Veritas Doesn’t Wear Crimson

The delta between a heroin-addicted antifa and a Harvard professor is the breadth of their vocabulary. All other intellectual and emotional contours remain congruent. I believe that characterization is more true than not, which is an appreciably higher standard of fidelity than most on the Harvard faculty would attempt to achieve. Let me give you an example.

Today I was reading the twitter feed of Anti-Gnostic, who is an intelligent and measured mainstay of the dissident right, and also a far more fair and reasonable interlocutor than any leftist deserves. In this instance I noticed he responded to a tweet from a Harvard Sociology professor, whose feed was encrusted with the same anti-Trump hysterics as any highly intelligent Hollywood starlet. The professor was opining on the allegedly enduring appeal of ethno-nationalism to white Americans, which he presumably views as abhorrent as long as they’re white. In the course of which, AG offered the blandly indisputable observation that…


Ethno-nationalism has broad appeal among practically all ethnicities.

Though being indisputable doesn’t mean a liberal won’t dispute it. Particularly when disputing is in service to a useful narrative. So the professor responded…

That’s not the case. Much lower prevalence among non-whites in white-majority countries (not surprisingly).

Ethno-nationalism is unsurprisingly much lower among non-whites? For someone who lives in a matrix of men rather than models, that was a surprising assertion indeed. Because if the professor is actually eating his baloney, it is a remarkable concession of failure. Society, that is to say wholly liberalized society, has cooked white racial solidarity in a crock-pot for generations. The anti-racial/nationalist apparatus could fairly be considered the country’s most carefully cultivated industry. From a child’s first reception at their government school to an adult’s corporate retirement, the indoctrination is unrelenting, and punishment for deviation unforgiving. A white person can not even express a concern for his people’s mere continued presence without vain and boisterous clucking followed typically by imminent unemployment. Despite the ceaseless investment and maintenance in this vast machinery, we are now advised it has not nearly the effect we had all feared. What a relief.

And that’s not the only good news. Non-whites also are apparently inoculated against the best efforts of prog professors. As whites are meticulously shorn of their heritage and identity, non-whites have theirs nurtured as if they were artisanal tulip bulbs. Movies, music, media, and academia collude in a great copulation to birth both a sense of superior separateness in non-whites as well as a mindset of entitlement and resentment toward the people whose taxes keep them complaining obesely. Yet all this effort is wasted as we are told ethno-nationalism is of much lower prevalence in this cohort. You really just can’t find any black people interested in their blackness.

All of which represents such risible bullshit that one can only speculate as to what conceivable data they tortured on the rack to substantiate it. We may actually be able to do more than speculate. This research may be the source of his nationalist assertions. The primary question of which to me was: how does one define (malign) nationalism so as to make racially deracinated whites more of it? The answer is embarrassing. What follows is the foundational survey.

How close do you feel to . . . America

Some people say the following things are important for being truly American. Others say they are not important. How important do you think each of the following is?
To have been born in America
To be a Christian
To have American citizenship
To be able to speak English
To feel American
To respect America’s political institutions and laws
To have lived in America for most of one’s life

How proud are you of America in each of the following?
Its achievements in the arts and literature
The way democracy works
America’s economic achievements
Its fair and equal treatment of all groups in society
Its history
America’s armed forces
Its political influence in the world
Its scientific and technological achievements Its achievements in sports
Its social security system

How much do you agree or disagree with the following statements?
Generally speaking, America is a better country than most other countries
I would rather be a citizen of America than of any other country in the world
The world would be a better place if people from other countries were more like the Americans
People should support their country even if their country is in the wrong
There are some things about America today that make me feel ashamed of America

These are all under Table 1 Nationalism Measures

So if fondly disposed toward America, you are an “ardent” nationalist (as explained on page 10/35). Conversely, if one dislikes America very much, as for instance with the black panthers, that person is completely devoid of ethno-nationalist sentiment. Similarly, Netanyahu would certainly be an ardent nationalist in Tel Aviv, but quite likely an anti-nationalist in Budapest—his entire philosophy and persona shifting with the topography. Because how do you feel about Israel? is a different question than how do you feel about Hungary?

The premise being that you can’t be a nationalist if you want to replace someone else’s nation (that you don’t like) with your own (that you do). And thus intensely tribal Arab Muslims in Marseille who are completely indifferent to French achievements are thus not intensely tribal at all. The fact that they don’t care whether a word of French is ever spoken in that country again makes this clear. Obviously the Mongol Khans would have also scored very low on Nationalism Measures when queried in foreign bivouacs.

As for myself, Mexican history means nothing to me. So when asked over many drinks in Cancun if I harbored nationalist tendencies I answered honestly as per the professor’s template: Not even slightly! Shockingly to Harvard faculty, there are very few nationalists for another man’s nation.

In any event, this Ivy League lecturer subsequently concluded that whites (particularly whites from the South, whom Harvard has proven on multiple occasions are the worst whites of all) are the most nationalist, with Republicans obviously more egregious offenders than democrats. Hispanics were the next most nationalist/liked America racial group, followed by blacks, and then “others,” who do not care for America at all except for where they beg to live. Thus we may be relieved to know they have no competing tribal inclinations whatsoever.

I hope this lesson has been edifying. As our motto says here at Harvard: Veritas.

Advertisements

12 thoughts on “Veritas Doesn’t Wear Crimson

  1. Pingback: Veritas Doesn’t Wear Crimson | Reaction Times

  2. The focus of sociology on opinion surveys is off to begin with.

    A respected science based not just on people’s feelings, but on how they answer surveys. What could go wrong?

    If sociology were really the study of the health of peoples and societies, it would find more reliable metrics than opinion surveys.

    Such as birth weight and dick status.

    What are the effects of a multiracial living arrangement on the health of newborn babies as measured in their prevalence and size?

    • “but on how they answer surveys. What could go wrong?”

      Yes, and to expand on that further, you can get a survey to say just about anything you want by being very selective about who, exactly, you give the survey to. Its all about the sample of the population. And, since most people don’t question anything they are told by a so-called ‘expert’, not 1 in 20 people will bother to look into it deep enough to figure out such things. Were I so inclined, I could look up pedophiles in my county and ask them if sex with children is OK, and then report back that “a majority of Americans now say sex with children is acceptable”.

      We certainly saw a good example of this in late 2016, when the media reported on polls that, upon further inspection, said nothing other than a majority of democrats planned to vote for clinton. Skew the sample in the direction you desire, and any outcome is possible.

  3. Maybe someone will post in the professor’s twitter thread the above conclusion:

    It is not sound reasoning, to determine rates of ethnic nationalism based on people’s reported feelings about their country, when questioned concept of said country contains no reference to their ethnic group.

  4. ” The anti-racial/nationalist apparatus could fairly be considered the country’s most carefully cultivated industry. From a child’s first reception at their government school to an adult’s corporate retirement, the indoctrination is unrelenting, and punishment for deviation unforgiving. A white person can not even express a concern for his people’s mere continued presence without vain and boisterous clucking followed typically by imminent unemployment. Despite the ceaseless investment and maintenance in this vast machinery, we are now advised it has not nearly the effect we had all feared. What a relief.”

    I’m far from the first to notice it, but all Western nation-states are and have been theocracies for quite some time. The USA, directly contrary to the First Amendment, absolutely has an established State Church. Progressives (nominally Christians, mostly protestants, Gnostic Heretics to a soul) saw to that no later than the War to Prevent Southern Secession. Onward Christian Soldiers, indeed.

    Just because the Christians dumped their bibles in favor of the printed lyrics from John Lennon’s “Imagine,” it’s plain that social policy since the early 1960’s has been explicitly driven by Lennon’s lyrical catechism. When differences in opinion are quite literally deemed heresy, any potential development of deviant thought must be crushed as the spawn of Satan itself. The frothing-at-the-mouth ANTIFA clowns would be complete if only we could train them to scourge themselves with whips and insist that hair shirts are this year’s fashion statement.

    The Left is theology, not politics. Politics is downstream of religion, which is why debating “it” is worthless. For religion, one’s premises are not fact, they’re FAITH. Leftists’ can’t debate the economics of resource allocation under a socialist system (which axiomatically lacks market-based price calculation) because such concerns simply aren’t relevant to them (which is hilarious, given that we approach the hundred year anniversary of the publication of Mises’ irrefutable critique of socialism in his book by that title.)

    The Left is made up of lunatics, hopelessly hopeful idealists and fad-obsessed virtue signalers. The loons have been setting policy of late, and I think the Pathological Collective Trust that underlies the Debt Volcano, the Asset Price Jenga Tower, Open-borders silliness and even trusting the state to define what is a man and what is a woman has reached its apogee zone. It seems plausible that the helix that is historical impulsion turned so far left that there’s no left to go…and all roads that aren’t Left are, by definition, Right.

    PS: This is why Trump baffles them. They expect a coherent Rightist alternative to their Leftism…but when Leftism was focused down to a tiny cone of fucking lunacy, the rest of the sphere of possible political thought is broad…mutually contradictory, inherently chaotic, and ALL OF IT IS RIGHT of the that LEFT-Lunatic Cone. The future is not coherent; it is chaos, disorder and disintegration of that which is large into ever-smaller constituent parts. Look to Washington DC’s importance to wane, wane, wane.

      • enjoyed very much. but I think a little optimistic. Deter sees the puppet strings. Or whatever metaphor. There are a lot of people that are being influenced/driven/paid to vote by the lunatic supporters. and those people do not or do not want to see the strings. they have 30 second attention spans. It’s dangerous to assume these people see the world as we do. the same mechanisms that put DJT in the almost ridiculous but so sweet role that he is in, could turn out to work against what we believe should be a logical course for sustaining our cultural or maybe literal existence. In 2016, the common folk demonstrated that the masses have power. Works both ways. Education and Motivation are the keys.

  5. Pingback: K Blog: Nationalism Through Crimson Eyes | Western Rifle Shooters Association

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )

Connecting to %s