The Talk

Readers will recall the infamous titular column from John Derbyshire. It was a conservative’s response to the identically termed speech that black parents reportedly convey to their offspring with open alacrity. It’s not racism. But rather sound parenting for young blacks to absorb and mitigate the risks of interacting with predatory whites. The talk ostensibly keeps teens alive to keep teening, and thus the virtue of its content is self-evident.

This in contrast with Derbyshire’s baleful version, which helped keep no blacks alive whatsoever in either intention or effect. In fact, his talk not only didn’t aid blacks, but actually injured the feelings of all those whom we can number as his regular readers. Imagine the reverse: you clicking on an article in Salon and reading to its conclusion without seeing a single uplifting sentiment about whites. Those capable of empathy will thus understand the resultant liberal teeth gnashing, and why The Derb had to be kicked to the curb. You just can’t have other-than-black racism in a respectable magazine. This wasn’t the New York Times.

Speaking of which, I had initially intended these ruminations to focus on a piece from that publication. It was an editorial lauding Obama’s recent peremptory update to HUD rules that will see the insertion of black section 8 housing into white middle and upper class neighborhoods. Why whites would form a government that shears them of wealth to subsidize the assiduous ransacking of their habitats is a question I have never had answered to my satisfaction–or at all, upon reflection. Though the NYT editorial board offered a more sanguine perspective: It is absolutely right and proper for hat EBT card-in-hand public charges to live in neighborhoods that are unaffordable for their taxpaying prole peers. If you want to start movin on up you better start movin on down the unemployment line. Because toiling in a typical blue coller job won’t put D’ontavious at a posh address. And that’s just wrong.

Of course by identical logic it is also wrong that Arthur Sulzberger gets to run the NYT exclusively, rather than share the helm with a committee of black hebrew israelites. You will also notice a dearth of 8″ advertisements on page two for local black NYC nail salons. Why these businesses don’t reside prominently in prime paper real estate is another form of hardly veiled segregation. Finally, has management there begun a program of wholesale daily paper giveaways in the ghetto? If not, why? Are they implying blacks should be required to pay for a Times subscription if they want to read it? It’s fascinating how liberalism grows stronger with distance from the liberal. And never so weak as when standing in his own shoes.

But you will be heartened to learn that’s not at all what I’m going to write about. Instead a quiz. I’ll paste some snippets from a piece and you attempt to guess the source publication and political movement.

blond-haired, blue-eyed fantasyland

longstanding love affair with the nations of northern Europe

ethnically homogeneous, overwhelmingly white, hostile to immigration, nationalistic, and frankly racist

brutish white supremacists and knuckle-dragging anti-Semites

an oddball cult of whiteness

metaphysically blond utopia

familiar Buchananite noises about the peril of cheap foreign labor

familiar xenophobia…about Asians and Latin Americans “stealing our jobs.”

Middle Eastern people seem destined to take the eternal brunt of American economic stupidity: It used to be the scheming Jewish bankers, now it’s the nefarious awful Arabs

economic xenophobia and ordinary xenophobia always end up colliding.

Do you guess Huffpost? Gawker? Buzzfeed? The Nation? Raw Story? No.

Readers, I give you the staunch movement conservatism of National Review. The entire piece is remarkable, not in its prosaic passion for Overton Conservatism, but in its desperation to actually get left of the window. The author is attempting to feebly troll the left by tying socialism to white nordic countries. His thrust is a jejune hey liberals, ever noticed how white European social democracies are…hmmmm? Though the natural progession of this query is abruptly truncated in favor of a subsequent SETI transmission saying liberals are closet white supremacists who don’t appreciate raceless widget capitalism. This is said sans the telltale drip of irony. He actually means it: socialism fails because it fails diversity. Look upon contemporary conservatism, ye mighty.

nationalism and racism, are based on appeals to solidarity — solidarity that is enforced at gunpoint, if necessary

Only an admirably crafty man can extract payment for producing statements this obtuse. Solidarity occurs organically among like kind. And it requires the law’s implied threat of violence to prevent its wholesale occurrence, not laughably to enforce it. Do we force mestizos into coalescing around La Raza? Do Amish yearn for life among LA crips, but are corralled into their bucolic communities by armed intervention? Do liberals ferret out Good Schools and pantpooping websites with the nose of bloodhounds because they despise social solidarity with others like themselves? Sentences such as that quoted are normally unerring indications that a writer should have been something more honestly worthless, such as a sociology Phd.

It is, rather, an exclusionary solidarity, a superstitious notion that understands “body politic” not as a mere figure of speech but as a substantive description of the state and the people as a unitary organism, the health of which is of such paramount importance that individual rights — property, freedom of movement, freedom of speech, freedom of association — must be curtailed or eliminated when they are perceived to be insalubrious.

If the nation is an organism, it’s no surprise to find Donald Trump describing foreigners as an infection.

Of course the nation is an organism. In the same metaphorical sense that Kevin Williamson’s likely less-robotic family is an organism. It’s as if once a man’s mind is lost to counting labor units, all chords of humanity are frayed. And yes solidarity is as exclusionary as a mother’s love for her own children. Just as in loyalty, solidarity with everyone is solidarity with none.

Though I am again impressed at his ability to misdiagnose the modern western curtailing of freedoms, such as to speech and association. Poor liberals can’t even offer a political opinion sotto voce without a pitiless nationalist employer terminating them summarily. And obviously the alt-right stands firmly opposed to freedom of association. Does Williamson think nationalists drafted those new HUD regulations?

Solidarity, as it turns out, is not evenly distributed, nor is it color-blind.

Yes, I was just mentioning this.

The Swedes, the Swiss, and the Germans often are in direct competition with key American industries, but there is never any talk about the Swedes “stealing our jobs.”

Can any readers articulate why we succumb to the hypocrisy of not blaming the Swiss for America’s occupational filching?

the socialism presented to the voters by Barack Obama, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Donald Trump, etc., is nationalistic and xenophobic

Obama, Warren, and Sanders are nationalist xenophobes. Obviously this man would be in a sanitarium in less forgiving times.

The nastier of Europe’s anti-immigrant and ethno-nationalist movements argue that ethnic solidarity is necessary to preserve the welfare state.

Correct again. I am no more inclined to sacrifice my family’s (and nation’s) finite income for the upkeep and propagation of hostile aliens than they are to me. This is why there are such things as separate countries.

The four-figure comment thread–of which I only read a fraction–featured some scattered dissidents making many of the points familiar to readers here. Though these were largely mumbled down by incantations of racism and well trod apologetics for every failed state. The majority opinion was that Scandinavians, and Europeans in general, possessed no native qualities that could account for their prosperity. But for the beating of ancient butterfly wings we would all reside in the bounteous and beneficent imperium of Shaka Magumbu.

There is almost a temptation toward sympathy for these wretched valets. They have so wholly internalized the left’s racis ploy that days are now spent in full gallop to tilt at its every perceived manifestation. They’re like trained seals fetching racist balls for an empty stadium. So set to task they don’t even seem aware of for whom or what they are performing. It’s all excruciating to watch. And so you’ll suffer no more of it here tonight.

That’s my talk.

14 thoughts on “The Talk

  1. Old Derbs “The Talk” article was my first step into nationalist racialism from basic bitch conservatism (thanks TRS!) When they fired him I started reading TakiMag and eventually went down the rabbit hole of race realism until I found myself in the darkest spider-webbed corners of the internets, such as this one.

    Still, lets be fair. NR provides occasional comedic relief.

  2. That’s been a ploy of tamed Republicans for some time now, saying the left are the real racists. They remind us that the segregationists in the South were Democrats, that’s Nazism was National Socialism, etc.

  3. Williamson must’ve seen the writing on the wall with Steorts in charge and is now publishing garbage to keep his job. This seems very uncharacteristic of him.

    • It’s actually weird. Incoherent. He starts out saying that socialism works in Nordic countries because they’re populated by Nordic people, then goes completely off the rails and loses the plot. Do you suppose that was actually some kind of distress signal in code? “Help, I’m being held prisoner in a looney bin”?

      • He’s actually trying to get in front of the left. Anything white is despicable–including his own family by extension.

        One of the commenters at the piece claimed that NR readers remained racist despite Williamson’s exertions because they vote out of alignment with non-whites. Like Williamson, he was serious.

  4. I wonder when these guys are going to reach peak grovel, when it dawns on them that no matter what they say, liberals and non-whites will still despise them.

  5. I had no difficulty identifying the source as National Review. The Overton window at NR is *far* to the left of that at The Atlantic, where I can comment freely (except on Tennisee Coates’s articles)..

    • LoLd at Tennessee Coates. It’s pretty impressive if you guessed right. Though to your point, mainstream con outlets like NRO do typically have the most restrictive speech.

      Nothing is more conservative than bounding ahead of the left.

      • I’m guessing those con sites don’t restrict comments from the Left? (I have to guess, as I don’t waste my time there.) One distinctive trait of conservatives and “conservatives” alike, is they relish a good tarbaby-fight, in which they can whoop their opponents with elbow-deep volleys of logic and reason.

  6. What a bunch of cucks.

    “Middle Eastern people seem destined to take the eternal brunt of American economic stupidity: It used to be the scheming Jewish bankers, now it’s the nefarious awful Arabs”

    This however is a plus for NRO. They never leave an opportunity to suck up to the ancients.

  7. Pingback: This Week in Reaction (2015/07/19) | The Reactivity Place

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s