes held by Blacks. There may be some karmic retribution involved since this ‘super-class’ was created through slavery. This is obviously a huge problem in regards to miscegenation as all the ‘physically’ idealized males are black which makes it simple to push on society.

    Soccer is probably a better sport to pursue as it requires a higher level of ‘team’ real-time intelligence and whites continue to dominate despite every kid in Africa and Asia playing it. For physicality though, Australian rules football is even more aligned to European traits.

    Of course, fans will always cheer their team (no matter the players race) which is why it’s important for a white state to have the ‘right’ sports.

  9. kennewick man
    Posted October 15, 2012 at 10:18 pm | Permalink

    A while back I commented that there was nothing good about Romney other than his beautiful family, but I’ve come to see than he possesses manliness and some degree of nobility as well. From your description of the debate (which I didn’t see) he’s confident, competent, and competitive . I’m also disconnected from the media, but living in Tampa I couldn’t help knowing the Republican convention was going on, and turned it on one evening when I came in from yard work and caught his wife’s speech. The goal was to humanize Mitt, which seems important to the electorate but doesn’t matter to me, but I was impressed that he had won and kept the love of a classy lady. She also does dressage, a sort of a horse ballet that traces its roots back to the Greek general Xenophon, so it’s a traditional and noble sport.

    The next night I heard as much as I could stand of Condoleezza Rice, who made it clear that the Republican Party stands for equality and will impose democracy and globalization everywhere. Her system, which is also Romney’s, isn’t mine.

    If you want to vote white next month, a couple of good choices are Merlin Miller, an actual pro-white candidate, or if he’s not on your ballot, Virgil Goode, the Constitution Party candidate. Just as a sample of their policy, the Constitution Party want a moratorium on immigration, and say they would use the military to defend the border.

  10. Jacques Vendée
    Posted October 16, 2012 at 12:49 am | Permalink

    Jef Costello apparently snuck into my brain recently and stole my thoughts. Even about UFC fights. With that kind of magic power on our side we are bound to win!

  11. Lew
    Posted October 17, 2012 at 8:27 am | Permalink

    I’m embarrassed to admit it, but I too have been rooting for Romney in these debates based on emotion (for me hatred for liberals not admiration for republicans). There is no rational reason to feel sympathy for Romney much less support him. I know this. He boasted last night he will pass immigration amnesty his first year. Emotion, optics and visceral response can be very powerful.

    Ted is the right of course that any feelings of sympathy people may have for Romney are not returned.

  • Video of the Day:

  • Kindle Subscription
  • Our Titles

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    The Lightning and the Sun

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Forever and Ever

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles

    Demon

    Proofs of a Conspiracy

    Fascism viewed from the Right

    The Wagnerian Drama

    Fascism viewed from the Right

    Notes on the Third Reich

    Morning Crafts

    New Culture, New Right

    An eagle with a shield soaring upwards

    A Life in the Political Wilderness

    The Fourth Political Theory

    The Passing of the Great Race

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Fighting for the Essence

    The Arctic Home in the Vedas

    The Prison Notes

    It Cannot Be Stormed

    Revolution from Above

    The Proclamation of London

    Beyond Human Rights

    The WASP Question

    Can Life Prevail?

    The Jewish Strategy

    The Metaphysics of War

    A Handbook of Traditional Living

    The French Revolution in San Domingo

    The Revolt Against Civilization

    Why We Fight

    The Problem of Democracy

    The Path of Cinnabar

    Archeofuturism

    Tyr

    Siege

    On Being a Pagan

    The Lost Philosopher

    The Dispossessed Majority

    Might is Right

    Impeachment of Man

    Gold in the Furnace

    Defiance