- The American Conservative - https://www.theamericanconservative.com -

The Left’s Anti-White Racism

That’s the way the left-wing website Salon.com presents a racist column by an elderly white male leftist named Frank Joyce. [1] A sample from the column:

The future of life on the planet depends on bringing the 500-year rampage of the white man to a halt. For five centuries his ever more destructive weaponry has become far too common. His widespread and better systems of exploiting other humans and nature dominate the globe.

The time for replacing white supremacy with new values is now. And just as some whites played a part in ending slavery, colonialism, Jim Crow segregation, and South African apartheid, there is surely a role whites can play in restraining other whites in this era. Beneath the sound and fury generated by GOP presidential candidates, Fox News, website trolls, police unions and others, white people are becoming aware as never before of past and present racism.

Blah blah blah.

I know, I know, it’s Salon.com. But you know what? This kind of thing is a big deal, and should not be shrugged off. Can you think of another web publication of its status in this country that could explicitly demonize others by race and gender, and say that “the future of life on the planet” depends on restraining them?

According to QuantCast, Salon.com reaches 11 million people monthly.  [2](The webzine claims over 17 million [3].) That’s four times the readership of Slate.com, according to the same company. Though the data for National Review’s website is “not quantified,” according to QuantCast, it estimates NR’s reach to be 3.7 million unique visitors monthly — about one-third of Salon’s.

Now, if National Review ran a headline saying, “Black men must be stopped: The very future of mankind depends on it,” NR would be denounced as the resurrection of Der Stürmer. What if it ran a headline promoting a story that argued, “Gay men must be stopped: The very future of mankind depends on it”? What kind of reaction do you think that would draw from the public? Hell, NR fired John Derbyshire in 2012 [4] for something racially provocative he wrote on another website.

And yet there will be no pressure on Salon.com to disavow this Frank Joyce column, and no expectation that they would do so. There’s a double standard in our media and academic culture for this kind of racist garbage. Do I think most liberals share Frank Joyce’s opinion? No, I guess I don’t. But I do think most liberals are not all that bothered by it being stated and promoted on a very popular left-wing website. We have come to accept it as standard leftist discourse.


There are few things more dull than a left-vs-right tu quoque [5]contest when things like this come up. What chaps me about this is the comment that a reader of this blog named Deep South Populist made in pointing out this Salon piece:

It is plainly obvious these people want war.

I don’t know that they want it, but that’s exactly what they’re going to get, because they are calling it up with rhetoric like that. I would remind Salon.com of the widely-reported study from last month reporting that middle-aged working-class white men are dying in record numbers, and by their own hand [6] (suicide, drugs, or drink). The day may come when they decide to turn their anger away from themselves, and on to others. We will be lucky if they only restrict it to the ballot box.

If, God forbid, that day comes, limousine leftists like the people who run Salon.com are going to bear some of the responsibility for it. This kind of racist cant is never acceptable in the public square, but you ought not be surprised by it when it comes from a fringe publication or website. Salon.com is very much not fringe, and liberals should not pretend it is. The left should ask itself if it really wants to see the country torn apart by racial violence. That is exactly what Salon.com and its fellow travelers are courting.

Tweeting about the asinine food protests at Oberlin, Freddie de Boer wrote:

He’s right. He subsequently tweeted:

I am not interested in whether or not there is a mass left-wing movement that can win, except in the sense that I don’t want there to be one that does. The left ought to consider whether it is helpful to its causes to promote the cranky opinions of an aging Boomer who wishes to declare war on white men when so many of them have their backs against the wall.

According to the US Census, 77.4 percent of Americans today are white. [10] Statistically, a bit fewer than half of them are males. That’s about one in three Americans that Frank Joyce and Salon.com are calling to be suppressed. Mind you, not all white males think alike (some of them, like Frank Joyce, are self-hating lunatics), but many white women are married to white males, and have white males for fathers, brothers, and sons. Do they really want to join a movement that demonizes them because of their race and gender?

The peaceable transition of America from majority white to minority white — which at this point cannot be stopped [11] — is going to be a delicate matter, one that requires wisdom, compassion, and forbearance on all sides. Articles like this from Salon must seem like all in a day’s work from deep inside the San Francisco bubble, where Salon is headquartered. But this kind of thing gets noticed out here in flyover country, among us bitter clingers. We see — or we ought to see, and remember — that this is the kind of discourse that goes on without much objection among the left, particularly in academic settings. If the left allows itself to say these things publicly without reproof, it sends a signal about what it will do in positions of power. We know what the cultural left does on campuses, where it dominates. [12] Do white males really want to acquiesce in their own marginalization and suppression? The defeated white males on campuses might have had all the fight leached out of them, and many members of the white working class may be too depressed, drunk, or strung out to resist.

But that’s not all white men. Yesterday, a reader who identifies himself as a white, male, Southern atheist yellow-dog Democrat who hates Republicans wrote to explain why he has become a Trump supporter. [13]He said he has two degrees, and his job prospects are poor. He has quit believing in institutions, and is voting out of anger and despair. I would love for Frank Joyce or a Salon editor to get in that man’s face and tell him why he’s the problem with the world, because he’s white and male.

One day — maybe not this election cycle, but one not far off — somebody’s going to come along who speaks to them and for them: for the weak, the marginalized, the broken, as well as ordinary white males like the new Trump supporter, and their wives, sisters, and daughters. (There’s a reason why former far-left constituencies in France are now voting National Front.) And we had all better hope he’s a good and decent man, one who speaks to the better angels of their nature, channeling their anger and despair to constructive ends. Anybody want to bet that he will be a good guy? I wouldn’t take that bet. I pray that I’m wrong, but I wouldn’t take that bet. Would you?

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. My point is, the kind of talk Salon trafficks in for clickbait are calling up demons that will be difficult to control or exorcise. If Salon and its fellow travelers in left-liberal media don’t want to license racist triumphalist rhetoric on the right — and in turn, racist triumphalist actions — they had better start policing their own appalling loudmouths. Sooner or later, somebody’s going to get hurt.

144 Comments (Open | Close)

144 Comments To "The Left’s Anti-White Racism"

#1 Comment By sps On December 24, 2015 @ 10:18 am

“But this kind of thing gets noticed out here in flyover country, among us bitter clingers.”

Which is largely due to flyover bloggers looking for outrage-bait clicks to their websites. You’re are both two sides to the same coin and vise-versa. It’s gotten to the point you couldn’t exist without each other providing reader traffic.

I stopped reading Salon because of crap like this and so should you. As for influence, well I’ll believe that the day Hilary Clinton says we need a “final solution” to the white male question. So-called eleven million readers is a nice thing to have but in the context of the American electorate means nothing. Rush Limbaugh used to claim he had 21 milllion listeners every week too. Did that stop Barak Obama from being elected President? Not exactly.

As for violence, after claiming political anti-Planned Parenthood rhetoric had absolutely nothing to do with a deranged, mentally ill Colorado man’s mass shooting at a clinic, are you now saying any future mass violence will no longer be about mental illness but exclusively due to political rhetoric? To boil it down in a nusthell: “Jim Bob went and shot up a university today and killed a bunch of “liberal” professors because an article on Salon.com provoked him.” I see. If it were me, I would stick to the “Twinkie Defense” rather than “Salon.com made me do it” argument.

#2 Comment By DeepSouthPopulist On December 24, 2015 @ 10:42 am

I don’t think Deep South Populist and other white nationalist are doing nothing more than calling attention to that possibility; I think they’re positively eager for it.

You and others here are clearly positively eager for this.


#3 Comment By Erdrick On December 24, 2015 @ 10:50 am

E. Potson says:
December 24, 2015 at 12:13 am

Okay, great. You implicitly agree that, on its face, there’s nothing offensive or extreme about Joyce’s essay. It’s only after we divine his innermost thoughts that his essay becomes a dog whistle that is, apparently, audible to both those who think like Joyce, but also to those who don’t. Of course, that begs the question of why Joyce needs to use a dog whistle at all?

And, I guess since criticisms of “white supremacy” are nothing more than dog whistles to criticize white men, then there are obviously no words one can use to criticize white supremacy. It’s great how that works out for white supremacy.

I don’t need to “divine his innermost thoughts.” It’s pretty clear what Progressive and Black /Minority Nationalist activists are doing when they’re attacking “white supremacy” in 2015.

What you’re (willfully?) ignoring is that the definition of “white supremacy” has been expanded beyond any historical definition or any reasonable limit. For the activist Progressives like the type who frequent Salon, “white supremacy” covers almost every political, cultural, and economic action taken by white people. The way it’s used now, there’s barely any daylight between criticism of “white supremacy” as it’s defined today and white people in general.

In other words, the term “white supremacy” is going down the path that the term “racism” has blazed. It is torn from its historical meaning and twisted into a club to use against white people for the act of being white. As an added bonus, railing against “white supremacy” rather than racism helps obscure and justify the racial bigotry and hatred of anti-white minority activists by specifically pinpointing the true enemy: white people. But people are catching on, and soon cries of “white supremacy” will get the same eye rolls as cries of “racism.”

Although I believe that African Americans have some actual, legitimate grievances, I think that the activists take those grievances and use them as a cover to spread generalized hatred of whites. 99 time out of 100, “white supremacy” is blamed for stupid microagressions and fake oppression like complaining that Band-Aids are prejudiced because they’re lighter toned than most black people (Band- Aids are significantly darker than my skin tone, but somehow I shrug off that tyranny). Creating an atmosphere where it’s fair game to lash out at every little thing as being “white supremacy” does nothing but polarize.

And why is there a need for dogwhistles on this issue? Because there are still naive white Liberal “allies” who will try their hardest to ignore what’s in front of their eyes. There are also minorities who are acting in good faith against legitimate grievances but who don’t generally hate white people. If the Progressive ?Black Nationalist activists didn’t use euphemisms like “white supremacy” to create plausible deniability for them, they’d scare those people away.

#4 Comment By DeepSouthPopulist On December 24, 2015 @ 11:03 am

Why do you think whites in the mainland US will react to anti-white prejudice so much more aggressively than whites in South Africa or in the Hawaiian Islands?

Whites aren’t monolithic, and a sizable number of them won’t think about reacting aggressively much less do it because they support white dispossession. A small number of affluent whites are positioned to benefit financially from white genocide. That’s basically today’s white financial elites. For many complex reasons, a larger number of whites crave death and oblivion for people like themselves and their progeny. That’s most of the non-Jewish critics of right-wing politics that post here. The available evidence suggests they’re minds are poisoned by the pathological out-group altruism and white pathology that Kevin MacDonald writes about. As for the pool of potential resistors across Europe and Diaspora Europe, because their numbers are larger I think they will eventually have openings to act in ways that were never available to white South Africans.

#5 Comment By Michael Guarino On December 24, 2015 @ 11:26 am

I agree that the students framed their complaint in a mockable way, but they had a reasonable complaint, and the company involved listened to their complaint in order not to lose business.

This statement is just self-contradictory. They did not “frame” their complaint. Their complaint simply was that the food in the cafeteria is unacceptable cultural appropriation. That is a stupid point (which I suspect you know but are too blinkered to admit) that ought not to have been acknowledged. And yes, they were crapping on the servers as well, because they would have been participants in that racist appropriation of historically marginalized cultures.

Whether there were amendments to the meal plan that would have been acceptable is irrelevant (all meal plans suck, so if that is the standard, any complaint is in fact going to be valid).

#6 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On December 24, 2015 @ 11:33 am

Andrew, I remember Michael Moore for three things:

1) His first movie, “Roger and Me,” which was great. The sequels (except “Pets and Meat) not so much.

2) The way he got fired from Mother Jones for prioritizing The Riveter over exposes on herbal teas.

3) His immortal comment “I hate liberals.”

He’s become increasingly irrelevant since.

As someone who considers myself pretty far left, I will be the first to say that Salon reeks of liberalism. The liberals can have it.

Gretchen, you mean well, and often have insightful remarks, but the last thing I want to be, living on the north side of Milwaukee, is a “good” white person who can “restrain other white people” from anything. There is nothing more embarrassing than seeing a handful of white liberals show up at a barbecue in Sherman Park with some damn banner bearing a maudlin reference to Martin Luther King. I have zero influence over “bad white people,” and there is no particular reason they should listen to me. I am a unique individual, as are you, as is each friend and neighbor of whatever light or dark complexion.

I object to Frank Joyce because he is promoting the concept of “white,” albeit to flagellate himself rather than to exalt himself. No, he does exalt himself, for being the “good” white person who flagellates himself over it. Don’t revel in it, don’t abase yourself about it, just get over it! Ain’t nobody white except lepers and albinos (II Kings 5:27).

It’s just plain old fashioned racism. Only it doesn’t want the race they feel is superior to exercise it’s superiority.

Excellent point, naturalmom. Its like the parody of Spiro Agnew saying “I would never want to insult anyone of an inferior race.”

#7 Comment By Erdrick On December 24, 2015 @ 11:46 am

KD says:
December 23, 2015 at 3:22 pm

Where the Nazis right about everything, but only got the identity of the culprit race wrong? That is the position of the modern Left, and why people like Rod find their position objectionable.

Precisely. Given Salon’s propensity to post this kind of trash, it’s tagline might as well be “Die Weissen sind unser Unglück”

#8 Comment By Erdrick On December 24, 2015 @ 11:56 am

Aaron Gross says:
December 24, 2015 at 7:21 am

So you’re all invited to answer this question: Why do you think whites in the mainland US will react to anti-white prejudice so much more aggressively than whites in South Africa or in the Hawaiian Islands?

I think that prolonged economic depression in the white working class (aggravated by continued mocking and belittling by the Progressives in the upper classes) could be the catalyst.

Plus, I think white people in mainland North America feel much more ownership (for lack of a better term) over the land than whites did in Hawaii or South Africa, especially in the areas in which I expect white grievance (and economic depression) to be most acute.

The northern Appalachians and much of the rural Rust Belt have been 95%+ white for 200 years or more. Hawaii, and even more so South Africa (where whites were always a minority), were never settled to that extent.

#9 Comment By Michael Guarino On December 24, 2015 @ 12:00 pm

Actually, let’s think about the beef vindaloo on Diwali thing a bit more. College cafeterias are not like what they were in the 70s. They actually provide a huge variety of options (all of which suffer from the poor quality inherent to bulk food prep). I usually remember a red meat option, a white meat option, some seafood or some foreign fare (often sushi), and a desert. They oftentimes try to stick to food trends as well, but again bulk prep is very unkind to complicated food. There is almost no chance Hindus were forced to eat beef on Diwali. I mean, think about it, do you really think Oberlin will force people to eat meat. Come on.

So what the student was really complaining about was the horror that a beef vindaloo was prepared at all. The correct reply to which would be that there probably were a large number of Oberlin students who would have preferred to eat beef. I very well might have. Chicken is boring.

#10 Comment By Erdrick On December 24, 2015 @ 12:09 pm

I sent my prior post too soon.

In sum, I think that there would be stronger resistance in a place like West Virginia than South Africa because I think West Virginia is much more of a white “homeland.” It’s closer to being Slovakia than it is to being Hawaii or South Africa, where to some extent whites have always been aliens. The West Virginians will fight to keep their homes.

#11 Comment By Kurt Gayle On December 24, 2015 @ 12:41 pm

”Ohioan” (December 23, 2015 at 3:55 pm) wrote:

“There’s a statement that’s becoming a mantra on the alt-right, and I think it’s relevant here: ‘If you don’t want 1930’s Germany, then don’t recreate 1920’s Germany’. What they’re referring to is the fact that people don’t like being ruled by their ethnic enemies, they don’t like being ruled by sexual degenerates, and they don’t like being hungry. It’s all well and good to say that Hitlerism was (a) monstrous, and (b) a failure on all 3 fronts (the end result was Germany being ruled by its enemies more than ever before, the Nazis were notorious perverts, and WWII brought hunger), but that’s sort of beside the point.”

“Ohioan” has come closer to saying what a growing number of Americans are saying than I have previously seen in print.

The American ruling elites and media are doing our country no good by ignoring this that a growing number of Americans are saying. That’s what happened in Germany during the 1920’s.

#12 Comment By Hector_St_Clare On December 24, 2015 @ 1:17 pm

““When you transport thousands of people and breed millions for sale and mortgage, you’ve created a multi-ethnic society. So no point in whining about it.”

No question, Siarlys. For better or worse, America is historically a multiethnic society. Most European countries aren’t, however, and they would be very well advised not to go down our path.

#13 Comment By Hector_St_Clare On December 24, 2015 @ 1:20 pm


Why do you care if some reporters in Russia get killed, why should I care, why should Trump care, and why should “white people” feel inclined to make a statement on the topic one way or the other. I guarantee most Russians don’t care.

You folks really are becoming a parody of yourselves.

#14 Comment By panda On December 24, 2015 @ 5:05 pm


Yeah nothing is more persuasive to the working class than being flamed by entitled white liberals who act like they know more about labor than the people who actually do the labor.”

First off, the assumption that I am “entitled” is classical begging the question fallacy.

Second and most importantly- i wasn’t criticizing “The working class” – I was criticizing a guy who says that he is working class, for literally repeating Nazi talking points.

Basically, the sum total of your comment, is that because that guy says he is from a victim class, he can say and do any stupid thing and never get called on it, because I need to check my privilige. Do you feel the same holds for minority college students?

#15 Comment By panda On December 24, 2015 @ 5:12 pm

“You and others here are clearly positively eager for this.


Rule no.1 for people fantasizing about mass murdering (and Mr. “solve the Black problem” is definitely fits the bill here): compile a narrative in which your would be victims are out to get you.

#16 Comment By JMS On December 24, 2015 @ 5:13 pm

[…It never seems to occur to them that people who get shoved and mocked over and over again might not think they deserve to be treated that way, and might start shoving back. — RD]

Perhaps, but people do have free will; treating “shoving back” as an inevitable “equal and opposite reaction”, as if people have no choice, is irresponsible. If a bully hits you, you can make the right choice and not hit back; or you can choose to hit back, and so become worse than the bully. Even if one were to grant the (incorrect) position held by some that things like the Salon article constitute a one-sided race war on whites, or a certain kind of white, there would still be no justification whatsoever for any kind of “pushback”; as others have said as well, a one-sided race war is always better than and preferable to a two-sided one. It doesn’t matter how much the Left calls for people like you to be destroyed, the only right thing to do is to “turn the other cheek”; any sort of fighting back is and will always be just plain wrong.

#17 Comment By JMS On December 24, 2015 @ 5:35 pm

Fears of an “American LePen” are overblown. It’ll never happen, because we live in a functioning liberal democracy, which understands the difference (going back to Rousseau) between the General Will and the popular will, and which does not let majorities beset with ignorance, harmful propaganda, and false consciousness override basic rights or the true best interests of the people. There are still sober, responsible people in the Republican party establishment who will work to block the nomination of such a candidate. Further, the institutions of the responsible, fact-based Media will be there to educate and inform the populace as to why the presidency of such a candidate is simply and categorically unacceptable. However, in the event that both of those fail, I note that, in the end, the president is elected not by the people, but by the Electoral College, and I firmly expect that were this unlikely scenario to come to pass, the Electors will do their proper duty to the country and its democracy by electing someone else.

#18 Comment By BadReligion On December 24, 2015 @ 5:46 pm

Dominic: In the past few years I’ve stood with my comrades in clashes with (against) white supremacists in the streets of downtown DC, so don’t doubt my sincerity here. Of course, I’d like to think we have bigger fish to fry, but that’s beside the point.

Andrew: You’re right, “dismissed” was the wrong word. I meant “lambasted” or something like that, or even just “characterized.” I am in fact criticizing liberals, and pondering the conservatives who think liberals are far more radical than just, well, liberal.

#19 Comment By EngineerScotty On December 24, 2015 @ 5:48 pm

Finally done with Christmas shopping, so am able to comment.

* Salon, like many others have noted, is obnoxious clickbait these days. It was interesting and useful once.

* The headline is horrible and needlessly provocative. Unlike many newspapers (where headlines are not written by reporters; and indeed, the same story may be given different headlines in different editions–the headline of the Salon piece and of the Alternet original differ slightly), I suspect the author, to his debit, had something to do with the headline.

* That said, the article is about structural white privilege and such, not about–as seems to be alleged here in much of the comments–about relegating whites to an inferior position, or about white genocide, or anything like that.

My first response to much of this is to echo Siarlys. Racial consciousness is false consciousness–whether one is white or black should matter as much whether one is right-handed or left. Of course, the problem with that is that many who promote racial divisions are those who benefit from them (or perceive they do); this combox is full of hand-wringing over the economic fate of working-class whites–from people who rather obviously couldn’t give a flying f**k about the working-class blacks and others who are their countrymen. That working class whites are seeing their living standards decline as blue-collar employment continues to decline is a big problem; however the continuing plight of those in the ghetto is also a big problem.

Given that we do live in a racially-conscious society–the existence of structural factors that are held to benefit one race over another, is a legitimate matter of public concern. This combox, unfortunately, appears to have large numbers of folks who either a) seek to defend and preserve those structural features (and in some cases, turn back the clock), in some cases openly proclaiming white supremacy; or b) insist that these structural features (which go by the name of “white privilege”) do not exist, or are entirely ameliorated by corrective policies such as affirmative action, or even that the mitigating policies impose a bigger hardship on whites than the original state of affairs that such policies were designed to correct for.

(And of course, being continually mistreated has a tendency to harden the hearts of those receiving the short end of the stick. It’s plenty easy to find examples of blacks and other minorities who wear racism as a crown of thorns, and wallow in it. Heck–Obergefell has only been law for less than a year, and many trads are now acting as though the catacombs are already upon us… as I’ve pointed out many times before, the Law of Merited Impossibility is largely a reality for black Americans).

The concept of race will not be cast aside until it is cast aside by those in power. To a large extent, many of them are unwilling to do so.

#20 Comment By DeepSouthPopulist On December 24, 2015 @ 6:42 pm

JMS says:
December 24, 2015 at 5:35 pm

>functioning liberal democracy

Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. The results provide substantial support for theories of Economic-Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism.


#21 Comment By K. W. Jeter On December 24, 2015 @ 6:43 pm

Per EngineerScotty:

This combox, unfortunately, appears to have large numbers of folks who either a) seek to defend and preserve those structural features (and in some cases, turn back the clock), in some cases openly proclaiming white supremacy;

Name one. The usual suspect, Deep South Populist, never has, inasmuch as white nationalism — which he has stated he supports — is not the same as “white supremacy.”

#22 Comment By DeepSouthPopulist On December 24, 2015 @ 7:08 pm

[NFR: Don’t EVER post videos here again. Ever. — RD]

#23 Comment By VikingLS On December 24, 2015 @ 8:48 pm


Okay I was responding to the second response of yours to Ohian. I get the outrage about “entnic enemies” and “degenerates.”

You’re missing the larger point though. Obama may have bailed out the auto industry but like his predecessors has continued the larger economic policies that have destroyed the industrial base and sided with immigrants who have flooded the country with cheap unskilled labor.

Pointing out that immigrants “produce the food” is just a reminder that the ruling class figured they could internally outsource work they consider unpleasant, which at this point includes kitchen work, sanitation, construction, and agriculture. Now the thought of detasseling corn or stripping tobacco might be unthinkable to you, but the people who lost that income really needed it.

At the risk of being hypocritical, try to be less quick on the trigger. When you cry racism immediately you may get some nods from people who already agree with you, but you alienate the people you would need to persuade, and in a way become the stooge of people like DSP.

#24 Comment By Andrew W On December 24, 2015 @ 8:51 pm


That you don’t personally care about someone has no relevancy as to whether they actually have any influence.

I don’t personally care what anybody on Fox has to say, but that doesn’t make Fox irrelevant.

#25 Comment By K. W. Jeter On December 24, 2015 @ 11:27 pm

Re the video that Deep South Populist posted here, which I now assume has been moderated away —

While not in complete agreement with it, and acknowledging that there were bits of it that could have made their points less offensively, I’d have to say that I didn’t find it as offensive as, say, Frank Joyce’s Salon piece that you quoted from here and to which you linked. And frankly, the video raised an important point: if Deep South Populist expresses a preference for white people — which is no more than the preference that members of non-white ethnic groups are commonly allowed to express for each other — and advocates for white people organizing to defend and promote their group interest — which is no more than what other non-white ethnic groups are commonly allowed and encouraged to do — then exactly how is that offensive to anyone else? Serious question; how does Deep South Populist’s advocacy of white nationalism, which is not the same thing as “white supremacism,” hurt anyone else? If, as increasingly seems to be the case, ethno-nationalism is the future — cf. Pat Buchanan and Amy Chua, among others, on the issue — then exactly what is “bad, bad, bad” (your words, Mr. Dreher, from another blog post a while back) about whites pursuing the same course that other ethnic groups openly pursue? Or is it that no ethnic group should pursue its own self-interest?

#26 Comment By Gretchen On December 25, 2015 @ 12:02 am

And for once I agree with M Young, whose phrasing of a complaint from students would be much more appropriate and helpful than the one they used.

#27 Comment By Gretchen On December 25, 2015 @ 12:09 am

Hector: The context is that Putin endorsed Trump, and Trump embraced the endorsement. Putin has had journalists who criticized him disappeared. Trump was asked whether he agrees with Putin’s handling of journalists who disagree with him. Trump hedged, falling short of saying that it’s wrong to disappear journalists who criticize the leader of a country. I think that’s an interesting data point when we’re deciding whether Trump is fit ot lead our country. Why don’t you?

#28 Comment By EngineerScotty On December 25, 2015 @ 12:16 am

Name one. The usual suspect, Deep South Populist, never has, inasmuch as white nationalism — which he has stated he supports — is not the same as “white supremacy.”

There’s about a half dozen regulars, and a few more periodic drive-bys, from whom a significant amount of the output consists of essentially “blacks are lazy, stupid, and/or violent”. They don’t use the term “white supremacist” to describe themselves–the preferred euphemisms seem to be “race realist” and “white nationalist”, but it’s the cluster of opinions I’m referring to, not specifically the label.

I am not including here the numerous others who object (strongly in some cases) to various facets of African-American politics and culture, but avoid some of the more toxic claims of open racism.

#29 Comment By DeepSouthPopulist On December 25, 2015 @ 10:38 am

panda is always calling me an advocate of mass murder and someone who wants to solve the black problem which is much worse than anything in the video that I posted which however uncomfortable for either founded or unfounded reasons it might make people contained no content that isn’t actually true. I’ve never said or implied anything like a solving a black problem. This is the internet, but that’s a completely out-of-bounds slur as far as I’m concerned. I’ve defended blacks many times in the context of police brutality issues. I’m never entirely sure if he’s serious or just trolling and baiting, or some combination of the two. But I posted that video because I’ve had enough of it. I trying to push his buttons. I’ll just put panda on my permanent ignore list and let that be the end of it. I won’t post any more videos.

#30 Comment By panda On December 25, 2015 @ 9:12 pm

“Pointing out that immigrants “produce the food” is just a reminder that the ruling class figured they could internally outsource work they consider unpleasant, which at this point includes kitchen work, sanitation, construction, and agriculture. Now the thought of detasseling corn or stripping tobacco might be unthinkable to you, but the people who lost that income really needed it.

At the risk of being hypocritical, try to be less quick on the trigger. When you cry racism immediately you may get some nods from people who already agree with you, but you alienate the people you would need to persuade, and in a way become the stooge of people like DSP.”

Pulling quickly on a trigger is something I do often, so thanks for the advice. As for immigrants: I am no proponent of unlimited immigration, and I would be a strong fan of real strong employment enforcement- especially in field like agriculture where illegal labor is basically a subsidy to employers unwilling to either treat employees better or modernize their farms. I just pointed out the blunt hypocrisy of Ohioan demanding respect for the working class, while clearly having knives out for people who, for better or (mostly) worse, do much of the actual working in this country. Respect flows both ways.

#31 Comment By panda On December 25, 2015 @ 9:23 pm

:You’re missing the larger point though. Obama may have bailed out the auto industry but like his predecessors has continued the larger economic policies that have destroyed the industrial base and sided with immigrants who have flooded the country with cheap unskilled labor.

As for Obama: I never argued that his policies were adequate for the moment. My only argument is that if you look at where the rubber hits the road- new federal spending, you will find the idea that he is somehow fighting a war on working class whites absolutely wrong. Immigration is a more complex case, but keep in mind that under Obama (but by no means thanks to him), illegal immigration stands at more or less at net zero. Also important to remember: there is a reason why labor unions are all in favor of immigration reform and legalization..

#32 Comment By Erdrick On December 25, 2015 @ 9:31 pm

EngineerScotty says:
December 24, 2015 at 5:48 pm

Of course, the problem with that is that many who promote racial divisions are those who benefit from them (or perceive they do); this combox is full of hand-wringing over the economic fate of working-class whites–from people who rather obviously couldn’t give a flying f**k about the working-class blacks and others who are their countrymen.

Engineer Scotty, I think you’re being too glib on this subject.

I for one am not as extremist as DSP. I absolutely see slave-descended African Americans as my countrymen. I think the optimum outcome would be absolute integration between African Americans and White Americans, which would eventually lead to intermixing to such an extent that African Americans would be part of the general ethnic American as much as English, Swedish, Irish, Polish, or Italian. After all, most African Americans have significant European roots. They’re our cousins too.

But nevertheless, I have a visceral reaction to anti-white Progressive propaganda like that preached by Joyce, Brittany Cooper, and other Salonites. While I am happy to meet with African Americans in good faith- and I even agree to some extent that there is such a thing as “white privilege” that African Americans don’t receive, though I would quibble about its effect and its value- I refuse to meekly agree with people who think “justice” requires white people spend a few centuries at the bottom of the pile as atonement for past sins of some whites.

As far as I can tell, none of my ancestors owned slaves. Most were poor northern farmers. The ones who fought in the Civil War fought for the Union. My other ancestors were Slavs who came here to work in the steel mills in the late 19th /early 20th centuries. My parents are union and working class, and they always taught me that we had more in common with poor blacks than rich whites. I used to believe that fully. But over the past decade or so, the radical Progressives have made me start to doubt it.

As I said, I prefer peace and brotherhood between European and African Americans. But gun to my head, push come to shove, do or die- I would pick DSP over Joyce. I will not grovel and submit for who I am or for what I didn’t do.

I don’t think that I’m the only white person who feels this way, or who feels the pull of radicalization when faced with the more obnoxious sermons against “white supremacy.” The mass immigration crisis only adds fuel to this fire, because it adds a feeling of being backed into a corner. The fact that people who were originally somewhat moderate (and, in my case, with advanced degrees from top tier universities) are being pushed in the direction of white nationalism should be a cause for concern and examination, not contempt or shrugging. (And I’m surprised that an engineer would lower himself into using B.S. pseudo-scientific sociological jargon like “false consciousness. Have some self respect 😉 ).

Anyway, I hope that my white, black, and brown brothers and sisters all have a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. Let’s hope and pray that all of us can decide to love one another.

#33 Comment By K. W. Jeter On December 26, 2015 @ 12:56 am

Per EngineerScotty:

There’s about a half dozen regulars, and a few more periodic drive-bys, from whom a significant amount of the output consists of essentially “blacks are lazy, stupid, and/or violent”.

So in other words, you can’t name anyone who posts here, advocating white supremacism. White supremacist has a specific meaning; per Merriam-Webster, a person who believes that the white race is inherently superior to other races and that white people should have control over people of other races. Even if it were true that people are posting here their belief that “blacks are lazy, stupid, and/or violent” — which I frankly doubt; I can’t recall seeing any postings like that — it still wouldn’t amount to espousing white supremacism, unless those postings also included the necessary element of a belief that white people should have control over people of other races. And I definitely don’t recall seeing anything like that. Unless you or someone else has a specific cite of a posting that included both necessary elements of what would constitute white supremacism, I don’t think you have a case for maintaining that anyone has actually espoused that belief here.

#34 Comment By Thomas Kaempfen On December 26, 2015 @ 5:43 am

Black nationalism, with all of its bitter destructiveness, is cynically being used to justify white nationalism, with all of its dishonesties and dangers. This is the point.

People like Deep South Populist are deliriously happy at Joyce’s piece, because they believe it lends credibility to their position that whites are threatened as whites and their only reasonable response is to defend themselves as whites. Rod asks for liberals to police their farther left reaches, to push back against the stupidity of that Joyce article, as well they should. But he’s not doing enough to police the farther right reaches on his own side. Instead, he lends a small portion of his well-earned credibility to those whose fondest desire is to further racially divide us.

And make no mistake about it; white nationalism is the thinnest veneer for the very real white supremacy lurking beneath. We’re all Americans, and dividing us by race is just as destructive when done from the right as when done from the left. Almost nothing is more terrifying or more potentially destructive than race war, and there is almost nothing more reprehensible or irresponsible – on the left or the right – than doing the slightest thing to hasten its arrival.

#35 Comment By Franklin Evans On December 26, 2015 @ 9:28 am

Take what is written at face value.

This is an ethical stance I found very difficult to adopt. Once I figured it out, I found it very difficult to understand how others simply can’t get it.

“People like [fill in blank] are [f-i-b] because the believe [f-i-b]…” is a precise example of passive-aggressive debate, and misses any possible point given or received.

This might be the key attribute of the racial-ethnic divide. There is a sometimes celebratory withholding of empathy on every side over every issue.

I shared my family story on another thread. My mother’s family was just one of countless stories out of WWII. The theme was simple: in the midst of a war founded on racial and ethnic divides ramped up to 11 on a scale of 10, some people didn’t hesitate to reject the divides and see others as fellow humans. If I were being cynical, my next paragraph or three would wax over the apparent need for a war to bring out this best in people. I’d go into painful detail over the parallels between WWII Europe and Civil War America’s underground railway for escaping slaves, or how the pre-Civil Rights Act America was much like a war, at least for some people in the middle of things.

However, I’ll settle on an aspect of my childhood. In the 50s African-American families began to enter the middle class in Philadelphia in large numbers, without government assistance and well before the advent of affirmative action. The majority of our white neighbors in the nearest suburb to West Philly all were quick to bitterly complain that the damn [email protected]@ers chased them from their homes, and would never allow them to come to our township. 40-plus years later, the children of those neighbors quietly gentrified some of those same neighborhoods, because that black middle class dwindled and died in large part from active racial discrimination that prevented the children of that black middle class from entering the mainstream of our economy.

Right there was an large cohort of people who lived the self-sufficiency of the American dream, only to watch their children slide back on a deliberately slippery slope of institutionalized racial discrimination. The black ghettos of Philadelphia were not the cause of that decline, they were a symptom and consequence of it…

All due to racism.

Who here can tell me that those black families brought it upon themselves?

By the way, I add no anecdotal caveat, because that story was repeated in many urban centers across our nation.

#36 Comment By DeepSouthPopulist On December 26, 2015 @ 9:49 am

Paraphrasing Whittaker Chambers, intentional or not, your message to white people amounts to — enjoy minority status, to your South African Eurabian future go!

It’s because of perspectives like yours, perhaps even more so than the perspectives at Salon, that the case for WNsm is picking more and more credibility every day. In point of fact, if we were animals, we’d be on the red list of endangered species. Do you realize that whites don’t have a single nation in the *world* run solely in the interests of whites, or, for people want to be more precise (some care about the finer points), solely in the interest of the Europeans and diaspora Europeans who built these nations and this civilization? Even eastern Europe is facing powerful forces trying to ram migrants down eastern Europe’s collective throats. That is wrong. Unfortunately, it is also a fact. So this idea that is common in WNst circles that the attack on whites is worldwide amounting to a form of genocide (of which there is more than one form) is entirely fact-based. It is customary in any debate to start by addressing facts; you have not done that here.

I’m sorry, but let me repeat some basics here. First, you’re not a mind-reader. You don’t know what anyone’s motives are. I don’t have anything against black people. I’ve lived among them my whole life. 3 out of my four immediate neighbors are black.


Just to be clear, I don’t care about criticism; in fact, I welcome it. But people ought to at least make it substantive, instead of whining about a need to censorship and making gross misrepresentations based on a belief they can read minds.

WNsm has a large number of credible critics; the sharpest ones, ironically enough, are usually found on the right outside mainstream circles. Like SJ, a responsible critic from the left, they usually focus on substantive ideas like “white” being an inadequate basis for political action because white is a thin identity; it covers a group that is too broad and that holds too many incompatible cultural views; and for the most part it has never had wide cultural significance especially in Europe. While all of those things are true, it’s also true that history moves forward not backwards. This is the factor those critics tend to overlook. Those things are changing for people like it or not, because US-based elites are determined to take their narratives global.

[NFR: OK, fine, whatever, but — and I’m talking to you too, Panda — I have no interest in this blog becoming a forum for protagonists and antagonists debating white nationalism. There are plenty of such places, but this blog is not one of them. I’m not going to approve any more posts on this discussion now. Censorship? I do it all the time, but this time, I’m telling y’all about it. — RD]

#37 Comment By Andrew W On December 26, 2015 @ 11:32 am


Ohian specifically said he DIDN’T blame his unemployment on Obama, he just felt like Obama didn’t care about people like him.

I don’t think that’s completely fair, but like Kanye West saying Bush didn’t care about black people, I can understand that sentiment. That’s still nowhere close to accusing Obama of conspiring to keep poor working whites out of work out malice.

#38 Comment By Andrew On December 27, 2015 @ 1:40 pm

I think anyone and everyone who thinks it is possible that the transition of America from majority white to minority white will be a “peaceable” one is naively dreaming. Not the least because it was people like Joyce and people influenced by such ideas who upended our ethnic demographics in the 1965 immigration laws in the first place. I guess I’m cynical. I’m glad I will be long dead before 2060 or so, if not earlier, that’s for sure.

#39 Comment By A. G. Phillbin On December 28, 2015 @ 2:43 am

naturalmom, on December 23, 2015 at 10:52 pm, gave the best, most concise statement about what is wrong with the whole “white anti-racist” concept. I won’t call it a “movement;” it is still largely an obnoxious academic trend with it’s greatest influence being amongst — surprise — college students.

Frankly, I think it isn’t really anti-white racism. It’s just plain old fashioned racism. Only it doesn’t want the race they feel is superior to exercise it’s superiority. Few movements infantilize non-white people like radical “anti-racists.” As a mother of non-white children, it can be almost as hard for me to have a conversation with them as it is to have one with a full-on white supremacist. They are 2 sides of the same coin. They both underestimate non-white people and either infantilize them or demonize them or both. Radical anti-racists demonize whites and infantilize non-whites. By doing so, they reveal their true underlying belief in white superiority, at least in the realms of power and intellect.

I thought it was worth repeating.(I took the liberty of correcting the misspelling of “infantilize,” because spell-check ordered me to do so(-:) I don’t know whether these people truly feel guilty about what other whites have done to non-white peoples, or their own racist feelings, or their own failure to effectively organize the working classes. The “white anti-racist” posture allows them to explain their own failures, pose as true allies and political saviors of the downtrodden non-whites, and tell themselves they are moral saviors of white people.

#40 Comment By gp On December 30, 2015 @ 12:22 pm

White people must throw off the burden of guilt that has been laid upon them by the government, media and educators for the past five decades. It is this irrational guilt that led, for example, to the sorry spectacle of Bernie Sanders groveling behind the two loud-mouthed BLM anarchists. It’s time for white people to stop being ashamed of speaking in their own interest, and to unflinchingly shove the calumnies of the left and their race-radical allies back into their faces.

#41 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On December 30, 2015 @ 8:57 pm

I second naturalmom and A.G. Phillbin. (I think that may be a first).

gp, “White” people must throw off the burden of thinking of themselves as “white.” The left will shove the calumnies of the paternalistic race-concscious liberals unflinchingly in their faces just fine, thank you.

What if they gave a seminar on “white privilege” and nobody came? What if they gave a seminar on the interests of “white people” and none could be found?

#42 Comment By Kirk Matoushek On March 21, 2016 @ 8:32 pm

There is no color to self sufficiency, personnel responsibility and contribution but if you measured these 3 categories you would have no problem finding millions of whites who fit all 3

[NFR: Which nobody disputes. — RD]

#43 Comment By Chuck On July 9, 2016 @ 4:36 pm

Truthout.org publishes a lot of articles blaming the dreaded “white male” for a variety of awful things. Its funny because the same authors seem to always write the anti white articles. Like they have an agenda or something.

#44 Comment By Loraine Mohar On December 13, 2017 @ 1:45 pm

I sincerely believe that white people are being pushed and pushed and prodded on purpose. This is warlike propaganda and it is relentless and unceasing.

The goal is to push them with this rhetoric and with the invasion of Islam to wake the beast. Once white men flip, the government will be ripe and ready to crack down and in fact finally and legitimately criminalize ‘whiteness’.