Two days ago on November 26, James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal made an admission in the paper’s editorial page that by mainstream conservative standards is rather shocking (HT: Steve Sailer):
During Obama’s first term, the demonization of the “white male” was common among left-liberal commentators, especially MSNBC types. The Post has now lent its considerably more mainstream institutional voice to this form of bigotry.
This seems likely to weaken the taboo against white identity politics. Whites who are not old enough to remember the pre-civil-rights era–Rep. Duncan, for instance, was born in 1966–have every reason to feel aggrieved by being targeted in this way.
This statement is shocking because mainstream conservative outlets such as the Wall Street Journal, Weekly Standard, and National Review (Mark Krikorian and Mark Steyn notwithstanding) simply don’t tackle the central importance of race and immigration in American society. To the extent that they do, those issues aren’t half as important to them as taxes, spending, and regulations. Or, as alternative conservative sites like VDARE like to call it, “economism.”
In some cases, mainstream conservative outlets are outright hostile to their conservative readers on the issues of race and immigration. Right after Barack Obama was reelected, National Review ran a horrendous anti-American article that was torn apart on VDARE. Hell, on August 28 of this year, the Wall Street Journal editorial board smeared the GOP position on immigration as “cranky, crabbed, and outdated.” The WSJ is evidently oblivious to the fact that the Republican Party fully supports legal immigration, doesn’t want to forcibly deport illegals, and doesn’t care that this country’s immigration system has successfully elected a new people.
Nonetheless, the WSJ went ahead and published Taranto’s accurate, scathing column in which he blasts the left wing media and progressivism in general for its toxic anti-white hatred. The argument Taranto makes about the weakening taboo of white identity politics is especially piercing. For 50 years now, white Americans have embraced colorblindness as their go-to approach for race relations. This is particularly true with conservatives, who want nothing to do with race and often make themselves blue in the face arguing that conservatives don’t care about race. Talk radio hosts from Mark Levin to Gary McNamara of Red Eye Radio have all done this in recent weeks.
Yet, for all these efforts and for all the olive branches, as far as the left is concerned, colorblindness might as well be a Ku Klux Klan rally (or perhaps a Nazi rally. Swastikas and white hooded hats are synonymous in the minds of liberals). Progressives demand nothing less then unconditional surrender. They aren’t interested in compromise or the good of the nation. They have no intentions whatsoever of arguing in good faith. Moreover, their ideology is fundamentally anti-white. To them, a racist can’t be a non-white person. Whites and only whites can be racist.
It is high time the entire conservative media establishment attacks the left’s anti-white bigotry head on like Taranto did. It is no longer sufficient to appeal to principles alone – or as the Heritage Foundation calls them, first principles. To rephrase the late great Russell Kirk, those principles can only exist within the framework of a particular people in a particular culture at a particular time. Trying to apply those principles outside that framework is akin to preaching to an atheist that Jesus is his Lord and Savior.
It is impossible to sell limited government and lower taxes to a people who see the government as their sugar daddy. It is impossible to sell the Constitution to a people who firmly believe it was written by old white racist slaveholders from a wicked, bygone era of “genocide.” It is impossible to sell hard work and ingenuity to a people who are wedded to hysterical notions of egalitarianism and social justice. It is impossible to sell traditional family values to a people who equate freedom with lascivious anarchy. (Hell, one of the reasons Ron Paul has so many loyal followers is because he promises illicit drugs to all the hippies).
30 years ago, conservative principles got Ronald Reagan elected in two landslides. 30 years ago, Reagan won 56 percent of the white vote. Mitt Romney won 59 percent of the white vote and lost anyway. The principles haven’t changed. The people have. The principles are as morally justified now as they’ve ever been. The people no longer embrace those principles because they aren’t the same people that put Reagan into office. As Peter Brimelow and the patriots at VDARE have been arguing for 20 years, the 1965 immigration law successfully elected a new people – and it will only continue to do so every single year until whites become an irrelevant minority.
As a result of America’s racial balkanization, which was signified by the reelection of Barack Obama, the natives are growing restless – hence the secession petitions in all 50 states. It matters not in this context that secession isn’t the wisest course of action, because the sentiments that are springing those petitions must be recognized and cultivated if conservatism is to survive – and by extension, if America is to remain a prosperous first world nation. Conservative media outlets must publish more articles like Taranto’s. They must tap the completely justified angst that America is becoming a foreign nation from within.
But will they?
If VDARE and other alternative conservative outlets are correct, probably not. Patriots like Krikorian and Steyn aren’t long for a world where John Derbyshire gets thrown under the bus by milquetoasts like Rich Lowry. Taranto may yet feel the wrath from a Wall Street Journal editorial board that is fully invested in open border invasion. Some “conservatives,” like Bill Kristol, are just wolves in sheep’s clothing – and increasingly conspicuous clothing at that. But for the most part, the reason conservative media outlets likely won’t follow Taranto’s lead is because of the interests of a third party that is also targeted with torches and pitchforks by progressivism. That third party is corporations.
To make a long story short, corporations benefit from cheap labor. As such, any organization or think tank they fund is unlikely to support patriotic immigration reform. Corporations also benefit from keeping angry consumers off their back, so they don’t want to say or do anything that might cause a backlash that will hurt their pocketbook in the short term and cause the next quarterly statement to scare their shareholders. Even the two biggest corporate demons in the minds of progressives – the Koch Brothers – aren’t stuffing the coffers of VDARE, NumbersUSA, the American Third Position party, etc.
As a result of corporate indifference to white Americans on race and immigration – and in some cases, such as the 68 Fortune 500 companies who support affirmative action, straight up opposition – the likes of VDARE adapt an explicitly anti-corporate mindset, which in turn is interpreted as an anti-capitalist mindset by mainstream conservatives. The resulting schism causes conservatism to spin its wheels helplessly as progressivism inexorably marches onward, spewing contemptible garbage at both whites and corporations alike. Throw in the influence of phony conservatives like Kristol and you have a recipe for a glorious mess where the side that wins is the side on a seek-and-destroy mission (IE, Progressivism).
James Taranto deserves credit for having the guts to stand up for white Americans. Whether the conservative media establishment follows suit depends on whether or not their financial backers finally realize that selling the rope on Friday is a dumb idea when they’re just going to be hanged with it on Sunday.