We've all seen Jared Taylor speak countless times, and the smarter ones amongst us have probably realised quite long ago that he makes more or less the same pitch again and again. This is true whether he is doing one of his straight-to-the-camera pieces or is in some sort of interview. Jared Taylor's position on things is therefore no secret. In fact it is out in the clear.
Why should this be of any interest or significance?
Well, let's put it this way: Jared Taylor is the blue ribbon of White nationalism, the clearest reference point.
If you want to understand or critique White nationalism, then Taylor is the go-to-guy. If you want to understand why White nationalism has failed or never seems to go anywhere, a good place to seek answers is by studying Jared Taylor's world view.
Many in the White identitarian movement think it's mainly about "optics" and presentation. It isn't. Whether a movement succeeds or fails depends on the quality of its worldview and the potency of its analysis. The window dressing is merely an afterthought. This is why Taylor is important because he has been a fixed point for decades and therefore a reliable reference point.
If you want to understand or critique White nationalism, then Taylor is the go-to-guy. If you want to understand why White nationalism has failed or never seems to go anywhere, a good place to seek answers is by studying Jared Taylor's world view.
Many in the White identitarian movement think it's mainly about "optics" and presentation. It isn't. Whether a movement succeeds or fails depends on the quality of its worldview and the potency of its analysis. The window dressing is merely an afterthought. This is why Taylor is important because he has been a fixed point for decades and therefore a reliable reference point.
You can also use Taylor as a gauge for other White Nationalists. For example, Greg Johnson or Kevin MacDonald, with whom he sometimes associates, are basically just Taylor with a Nazi-esque theory of Jewish power and malevolence bolted on.
So, to get down to it, what is the Taylorist world view?
A key point that he makes again and again is that White people exist objectively but do not exist subjectively. That is, there is such a thing as White people but White people don't think of themselves as a "We," lack consciousness, and don't organise in their own interests, while other groups do. This has a slight Marxist resonance, as in the idea of class consciousness, which the proletariat needed to develop in order to serve their interests.
Another point of Taylorism is that East Asians are smarter than Whites, but Whites are somehow still special. Often the word Taylor uses here is "Faustian." White people, despite their lower average IQ, like pushing the envelope and finding new things. The East Asian by contrast likes pulling the envelope, so to speak. This aspect of Taylorism plays off the r/K race theory of people like J. Philippe Rushton, which sets Whites somewhere in the middle of a racial spectrum.
Another key "finding" of 40 years of relentless White Nationalist enquiry by Taylor is that Whites are just too darn nice, so much so that it often flips over into ethnomasochism. He even thinks that anti-White leftism and liberalism is mainly an expression of this.
Perhaps a fourth and final pillar of the Taylor Weltanschauung is that it wasn't always like this, and once upon a time Whites did have a healthy sense of their own collective interests -- putting up statues of Columbus, Robert E. Lee, and so on. But, they lost this, either because of the 2nd or 3rd pillar (the Faustian envelope pushing expressing itself as "atomisation" or the being so darned nice).
Really, I think that just about covers almost everything Taylor has to say, except, of course, there is the assumption that Blacks are pretty hard to live with, but this is sort of contained or implied in the first pillar or table leg of the Taylorist world view.
Let's bullet point it:
- White people are a group that doesn't know it is a group (bad thing!)
- White people are not supreme, but they kind of are.
- White people are too nice (bad thing!)
- White people used to have a healthier balance before "the bad thing(s)" happened.
There, that's about it. That's what you're buying when you sign off those donation cheques to Amren. Value for money?
(to be continued)
___________________________________
I think Jared Taylor has done rather well as a race realist and for race realism as a cause! His points about modern whites are basically true if a little trite. The truth indeed becomes old after a while of frequent repeating.
ReplyDeleteLets bullet point it:
- Whites are in general not as clever as north-east asians (and jews), but more clever on average than people from Africa and western, central and southern Asia. Are they a bit more curious than most other people groups? Probably a tiny bit. Do they on average also have a bit more social empathy? Yes, it seems so. All this seems rather obvious. Also to most non-whites I think.
- Are whites more prone to extreme egalitarian fantasies and universalist hubris? Perhaps. Other groups certainly also display such tendencies. Islam imagines a world where in all humans ideally are one nation (ummah) under Allah, with one theocratic leadership, one divine law and no politics based on any form of ethno-national self interest. All muslim believers are brothers. The end.
- Were whites better at being racist in the olden days? The 19th century certainly seems to have been a century where most whites were consciously racist in more or less direct ways. And before that? Yeah, not really it seems. Not in any recognizable modern systematic way at least. And so not really.
So does Taylor even have any flaws to his thinking and demeanor? Well, its a question of taste to some degree I guess. In politics he seems a libertarian of sorts (an extreme non-racist viewpoint if believed consistently) that is what we today call a "conservative". And this way of thinking of course has its elements of truth, but in general is a faded worn ideology. And an ideology truly welcoming of mass migration not opposed to it. But here Taylor obviously diverts from some of its core doctrine. All in all one might say Taylor is rather sober, but also boring.
I don't think Islam is multicultural. I believe you have to learn Arabic and go on a pilgrimage to Mecca in order to become whatever a good Muslim is. No different than other racial centric religions because all of them are fundamentally racial centric, which is normal. Islam does not separate religion from the state – which is not at all Enlightened western democracy's professed belief but probably Taylor thinks we should have a separation.
ReplyDeleteEverybody's "racist." The least "racist" people on the planet are white men.
I think Taylor's main value is his race realism. You don't live in suburban Washington, DC, and – if you have a shred of honesty – cannot be aware of racial difference. I give him a lot of credit for that because the liars are everywhere.
I think white identity is a nonsense that doesn't make sence outside of the USA a good example is the huge amount of interracial breeding between black men and white women in the usa white nationalist try to blame the media who are by there point of view are sending subliminal message though there adverts to chose black men
ReplyDeleteIn ultra liberal Washington, DC, a black man is 29 times more likely to have been in jail than a white man. In ultra liberal DC, a house in Upper Caucasia (northwest quadrant) is twice as expensive as a similar house in middle class affirmative action Anacostia (southeast quadrant). [You'd think this would be racist.] Crime, especially black on white, is rampant. The new black insanity is to drive recklessly, kill pedestrians, and run away. Usually using a stolen car. And living around blacks is also expensive. The DC budget costs $25,000 for every man, woman and child. In most white US cities it's about $5,000 per capita. The subway system is losing riders because of unruly black "students" (who pay no fare) assaulting ultra-liberal whites. Plus, the black-run subway (Metro) union accuses white managers of racism if they discipline them, and files lawsuits for racism because they don't discipline them! And, because black people are sacred to liberals, the white establishment cannot address the underlying problems because in order to do so would offend blacks. And that is the worst thing ever. The sad fact is, Colin, blacks destroy every institution they manage to infiltrate. And then blame whitey. And virtue signaling feminists and feminized men then pretend it's because of racism. Blacks are the favorite weapon used by feminists and their simping male or tranny cohorts to destroy the West. Unfortunately, they are a weapon that attacks in any direction and the idiots who live around them in places like DC pay the price. Taylor, for all his faults, is merely pointing out the obvious.
ReplyDeleteMy main problem with Taylorism is that there is very obviously significant inter-mixing between Whites and "Hart-Cellar-Americans", namely Asians and Hispanics. This does not have to mean outright intermarriage, but could also mean social integration--going to the same churches, living in the same neighborhoods, etc. This obviously parallels what happened between Anglos and white ethnics earlier in American history. This process of ethnogenesis does not happen overnight, but it is certainly occurring. Underclass Blacks remain highly segregated. Some immigrant groups may remain segregated into the future (religious Muslims, Mexicans in Spanish speaking areas on the border). But otherwise the average white American is not a white nationalist and certainly doesn't act like one--more like an "underclass Black avoider". I see no reason why, as the country becomes less white, whites will "awaken" and become racial separatists who conceive of themselves as having group interests. Due to ethnogenesis, they will instead be more likely to conceive of their "tribe" as including certain nonwhites who they are socially integrated with. This is a gradual thing and will happen over the course of several generations. This makes white nationalism DOA as a political movement.
ReplyDeleteOne can argue for reduced immigration or rolling back civil rights laws without advocating for white identity or racial heritidaritarism. The Claremont Institute is considered a relatively safe "Trumpist" publication and regularly does this. Mark Kirkorian of the CSIS spoke at that National Conservatism conference alongside sitting US Senators and advocating for reducing legal immigration by 2/3rds. This makes Taylor kind of redundant. He is sandwiched between anti-social nutcases to his right and people to his left who are less toxic but advocate for substantially the same policies.