Category Archives: Multiculturalism

Paul Gottfried Ponders Richard Spencer’s Strategy (& My Paleolibertarian Take)

Conservatism, Critique, Left-Liberalism, Logic, Multiculturalism, Old Right

Well, at least some in the Moron Media have corrected course and are calling Richard Spencer a “white nationalist,” instead of a white supremacist.

Watching Richard’s performance at Auburn University, renowned scholar of the Right Dr. Paul E. Gottfried shared these impressions:

When I criticize him, I am not making moral judgments, except when I note his futile attempt to keep up with leftist Millennials by siding with gay rights and abortion. What I object to in Richard is his, well, strategic stupidity, not the fact that he has committed the “sin” of being a white nationalist. Since “educated” whites are taught to hate their own race, I can’t see how one can appeal to Millennials and leftist college students by calling for white nationalism. Nor does one win their sympathy by mimicking their positions on feminism and homosexuality while trying to convert them to a racialist ideology. What seems to me the only chance left to the Right to be effective is by mobilizing the “Deplorables” and then turning them against the social-cultural Left. I was delighted to see how the pro-Trump people took it to the Antifascists at Berkeley. And I knew these counter-demonstrators were on the side of the angels when David French at National Review began to rail against them.

My impressions? The young, white men in the audience seemed receptive, even enthusiastic, although Richard may be talking above their heads. What Richard was saying conjured an interview I gave, “Self-Segregation Trumps Imposed Multiculturalism.” My views are decidedly LIBERTARIAN, a slant Richard Spencer rejects:

Multiculturalism as practiced in the West amounts to top-down, centrally enforced and managed integration. Show me a historical precedent where forced integration has worked. As it works across the Anglo-American and European spheres, one group (the founding, historical majority) is forced by self-anointed and elected elites—no contradiction there—on pain of public and professional ostracism, to submerge its history, heroes, customs, culture, language, and pander to militant minorities, who’ve been acculturated by the same elites in identity-politics warfare. As a libertarian, I believe that the right to include or exclude; associate with or dissociate from, is inherent in the right of private property. Private property is a civilizing institution. How better to keep the peace than to respect the right of free private-property owners to keep their distance (or not)—to hire, fire, and, generally, associate at will? This foundation of civil society is being dismantled for the sake of militant multiculturalism and policed pluralism.
An interesting new book, reviewed by one Barnaby Rogerson, makes the point that the Levant of the 18th century was peaceful and prosperous (and surprisingly libertine), because it was made up of “a grid of self-governing communities.” Integration between disparate communities was not enforced. And surprise, surprise: communities freely chose to live in complete segregation. This freedom fostered “remarkable tolerance” among diverse communities across the cities of the Levant of that time. “Deals before Ideals, City before State, Trade before Politics,” as the reviewer puts it. This freedom of association was the source of strength. These autonomous ethnic communities were free of the top-down, punitive, forced integration that has become the hallmark of the 19th-century nation-state that usurped their authority.

See: “Self-Segregation Trumps Imposed Multiculturalism.”

TRUMP News Round-Up (March 26 – April 5)

Donald Trump, Economy, Foreign Policy, Free Markets, Gender, Healthcare, IMMIGRATION, Labor, Multiculturalism, Russia

As Steve Bannon Goes, So Goes the Promise of …

Is the foreign policy promised on the way out: America First?

Surveillance:

Ivanka milking the equal-pay nonsense:

Let’s have more of Melania, less of busybody Ivanka:

Yes to Dana Rohrabacher:

Job numbers are looking good, but not to our mad-hatter media:

No wonder DC dislikes Putin; he likes Russia just the way she is:

ForeignAffairs.com is getting religion on immigration restriction.

Julian Assange: They used him.

MICHAEL FLYNN: throwing him under the bus was probably WRONG, don’t you think?

Democrats in healthcare? Is this why we gave Trump the presidency and both chambers?

Robert Redford: The actor believes his own hype.

The best people are NOT in the Trump admin: Michele Bachmann, Phil Haney, Kris Kobach.

Ivanka’s office is way too close.

The CIA, America’s political police:

Leave Deep Space to the private sector:

Keeping bad company: Condoleezza Rice:

Supply and Demand is immutable, natural law, but … but …

Freedom Caucus: Thanks!

What Rep. Steve King’s ‘Racist’ Statements Teach

Multiculturalism, Race, South-Africa, The West

“What Rep. Steve King’s ‘Racist’ Statements Teach” is the current column, now on The Daily Caller. An excerpt:

Rep. Steve King walked back his remarks with ease. King had told Iowa radio host Jan Mickelson that “we can’t restore our civilization with somebody else’s babies.” The Republican congressman quickly reframed the comments. It was not race he was alluding to, but “our stock, our country, our culture, our civilization.” Those sound like proxies for race.

Nice try, congressman.

More instructive than what Rep. King said or meant to say are the lessons about what we’re not supposed to say.

We dare not suggest that a civilization created by a particular people with a particular religious and racial profile, may well perish once those people are replaced or have engineered their own replacement.

America’s historical majority may not entertain or express a natural affinity for its own. A connection to kith, kin and culture, when expressed by whites, is considered inauthentic, xenophobic, and certainly racist.

In other words, there’s a class of people for whom no identity is permitted. They’re the people of Europe and the Anglo-sphere: the English, the Americans, the Canadians, Australians and New Zealanders. The unspoken rule is that only non-Occidentals be allowed to express “civilizational consciousness,” Samuel P. Huntington’s synonym for “our stock, our country, our culture, our civilization.”

Conversely, blacks, browns and all the other, more exotic, more sympathetic peoples of the world are encouraged to strut their civilizational consciousness.

Africa, the Middle East, Near East, Far East: The people of these regions want to come and lay claim to countries built by the supremely kind, sanctimonious, gullible do-gooders of the West. Yet despite The West’s generosity to The Rest, whites are the only people to be shamed, ostracized, threatened and maligned if they dare hearken back to their forefathers, or cling to the beliefs, faith and folklore of their founding fathers.

Another thing: All peoples aside whites are allowed to claim and keep their corner under the sun. Dare to suggest that China, India, Saudi-Arabia, Yemen, Japan, or South-Korea open the floodgates to aliens who’ll disrupt the ancient rhythm of these societies—and you’ll get an earful. Yet this is what Anglo-Americans and Europeans are cheerily called on to do by a left-liberal, progressive ruling class.

To her governing elites, America is not a nation but a notion, as Patrick J. Buchanan put it. To someone like House Speaker Paul Ryan, who is admired by Democratic and Republican progressives alike, America is a community of disparate people coalescing around an abstract, highly manipulable, state-sanctioned ideology. …

… Read the rest. “What Rep. Steve King’s ‘Racist’ Statements Teach” is now on The Daily Caller.

Tucker Carlson Is The Only Immigration Patriot @ Fox News

Homeland Security, IMMIGRATION, Islam, Labor, Multiculturalism, Nationhood, Republicans

Tucker Carlson Socratically questions his Republican simpleton guest (6:10 in): “Our current understanding is that foreigners can come here until we can show they pose a danger to us. Shouldn’t our assumption be that nobody has the right to come here until they can show us the benefit of their coming here?”

Tucker went on to observe that “the People whom the congress is supposed to be representing are largely not in favor of resettling Syrian refugees. Only 36% in favor [and likely virtue signalling to the surveyors posing the questions. Survey methodology is notoriously confounded by a bias whereby, from the questions asked, the surveyed sense the “right” reply and oblige the individual questioning them]. People are not for this. Why wouldn’t the congress take this up? They’re supposed to be representing The People.” And, “Do employers have the moral right to low-wage labor?”

Tucker is an immigration patriot because he suggests restricted in-migration based on reasons other than “the security of the American people.” The latter is the sum total of the case made by all at Fox News other than Tucker Carlson.

Moreover, everyone at Fox News currently concurs that we have no problem with legal immigration, only with the illegal variety. It’s now mandatory to pair an objection to the invasion of the American Southwest with an embrace of all forms of legal immigration. The sole emphasis on border security has, in all likelihood, entrenched the status quo—Americans will never assert their right to determine the nature of the country they live in and, by extension, the kind of immigrants they welcome. The security risk newcomers pose is the only permissible topic for conversation. So I wrote in 2006.

Eleven years hence, and Tucker has broken the mold on Fox News.

Give Tucker time, and he’ll question “diversity.”


Moratorium:


Self-defense.


Deplorables love it. The country’s in favor:


All those Alexander Bells Keep Coming.


Dershowitz would do the job, too; he enjoys a challenge. Thought you hired the best, POTUS: