Print this post Print this post

The Accidental Nationalist

1,935 words

It’s always painful watching conservatives tie themselves into knots trying to defend Western civilization without resorting to race realism. On one hand, they say, West is best and always has been. On the other, they claim that since we’re all the same under skin, virtually anyone can become a Westerner. I’m sorry, but you can’t have it both ways. If Western civilizations—until recently the product solely of white people of European descent—are as great as they say then it stands to reason that there must be something special about the whites who made it so. By the same token, if race is just an incidental thing, then we have to argue against the data to explain why no nonwhite civilization ever equaled any of the greatest Western civilizations without first emulating them.

To any race realist, such dissonance rings loudly false and requires magical thinking to reconcile. The conservative, however, doesn’t seem to notice . . . or pretends not to. It’s a frustrating and annoying state of affairs when you share so much in common with a person, except those things which are most important.

Sadly, one of my favorite normie bloggers, Kim du Toit, served up a bowl of such atonal mess in his July 19th post entitled “Not Quite Guilty as Charged.” In it, he attempts to reconcile his American nationalism and his race denialism by claiming that the greatness of the West was only accidentally the result of the efforts of white people. Yes, folks, Western Civilization was nothing more than an accident.

Whoops! Oh, look! There’s The History of the Peloponnesian War. Whoops! There’s the Magna Carta! Whoops! There’s the complete works of Shakespeare. Whoops! There’s the periodic table of the elements! And the airplane! And the automobile! And the internet! Boy, with all these happy accidents, aren’t we just so darn lucky!

Seriously, such mocking doesn’t quite do Mr. du Toit justice—although I do find it amusing. I don’t think this is what he really meant. Here is what the man himself has to say on the matter:

The fact that our culture has its roots in “White” (European) populations is frankly irrelevant. It’s an accident of both history and geography, just like the color of my skin, and I am not going to go into the tangent of why: it just simply is.

“An accident of both history and geography”? If so, then why did scientific revolutions appear not once but twice in Europe and nowhere else? Why did the industrial revolution occur first in Europe? Why did Europeans establish modern fields of science and reach unsurpassed heights in music, art, and literature in the past 100 to 300 years? Why were the Europeans the first to traverse the globe and fly to the Moon? That’s a lot of accidents, don’t you think?

Further, if these were nothing more than Diamond-esque accidents of history and geography, then why didn’t black Africans in their hundreds of thousands of years on that very large and geographically diverse continent of Africa ever once stumble into inventing the wheel? Why didn’t the North American Indian tribes ever trip and fall into the written word? Why didn’t the Arabs ever slip on a banana and invent anything as sophisticated as the telegraph? Why didn’t the East Asians, for all their technical skill and intelligence, ever once step on an upturned rake and produce something as brilliant as Beethoven’s Ninth or Newton’s three laws of motion? (Olympian standards in this last question, true, but my point still stands.)

Of course, some nonwhites have expressed genius and creativity throughout history. For example, the Persians and the Arabs contributed a great deal to algebra. Muslims produced great works of architecture like the Taj Mahal. The Han dynasty in China certainly equaled or surpassed the contemporaneous West in terms of mathematics and astronomy (they were the first to use negative numbers). Yet none of this can really equal the flurry of intellectual and artistic activity which took place in the West since the Renaissance, all things considered.

If such important “accidents” took place consistently and almost exclusively with whites and only a handful of nonwhites throughout history, perhaps it is time to revise your idea that these were accidents to begin with. Perhaps they weren’t accidents at all. Perhaps white people of European descent are for whatever reason blessed with a tolerably-high average IQ and wide standard deviation of intelligence which allows for a greater proportion of geniuses in the general population than any other race of people. Perhaps they are also blessed with a hard-to-quantify creativity and curiosity that you can’t easily find in nonwhite populations, even in the most successful ones.

That certainly would explain a lot, wouldn’t it? That certainly goes a lot farther than your explanation: “I am not going to go into the tangent of why: it just simply is.”

If you want to say that European genotypes and the thousands of years of evolution which produced them were the results of “accidents,” fine. I wasn’t there, and anyway elements of randomness are certainly accounted for in our understanding of both evolution and genetics. But when you leave out genetics and evolution completely and then proclaim that the greatness of Western Civilization is only coincidentally related to the white people that created it and made it great, that’s when you begin to lose me. You don’t explain how or why. Instead you retreat into magical thinking and claim that “it just simply is.”

Since when can one aver something into being? If that’s the case, then I shall aver that I deserve a dinner date with Jennifer Lawrence. It just simply is, dammit. It just simply is.

Sorry for the snark, Kim, but race and nationalism make up much of our wheelhouse here at Counter-Currents. And if you’re going to be opining on these topics you better have something a little more persuasive than ‘it just simply is’ up your sleeve, or I am going to ding you every single time.

I’m doing this not to be a pain (and if you have read this far, thank you). I am doing it because the stakes are too high for me not to. The continued survival of the West and, yes, of white people in the West, hangs in the balance. If you’re wrong, Kim, it’s a big freaking deal, because you are opening the door for nonwhites to enter the West and eventually exert political control over it. Over time, as they settle in and grow as a sub-population, they will see to it that that door gets opened wider and wider and wider. It’s only natural, since all people are tribal at heart and want to see more of their own kind in their neighborhoods, schools, offices, and places of worship. At some point, there will be no closing that door at all, and whites like you and me will be making up only thirty or thirty-five percent of a population we once dominated. Is this really what you want?

Here are your words:

I’m immensely proud of the fact that so many immigrants of different skin colors have assimilated into the dominant American culture and ditched most of their deficient home cultures for the greater American one. Like I did.

Again, I have to ask, “Really?” I’m reminded of a Steve Sailer article about how the assimilation of Mexicans into the dominant Anglo-American culture has lost quite a bit of steam since the heyday of Lee Trevino. If you don’t believe him, here is an AEI study saying basically the same thing. I am also reminded of the recent Vox Day post which featured a family of Hispanics posing for pictures while proudly flipping off Mount Rushmore. Where is the assimilation there? Do you also see a desire to assimilate when Representative Luis Gutierrez tells his followers in Spanish to punish Americans who wish to enforce border security? Do you also see assimilation when Hispanic lawmakers in your home state start fist fights with Representative Matthew Rinaldi for simply trying to enforce immigration laws?

As nonwhite populations surge in America, the pressure for them to assimilate with the dominant white culture will only decrease over time. Further, as they sense weakness in the dominant culture, they will start to vie for dominance. This is what the evidence shows. This is what history shows. This is also what Derbyshirean pessimism predicts. And the apparent optimism of civic nationalists like yourself in the face of all this is worrisome.

If you’re right, then okay. But if you’re wrong, then there is no going back except with massive amounts of bloodshed. That is a hell of a risk you seem to be bent on taking, Kim. On the other hand, if white nationalists like myself are correct, then forming a white ethnostate is our way of dodging a demographic bullet. And if we’re wrong, well, then we will still have our ethnostate, which, judging from 1965 America, would be a pretty damn good thing in its own right. Better than what we have now, for sure. So it’s in-win, baby. The only people who lose out in this case would the nonwhites who have something to offer current-day America but get turned away. But you know what? That is not our problem, nor is it incumbent upon us to make it our problem. Better for such people to improve their own civilizations rather than demographically disintegrate ours.

Does that seem harsh? Well, envisioning an America in which whites make up only a quarter or third of the population seems a tad harsher, in my opinion.

Make no mistake, I appreciate your staunch American nationalism and Western chauvinism. I also understand that you have common sense and that you’re not arguing for open borders. I see you as an invaluable ally in the broader culture war against the Left. Truly, you are sui generis in today’s political landscape. Tell me if this Venn diagram doesn’t express this rather nicely:

Not too many people in that center section other than you, are there?

I just believe that white nationalists and civic nationalists could be better allies if we better appreciate our differences on what we stand for and why we fight. You seem to buy into the idea of America as a “proposition nation,” and I don’t. This seems to be based on the idea that Western greatness is only incidentally connected to the race of its creators, an unproven idea, which you, obviously, embrace.

I don’t. You do. And if the factual arguments above won’t sway you, perhaps the following one will.

You know else embraces your theory of racial incidentalism? Antifa. Yes, that Antifa, the left-wing, terrorist organization itself.

Please take a look at this video. It was taken during the recent American Renaissance conference near Nashville, Tennessee. At about the 1:50 mark, a protestor among the Antifa presence there harangues an AmRen attendee by saying the following:

How can you look around at some people of color or people that are disadvantaged and think that you’re better because of some goddamned accidental qualities that you’ve got?

Sound familiar, does it? Yes, accidental qualities, like your white skin or the fact that you are descended from white people. You’ve said so yourself. So tell me then, how can we resist the enemy, let alone beat him, if we yield to his strongest argument before the fight even begins? Racial equality is the bread and butter of the Left. Concede that, and it will only be a matter of time before we’re swept off the field.

 

Related

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 , , , , , , . Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

10 Comments

  1. Muhammad Xerxes
    Posted August 7, 2017 at 1:11 am | Permalink

    As far as contemporary world is concerned, it is the product of white European culture. It has been dominant for the last 2000 years. There are ‘senates’ and ‘assemblies’ even in Equatorial Guinea. The imprint is almost everywhere, which points to the sheer strength and dynamism of the western civilization.

    I am very proud of my Persian heritage and expect whites to do the same as their ancestors have had a lot to their credit.

    Now was it because of their mere biological whiteness or were they just more resourceful and cultivated like Persians and Mesopotamians before them? It’s an interesting discussion.

  2. Leon Haller
    Posted August 6, 2017 at 7:25 am | Permalink

    Civic nationalists are at best merely tactical allies – and that not only of White nationalists, but even of genuine American preservationists. If this guy Du Toit (whom I had never heard of – are you so erudite Mr. Quinn that you feel comfortable wasting precious reading time on such nonentities?) really believes this

    “I’m immensely proud of the fact that so many immigrants of different skin colors have assimilated into the dominant American culture and ditched most of their deficient home cultures for the greater American one.”

    then he’s a moron unworthy of consideration by serious men. As I have been arguing since the 80s, there is NO empirical evidence of mass-interracial cross-cultural assimilation. Ethnocultural assimilation can occur (though as Brimelow pointed out in ALIEN NATION over two decades ago, even this is difficult, and slow-occuring), but only INTRAracially. My family is overwhelmingly Continental European, yet most Europeans would consider me to be thoroughly assimilated into the Anglosphere (and to have lost my ancestral attachments to German and French ethnocultures). The greater the genetic distance between dominant/host and migratory cultures, the LESS cultural assimilation occurs. One would think after a half century of unwanted diversity and its attendant cultural fissures and “negotiations”, this would have the status of common sense.

    Of course, if one element in American civic nationalism is non-racist opposition to mass immigration, then, yes, we can be tactical allies. But insofar as civic nationalists mostly prattle not about actual immigration reduction or cessation, but “bringing in better [more educated, skilled] immigrants”, and then ensuring their “assimilation” (not to Anglo-Saxon Americanism, but more usually to some variant of 1950s era neoconism extolling “liberal democracy” and “democratic capitalism” and “America’s benevolent global hegemony”), they are more usually to be considered not as allies but as enemy competitors for the allegiance of many of the same patriots we seek.

    • Spencer Quinn
      Posted August 7, 2017 at 5:33 am | Permalink

      Hi Leon,

      I agree with your assessment of civic nationalism. But I also view it as part of the greater shift from the center to the right during the great radicalization period, which we all are enduring right now. The Alt Right is ahead of the curve and the Alt Lite/Civic Nationalists are behind the curve. But they are still on the curve, which is a good thing. The thing about this rightward shift is that it is irreversible. I would suspect that in 10-20 years a high proportion of the white alt lite will be Alt Right. I see it as inevitable as 3rd worlders continue to invade and abuse white people. Therefore, I think the best thing the Alt Right can do is continue to engage and reason with the Alt Lite and do nothing to alienate them. This will facilitate their joining us IMO.

      As for Kim himself, I have always found him interesting, and he was a big part of my initial shift to the Right about 15 years ago. I don’t find him interesting so much for political reasons anymore, but I still enjoy him. This has nothing to do with erudition and more to do with diversity of interests and appreciation for Kim’s fierce traditionalist and pro-gun rights perspective. He can also be pretty funny.

      • Leon Haller
        Posted August 12, 2017 at 11:53 pm | Permalink

        Fair enough. But what is LESS “traditionalist” than artificially changing (via Big Government) the demographic composition of your nation’s population? Any self-styled “trad” who is not aggressively opposed to nonwhite immigration is a pure phony. It’s like a self-proclaimed capitalist (or Constitutionalist) extolling the New Deal or Great Society.

        My father was a Hard White Nationalist from the very beginning (defined as “when race got injected into American civic life” (ie, with the sainted Negro Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s-60s)), but I always thought my mother’s softer position was more in line with both Christian values and traditional Americanism. She is in no sense a “hater” or “supremacist”, but she has said for at least the past 40 years that America should treasure its “superior” European heritage, and preserve it by means of keeping out such immigrants (mostly nonwhites) whose very presence dilutes and threatens it.

        IOWs, my mother is the true “traditionalist” (but NOT exactly a White Nationalist, and certainly not a neo-Nazi).

        One of my dreams for my remaining years of life is to write my own book on why “diversity” and especially “diversitism” (the ideology of diversity) is incompatible with classical conservative thought. I like the intellectual quality and seriousness of this site, but I strongly dissent from its underlying message that there was something wrong with traditional conservatism. I hold there was nothing wrong at all with it, though its racial separatist implications may have needed to have been more explicitly stated and theorized. The error has always been with “cuckservatism”, which, contrary to what some may think, has plagued the American Right at least since the 1960s, if not earlier (and undeniably since the early 80s, when I first started reading National Review – which then was much better than the rag it is today, but which still shied from racial truthfulness).

        The Alt-right needs to be very careful about jettisoning the Right. I prefer the ideology of AmRen to C-C mainly because the former (I speak as an early 90s AR print subscriber) basically seeks to graft race realism and White Preservationism onto the essentially healthy tree of traditional conservatism (I once told Jared taylor in the 90s that I viewed his publication as a kind of supplement to the paleocon magazine Chronicles, the latter being correct on most issues, but weak on race, and biological conservatism more broadly), whereas I understand the latter’s ambition to be to develop an entirely new (revolutionary) rightism grounded in White preservation and interests in a world of permanently warring races and ethnicities. I think that ambition is pragmatically dangerous, if only because most Whites embrace conservatism not out of romantic racialist (or even Occidentalist) attachment, but for more quotidian concerns, like protection of private property, the free market economy, law and order, and Christian moral values. To the extent that White Nationalism moves Left (on non-racialist issues), the more of us on the Right it will lose (or fail to attract). Politics is about addition, not subtraction in pursuit of ideological purity or originality. And insofar as the Left is wrong on everything (not just race), there is no reason for WN to do so.

  3. dolph
    Posted August 4, 2017 at 9:47 pm | Permalink

    That’s right, you can’t separate the civilization from the people. The people are the civilization.

    However, and interestingly enough, it’s perhaps only the modern West that believes you can (this itself is based on western ideas on technology and progress). This was the endgame that was seen long ago by prescient people. America, for instance, will die by becoming universal. It’s already the case that being “American” hardly signifies anything at all. It’s a non identity.

  4. R_Moreland
    Posted August 4, 2017 at 1:07 am | Permalink

    The dilemma of the Kim du Toit argument is that it works only if non-White groups buy into it. But non-White desire to assimilate into Western Civilization is a function of White confidence in the West.

    Consider how Paris and London are becoming multi-racial and thus multi-civilizational. Do such cities – once capitals of globe spanning empires – inspire any confidence? I don’t think so. Nor does the fact that hostile elites allow non-Whites to wreck havoc in Cologne, Rotherham and Malmo. To paraphrase Marx (Groucho), who would want to join a civilization whose standards are so low they would accept any low-IQ/low- impulse-control third worlder as a member?

    Du Toit’s drum beating for assimilation is nostalgia for a bygone era when the US government kept the standards high and the non-White immigration low. Today’s third world immigrants are not “ditching” their home cultures because even if they wanted to, they’d still be stuck with their genetics. After all, the US has yet to assimilate much of its own black demographic, this despite common language and several generations of social engineering. We see too many inner cities in America reverting to African style gang warfare and infrastructure collapse…replicated in many European cities with their Afro-Islamic No Go Zones.

    I’d also point out Africa itself which, under White colonial rule (especially apartheid), maintained a level of Western Civilization. But with the end of White rule came a general collapse of anything resembling the West – and in many Africa countries, of any civilization whatsoever.

    And when it comes time for handing out affirmative action or “reparations” for slavery-colonialism-apartheid, or BLM flashmobs selecting targets for their attacks in a Ferguson or Oakland, then du Toit will be forcibly reminded of the color-of-his-skin(tm). Assimilation or not, non-Whites mostly do not buy into any deal in which they are required to abandon their own race.

    Du Toit is missing something which ought to be visible every time he looks in a mirror: he is White. And that is what makes him assimilate into Western Civilization. And what made Western Civilization great from the get-go.

    • Spencer Quinn
      Posted August 7, 2017 at 5:34 am | Permalink

      Totally.

  5. JimB
    Posted August 3, 2017 at 11:57 pm | Permalink

    “I just believe that white nationalists and civic nationalists could be better allies if we better appreciate our differences on what we stand for and why we fight.”

    Better allies, the better we understand our differences? Ummm. The only way that can possibly happen is if one person’s differences goes away.

    Good read, though, and I agree with 99.99% of everything you said. The .01 percent being the quote above from the article!

  6. Mike
    Posted August 3, 2017 at 1:33 pm | Permalink

    Among some of our lesser inventions: “Guns, Germs, and Steel”

    • Zero
      Posted August 3, 2017 at 2:20 pm | Permalink

      It’s not ours, it being authored by (((Jared Diamond))) . From my experience, it seems to be the go-to book of civic nationalists.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.
 
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
 
Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

*
*

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.

    Kindle Subscription
  • Our Titles

    The Importance of James Bond

    In Defense of Prejudice

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    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

    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

    Tyr, Vol. 4

    Reuben

    The Node

    A Sky Without Eagles

    The Way of Men

    The New Austerities

    Morning Crafts

    Siege

    Asatru: A Native European Spirituality

    The Prison Notes

    Standardbearers

    Tyr

    The Lost Philosopher

    Impeachment of Man

    Gold in the Furnace

    Defiance

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories