Category Archives: The West

What Do You Like About Being White? Lily White Conservative: I’m Too Individualistic To Say

Conservatism, Critical Race Theory, Individualism Vs. Collectivism, Race, Racism, The West

“What do you like about being white?”

Christopher Ruso’s fluid, but flaccid, reply to this question, posed by Marc Lamont Hill, encapsulates what is meant by a weak, apologetic case for Western man.

I believe Rufo’s one reply was that he is too much of an individualist to say. “It’s an amorphous term,” he added, “a metaphysical category,” and he also rejected the categorization of individuals.

Lamont, however, countered forthrightly that he, on the other hand, can state quite clearly what he likes about being black. Indeed, Dr. Hill asked a plain question.

Rufo then proceeded to reject the great things associated with Western mannerisms and habits, universalizing these, instead.

This exact same Uriah Heep like obsequiousness I highlighted in October 2020’s “Wake Up. Systemic Anti-Whiteness Is Deadly. Witness South Africa.”

Going by the Federalist writer mentioned in this 2020 column, conservatives like Stella Morabito and Rufo refuse to even take credit for the “oppressive” culture for which Europeans are being berated. Ludicrously, they both universalize the Protestant Ethic.

Recall the “Smithsonian display on whiteness”? It condemned as “white” all elements of a civilized society, including politeness, hard work, self-reliance, logic, planning, delayed gratification, and family cohesion.

“None of those are ‘white’ values,” assured Morabito, the apologist from the Federalist, as she criticizes Critical Race Theory for framing them as white. Ditto Rufo.

Imagine being so obsequious and apologetic as to wash your hands of a really cool thing you invented, evolved or were born into: Western civilization.

Almost all these values are, moreover, most pronounced in the European culture. One might even pin them down to Western Europe, because the sanctity of a man’s word, the handshake, culminating in the legally binding contract—these are some of the cultural and religious values that allowed capitalism to take off particularly well in the Anglosphere. Arguably, these are not part of the East European ethos.

MORE.

Related to the Rufo apologia is news that Princeton has ended Latin and Greek requirement for a Classics Major, so as to “address systemic racism” Hint to Mr. Rufo, who failed to defend his white self: There is no “classics” without the West. The culture of Greco-Roman antiquity was foundational and spectacular.

READING:

‘Systemic Racism’ Or Systemic Rubbish?

Ethnocidal ‘Critical Race Theory’ Is Upon Us Like White On Rice
Critical Racist Theory Robs And Rapes Reality

Video With David Vance: “NY Psychiatrist Aruna Khilanani Is Right: Hatred Of Whites Is Here To Stay

Education, Ethics, Ilana Mercer, Morality, Psychiatry, Race, Racism, South-Africa, The West

My weekly conversation with David Vance looks in depth at why murderous “NY Psychiatrist Aruna Khilanani Is Right: Hatred Of Whites Is Here To Stay.”

The timeless insights are drawn from “Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons From America From Post-Apartheid South Africa” (2011), and from columns based on the book, such as “Why Hatred Of Whites Is Here To Stay” (2017).

NEW ON YouTube: David Vance In Conversation With ilana mercer

Argument, Britain, Conservatism, Ilana Mercer, libertarianism, Paleolibertarianism, Political Philosophy, Race, Racism, The West

Interested interviewers: I am laconic, not loquacious.—ilana mercer

A YouTube CHAT With UK’s illustrious and debonair David Vance: The lads (David and his producer) treated me so very kindly. (As in welcoming and mannered, rather than like other requests constantly received from ego-bound interviewers, concerned with rambling with me about their own views, which, being laconic, not loquacious, I cannot do.) We laughed hard, sharing that Sir Humphrey Appleby sense of humor.

The topics: The Systemic Racism irrational rot, deconstructed in columns, and my latest on the wussification of the West, as manifested in the book-burning Seuss saga and the conservative response thereto.

Hint: We both argue process—the right of freemen to think, speak and write impolite thoughts. We refuse to debate the content of those thought, because that would be conceding the Left’s Argument, as conservatives habitually do.

I was delighted to be asked by David to come on more regularly.

 

 

UPDATE III (4/9): NEW COLUMN: The Wussification Of The West: Will We Ban Shakespeare For Othello And Shylock?

Argument, Comedy & Humor, Conservatism, Education, English, Free Speech, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Literature, Race, Racism, The West

The The Argument from Freedom means arguing process, not content.–ilana

NEW COLUMN IS either “The Wussification Of The West: Will We Ban Shakespeare For Othello And Shylock?” Or, “How Tucker Could Have Crushed His Dr. Seuss Segment,” currently on WND.COM, the Unz ReviewTownhall.com.

How Tucker Could Have Crushed His Dr. Seuss Segment” is on CNS.News, too.

And American Renaissance, where the conversation is lively.

And, the great American Greatness, the voice of next-generation conservatism.

Watch a video version of this column on YouTube.

And excerpt:

… Tucker’s mistake was his contents-driven defense of these kiddie books:

“Dr. Seuss was not a racist. He was an evangelist against bigotry,” pleaded Tucker. “He wrote an entire shelf of books against racism, and not in a subtle way. They were clearly, explicitly against racism. That was the whole point of writing them, to teach children not to be racist.”

Yawn.

Even if Dr. Seuss was the pedagogic, sanctimonious bore Tucker makes him out to be—actual racism in the targeted literature should be a peripheral issue, or no issue at all.

The Argument from Freedom means arguing process, not content.

Whether he intended it or not, the premise of Tucker’s defense of Dr. Seuss is that if we do detect “legitimate” racism in literature—there is a case for banning it. (Now, Tucker might not have meant it that way, but, this is what the structure of his argument portends.)

By contrast, freedom makes the case for an unfettered free market in ideas, good and bad. Freedom argues for politically impolite books to be published and read freely.

Banning books, moreover, assumes a lack of choice and agency among individual human beings. It’s also predicated on a higher authority that decides for the rest of us which cultural products are fit for our consumption.

The Argument from Freedom means arguing not over the contents of Mein Kampf or McElligot’s Pool, but for their publication irrespective of their content.

Which is why I say freedom’s argument is an argument from process, and not content.

Mein Kampf, and any offensive literature, needs to be available in a free society to free men and women who want it. And not because of history; so that we don’t forget it or repeat it (blah, blah, blah, as I heard it enunciated by Seattle’s radio mouth, Jason Rantz, the other day).

Alas, in the face of the cancellation of people and publications, cancelled conservatives just keep these logically weak and, frankly, loser mea culpas coming. Like the Argument from Hitler, which is a kind of “WhatAboutism”:

“Amazon and eBay sell Mein Kampf, why not Dr. Seuss? I want what Hitler got, Amazon and eBay. Me too. Boo-hoo.”

Tweeted “Musil Protégé”: “Conservatives [inadvertently] condone presentism. As Audrey says in Whit Stillman’s Metropolitan: ‘Has it ever occurred to you that our world judged by the standards of Jane Austen’s time would (look ridiculous)?’”

Most great literature doesn’t meet the sub-intelligent standards of the woke illiterati, who control the intellectual means of production—the schools (primary, secondary, tertiary), the press, publishing houses, think tanks, Deep Tech and the Deep State. …

NEW COLUMN IS either “The Wussification Of The West: Will We Ban Shakespeare For Othello And Shylock?” Or, “How Tucker Could Have Crushed His Dr. Seuss Segment,” currently on WND.COM, the Unz Review and Townhall.com.

How Tucker Could Have Crushed His Dr. Seuss Segment” is on CNS.News and American Renaissance as well.

Watch a video version of this column on YouTube.

UPDATE II (3/16): Facebook
Ray McClendon:

I’m a big Tucker fan too Ilana. Your article pointing out his arguments along with others who made the same argument give rise to mixed emotions. On the one hand, he (and they) are not wrong. There is some validity to their logic. After all, truth is often multifaceted. Plus, we’re all on the same side fighting side by side as allies in a common cause. On the other hand, you perform a great service when you point out there are far more substantive, powerful, and relevant arguments to be made, reminding me of that axiom, “Great minds may think alike, but greater minds think alone.” It’s why you’ve always been in a class by yourself. Thank you…

Ilana Mercer

No! I point to he fact that the argument from racism is irreverent if one is arguing classical liberal freedoms. Tucker, whom I love, was arguing from the leftist premise. The End. No argument. You can both love Tucker, and agree he presented a weak case for freedom. I do. That’s not wrong.

UPDATE III (4/9): When Adult humor is allowed:

Ed Powell:
“You are my favorite African-American.”
Me:
“That’s good ‘adult humor’. I am an African-American Jew.”
MrSweetaz:
“@ILANAMERCER, LOL, Hitler wouldn’t have known what the hell to do with you.”
Me:
“I think he would.”