Racial Consciousness in the 21st Century - White Identity

Jared Taylor has been a pro-white activist for years and he gives us many examples of how multi-racial societies do not work, especially for whites. The main hurdle is getting the word out about racial realities when the mainstream media will not cover it. I like David Duke better because he places more responsibility on Jews for this multi-racial society which is so anti-white. I think he is closer to the truth than Taylor. I conjecture that Taylor seeks to make an alliance with the Jews to start reversing the anti-white policies. That way he does not have to fight a powerful and wealthy ethnic group. It is like begging them to stop. Anyway, as they say, "Good luck with that. " I really do not know how whites could gain control of largely Jewish controlled media to put out a pro-white message enough times to reprogram people who feel uncomfortable thinking for themselves.

Taylor shows us that non-whites are intent on taking over this country and when they do, whites will not have enough numbers or political power to stop any injustices against them. Other races are practicing national socialism while a majority of whites practice altruism. That lack of even a defense from whites is surely a losing strategy in this old world where you have to fight for territory and power. Perhaps whites have gotten way too wimpy from soft living and idealistic fantasies that we can make racial differences and conflict go away by education and public spending. This country has swallowed the myth that whites are oppressors and that is the reason why non-whites do not do as well in life. Taylor's solution is that whites should regain their racial consciousness and identity and start acting to save their unique culture.

Scientific studies show that people tend to favor those who are genetically similar to themselves, even if they are not consciously aware of that. I think that we should start creating ethno states, instead of continuing more failed experiments with integration and diversity. The book is guaranteed to make you ANGRY at the many examples of how ungrateful and hostile non-whites have become towards whites after whites have done so much to accommodate them. Another vexation is this society's refusal to defend white interests. Hopefully, the anger will motivate whites towards constructive activism.

Wenn US-Präsident Obama heute aus den Reihen der schwarzen Minderheit des Landes kritisiert wird, dann dafür, daß seine Politik nicht schwarz genug ist. Wenn mexikanischstämmige Abgeordnete, Senatoren oder Bürgermeister mit Attacken seitens (legal oder illegal) zugewanderter Latinos konfrontiert werden, dann deshalb, weil sie deren Interessen nicht nachdrücklich genug vertreten. Selbst die Immigranten aus Asien erkennen nach und nach, daß sich mit Initiativen zu Lasten der weißen Mehrheit materielle Vorteile erringen lassen. Den Grund dafür ortet Jared Taylor, Philosoph, Ökonom und Autor des vorliegenden Buches, im ausgeprägten Rassenbewusstsein dieser Bevölkerungsgruppen. Ein Rassenbewusstsein, das eine erst seit den 1960er-Jahren betriebene, auf Integration und Förderung von Minderheiten gerichtete Regierungspolitik der weißen Mehrheit im Lande gründlich ausgetrieben hat.

Rassenbewußtsein zu zeigen, ist in den USA heute jedermann erlaubt - so lange er nicht weiß ist. 95% der Schwarzen im Lande haben Barack Obama zum Präsidenten gewählt. Die überwiegende Mehrheit davon ausschließlich seiner Hautfarbe wegen. Niemand kommt auf die Idee, sie deshalb des Rassismus' zu zeihen. Würde dagegen ein Weißer sein Entscheidung für John Mc Cain mit dessen Hautfarbe begründen, stünde das Urteil sofort fest: Ein ewiggestriger Rassist. Nur in einer einzigen Sache wird den Weißen kollektives Bewusstsein zugestanden: wenn es um deren unauslöschliche Schuld geht - ihre vor Ewigkeiten an schwarzen Sklaven begangene Verbrechen...

Taylor untersucht den Mythos der multiethnischen Integration, die von den (linken) Eliten als Identität stiftendes Merkmal und Grund für die Stärke der Nation gefeiert wird und kommt zu einem ernüchternden Befund: Die USA wurden als Staat von Weißen für Weiße gegründet. Selbst der (fälschlich) zum Sklavenbefreier stilisierte Präsident Lincoln verschwendete keinen Gedanken an eine Integration oder Gleichstellung der Schwarzen. Vielmehr empfing er anno 1862 - nicht lange nach Ausbruch des Bürgerkriegs - als erster US-Präsident eine schwarze Delegation, um mir ihr über die Aussiedlung befreiter Negersklaven zu verhandeln.

Ein (positiver) Beitrag zugewanderter, nichtweißer Minderheiten (gleich welcher Hautfarbe) zum Fortschritt der Nation ist schwer zu finden. Im Gegenteil - der größte Teil aller Probleme, mit denen die Vereinigten Staaten heute intern zu kämpfen haben, hat mit der schwarzen, rund 13 Prozent starken Minderheit und mit der durch die seit den 1960er- Jahren explodierenden Zuwanderung von Latinos (die mittlerweile rund 18 Prozent der Bevölkerung stellen) zu tun. Wäre ein bunter Bevölkerungsmix, wie von den Progressiven rund um den Globus ebenso unermüdlich wie unwidersprochen behauptet, tatsächlich vorteilhaft, müssten Staaten wie der Libanon, Jugoslawien oder Afghanistan Erfolgsmodelle darstellen. Das Gegenteil ist der Fall. Stattdessen schreiben homogene, reinrassige" Staaten wie Japan, Taiwan oder Korea Erfolgsgeschichten. Das sollte auch nicht weiter verwundern, denn rassistisch motivierte Hate Crimes", affirmative Actions" oder Zerwürfnisse um ethnisch gerechte" Quotenbesetzungen für Führungsfunktionen sind dort unbekannt. Alle damit verbundenen Reibungsverluste ebenso.

Taylor stellt die berechtigte Frage: Wenn die Nichtweißen damit fortfahren, ihre rassenbasierten Interessen auszubauen, ist es dann klug, wenn die Weißen weiterhin so agieren als ob sie keine hätten?" Sein Buch versteht er als Den Versuch, Rassenbeziehungen zu verstehen wie sie sind und nicht, wie wir uns wünschen würden, daß sie sein sollten."

Daß Wikipedia ihn als White Supremacist" denunziert und als Stichwortgeber des KKK darstellt, überrascht nicht. Gegen seine - passagenweise etwas ermüdende - Präsentation von Zahlen und Fakten, weiß der Meinungshauptstrom eben kein anderes Mittel ins Treffen zu führen, als die Rassismuskeule.

Der Autor weist akribisch (mit hunderten von Quellenverweisen) nach, daß die Vorstellung einer zum gemeinsamen Vorteil gereichenden, multikulturellen Gesellschaft nichts weiter ist, als eine Illusion. Ethnische Inhomogenität bringt Spannungen und Probleme, keine gegenseitige Befruchtung". Gleich und gleich gesellt sich eben gern. Nie waren die einzelnen ethnischen Gruppen in den USA durch tiefere Gräben getrennt als heute. Noch jeder Versuch einer von den politischen Eliten gewünschten, zum Teil mit robusten Mitteln vorangetriebenen Rassenmischung, ist gescheitert. Allein die Hauptkampflinie" hat sich deutlich verschoben: Rassenunruhen entzünden sich heute nicht mehr bevorzugt zwischen schwarz und weiß, sondern meist zwischen der etablierten schwarzen und der (durch massenhafte illegale Einwanderung) progressiv wachsenden, lateinischen Minderheit. Bürgerkriegsähnliche Zustände in den von mexikanischstämmiger Zuwanderung besonders stark heimgesuchten Bundesstaaten (wie Kalifornien, New Mexico und Texas), die nur durch massive Aufgebote von Eliteeinheiten der Polizei unter Kontrolle gehalten werden können, sind keine Seltenheit.

Ob in den Schulen, an den Arbeitsplätzen, in Öffentlichen Einrichtungen, ob beim Wohnen oder in der Kultur: von freiwilliger, von den Betroffenen selbst gewünschter Integration kann keine Rede sein. Wer nicht anders muß, bleibt bei seiner Gruppe. Je weniger Berührungslinien, desto weniger Gefahr von rassisch motivierten Konflikten. Keine Rede von der vorteilhaften Wirkung des einander besser Kennenlernens": je mehr man über die jeweils andere Gruppe weiß, desto größer deren Ablehnung. Daß die angeblich diskriminierten (in Wahrheit aber durch einschlägige Gesetze und Quotenregelungen zu Lasten der Weißen massiv bevorzugten) nichtweißen Minderheiten mittlerweile zu den lautstärksten Befürwortern rassenorientierter (d. h. antiweißer) Politik geworden sind, passt ins Bild.

Allen anderslautenden zeitgeistigen Behauptungen zum Trotz, sind die zum Schluß getroffenen Feststellungen des Autors, die auch für Europa von Bedeutung sind, bedenkenswert: "Die demographischen Kräfte die wir in Bewegung gesetzt haben, haben Bedingungen geschaffen, die inhärent instabil und potentiell gefährlich sind. Alle anderen Gruppen wachsen zahlenmäßig und verfügen über eine klare rassische Identität. Nur die Weißen haben kein rassische Identität, befinden sich permanent in der Defensive und auf dem Rückzug. Sie haben die Wahl: Wiedererlangung des Sinns für ihre Identität und die Entschlossenheit ihre Zahl zu erhalten, ihre Traditionen und ihre Art zu leben - oder in Vergessenheit zu geraten.

Für jene Europäer, die sich unentwegt vor einer weiter zunehmenden Übermacht der USA ängstigen, eine möglicherweise trostreiche Lektüre. In Wahrheit aber eine erschreckende Bestandsaufnahme, die, nach ihrer notwendigen Anpassung, 1:1 auch auf die Alte Welt anzuwenden ist. Die westliche, weiße Kultur scheint ihre Zukunft hinter sich zu haben...

Jared is awesome. To say I was skeptical would be an unerstatement. Regardless of your political ideology there are many facts contained in this book that anyone with an open mind would be interesting.

Madison Grant was right. Lothrop Stoddard was right. Jared Taylor is right. I am reminded of a once-famous sculpture titled The End of the Trail. It shows a dejected Indian sitting on a dejected horse. The White race is now at the same point as that Indian. Oh, I forgot! I meant, Native American.

The essence of race realism. Combining insights of the best sociologists, economists, historians and evolutionary biologists, Taylor grasps why despite the best of intentions to "make it work," multiculturalism in one nation is an idea that CANNOT work. It's time to scrap the grand ongoing experiment that since its launch in the 1960s has caused the Western world so much woe.

Got a signed copy. This is an incredibly useful, well researched book. It will help you firm up what you already know to be the truth by your own experience. Your insights and opinions will now be supported by FACTS. Jared Taylor has done us all a great service by helping us to construct a foundation of truth for our opinions.

This is a must read for any self respecting person that's not ashamed of being white, and is tired of footing the bill for all those that would just as soon see us disappear in the name of "diversity." We're brainwashed into believing it's perfectly acceptable for other races to show pride in their ethnicity or nationality; but it's sacrilege for a white to show the same pride in their heritage.

This book proves, beyond any possible doubt, that diversity is a massive weakness, not a strenght. However, the title is a bit of a misnomer, since it doesn't really talk about white identity - it talks the myriad ways in which diversity poisons a society.

First off, let me begin by saying that neither this book nor the author advocates racism or racist views. Having received the book just days ago, I am only a few chapters in; however, nowhere thus far have the words "white" or "supremacy" appeared in the same sentence, leaving me to believe that this trend will follow throughout the rest of the reading. Taylor's argument is not that whites are a superior race (or that such a race should even exist), but that the presence of foreign races under the same nation poses threats to ALL races; that diversity undermines ALL races, and that the current American paradigm of multiculturalism poses a threat to the existence of whites. If this were not the truth, then my black roommate would not agree with the book's thesis.

Contrary to the book's title, when reading White Identity, it becomes clear that Taylor intended for the book's thesis to find relevance in all races and cultures within America and even around the globe. The book is carefully written with the best of intentions, making it very hard for even the skeptic liberal to disagree with the book's most controversial moments. I present this book with highest recommendations.

This book was advertised to me while I was reading a Washington Post article. I clicked on it because I thought it would deal with racist White identity politics. Instead, this book ENDORSES racist white identity politics. I am very angry that this was advertised to me.

Jared Taylor's book white identity is an insightful read into the taboo topic of race relations in America. Mr. Taylor is direct, forward, and to the point, he lets the facts speak for themselves, and doesn't dress the content of his book up in the miasma of political correctness. Definitely buy this book.

I've been going through Jared Taylor's writings recently, and I just finished with the material in White Identity. Jared Taylor's argument is essentially that whites have interests, and the forces of political correctness prevent them from pursuing their interests. This is true only in the sense that they are not explicitly allowed to label their interests "white interests" or call their organizations "white" organizations. But almost every interest that he named is being pursued by mainstream organizations such as the Center for Equal Opportunity. Take affirmative action. In the 2012 case Fisher v. University of Texas, the Center for Equal Opportunity, along with the Pacific Legal Foundation, the American Civil Rights Institute, the National Association of Scholars, and Project 21 (the black conservative organization), filed an amicus brief supporting Fisher arguing that the Supreme Court should declare affirmative action unconstitutional.

What about housing discrimination? Those same organizations (plus the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Cato Institute, the Individual Rights Foundation, the Reason Foundation, and the Atlantic Legal Foundation) filed an amicus brief in favor of the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs arguing that the Supreme Court should declare disparate impact liability unconstitutional. English only education? The Center for Equal Opportunity has been encouraging this for years, and the English for the Kids ballot initiative (Proposition 227) in California was pushed by mainstream conservative Ron Unz, and he has been pushing similar initiatives in other states.

Worried about high levels of immigration? NumbersUSA, which explicitly disavows racism, has been by far the most effective grassroots restrictionist advocacy organization. The Center for Immigration Studies is a related organization that also argues against high levels of immigration without discussing race. Worried about violent crimes? There are dozens and dozens of organizations (such as the conservative think tank the Heritage Foundation) that push tough on crime laws to lock up violent criminals for long periods of time. These laws are very popular among politicians, and they pass without the need to resort to a racial appeal.

Churches and schools? Well, churches are voluntary organizations, so the government is not actively involved in requiring certain percentage of this or that in each congregation. As for schools, the Supreme Court severely limited the use of race in assigning students in its decision Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District Number One. If you're really that worried about interacting with racial minorities, you can move to states (and specific areas within those states) that are almost all white, and nobody is going to attack you personally just for living in such a city.

If you want to have "white pride" and teach your children "white history" and instill in them a "white identity," you are certainly legally allowed to do that. If done in the privacy of your home, you will not be fired from your job for it. But what if I do it on a college campus? Well, organizations such as the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education do a fantastic job defending First Amendment rights, and they help students who are targeted based on vague "speech codes" that prohibit "hate speech." In fact, they even published on how the decision to expel the University of Oklahoma students was almost certainly unconstitutional, yet they did it without invoking "white identity" or resorting to demeaning blacks or Hispanics.

Worried about "multiculturalism"? Organizations including the Center for Equal Opportunity (which denounces racism) have been working for assimilation for years, and various groups (including NumbersUSA) have done a pretty good job arguing that we need less immigration if we want full assimilation. Believe that there's a genetic basis for racial achievement gaps? Okay, there's no law against holding that belief and you are free to share it as you see fit. Of course, no one is required to agree with you either, so they meet criticize your statements about that topic, but you're still free to express yourself.

The point is that there is absolutely no need for him to run a white nationalist organization to push any of these issues. I am especially surprised that he chose this path given that he is Jewish by marriage to his partly Jewish wife Evelyn Rich (look up the surname Rich). He denies this publicly by saying that his wife is not Jewish, but he is referring to her religion, not her ethnicity. He probably knows that white nationalists have a history of being very hostile towards Jews, and many of them today deny that the Holocaust ever occurred. In fact, this is why he refuses to discuss religion publicly, as you can see in the video "Tim Wise vs. Jared Taylor - The Merits of Racial Diversity" @ 38:35. Jared extensively protects Jewish people from criticism (see below) because he knows many of the people who share his views on race are extremists. Considering that so many of his followers hate people like his wife, why does he continue to run an organization like this when there are mainstream alternatives to push "white interests"?

"The Jewish Question - Jared Taylor Vs. Brit" @ 4:20 (praising Jewish people for their contribution to white nationalism)
"Jared Taylor: The Jews? The Jews are fine by me" (saying Jewish people are just like white people)
"Jared Taylor Flees From The Jewish Question" on Northwest Front (suppressing discussion of the so-called "Jewish Question" because he knows his readers are largely anti-Semitic)
"The Birth Of American Renaissance" by Luke Ford (discussing the influence that being with Evelyn Rich has had on Jared Taylor)
"The Strange Case of Jared Taylor" on Malevolent Freedom (discussing how the Anti-Defamation League has influenced the views of Jared Taylor)
"Jared Taylor, Evelyn Rich, and American Renaissance" on Vanguard News Network Forum (discussing how closely American Renaissance works with Jewish people)

Jared Taylor is an effective propagandist- a genial Gobbels that serves up more of his trademark racialist claptrap in this book, likely pleasing to the echo-chamber of "the faithful" but easily debunked and exposed by anyone with a basic knowledge of history, science and social policy. There are 4 basic patterns characterize Taylor's claim: (a) distortion and half-truth, (b) the injured-innocence routine, (c) the posture of a brave, noble teller of truths persecuted by "politically correct" forces and (d) pervasive hypocrisy and double-standards.

The half-truth misrepresentation/ caricature means distorting the record of history and science, while piling on seemingly supportive data distortions. The air of injured innocence means painting a picture in which innocent virtuous white people are on one side, "persecuted" by unreasonable, pathological "minorities" on the other. A third tactic is to posture as a man of bravery and nobility, fearlessly "saying what no one else dare say", and "reporting on the facts" while allegedly being "unjustly" criticized by "politically correct" detractors. Finally a deep root of hypocrisy pervades Taylorism- if whites are under discussion- build them up as virtuous paragons of humanity, but paint blacks and other targeted minorities in as lurid and negative terms as possible, including pseudo-scientific claims that their alleged "defects" are inherent in their "evolutionary" makeup. Once these 4 basic patterns and/or tactics of the genial Gobbels is grasped, many of his claims fall apart like a bad hand of cards.

One fundamental point to grasp before examining some of Taylor's claims is that white people are already pursuing their own selfish interests, having been doing so since the founding of America and continue to do so. These days however a snarling racist face is just not good publicity. A more subtle, seemingly race-neutral web of control and co-optation does the job more effectively, without raising too detailed examination of other things. Token numbers of blacks can be hired for example, as a way of dismissing too much deep scrutiny and without exposing the deeply embedded systems of discrimination and favoritism whites have always used to benefit their own. "Affirmative Action" can be pinned as something negative on "the culluds" while quietly proceeding with self-serving policies ensuring that most "affirmative action" beneficiaries are white. White privilege, profit and self-service are well in hand. Why rock the boat with some sort of tedious "white power" campaign that will spark a draining counter-hostility and embarrassing scrutiny? "The Taylorites" as we shall see, simply have not gotten the memo... Hence they are a continuing embarrassment to most white people- like a curmudgeonly elderly relative that keeps farting at your dinner party. Now let's take a look at some of Taylor's arguments shall we..

2-- DIVERSITY OF RACE, LANGUAGE, RELIGION, ETC. IS NOT A STRENGTH FOR AMERICA BUT A SOURCE OF CHRONIC TENSION AND CONFLICT.

Diversity of race, language, religion etc is a source of tension EVERYWHERE ON EARTH not only in America. This is news? Some profound impartation of "knowledge" - received in an awed hush by "the faithful"? Yes there are tensions where such differences exist- just as there has been "tension" between an Irish minority trying to integrate or assimilate in Britain. We call this some sort of profound insight? "Tension" does not need non-white minorities to happen. In America diversity has also caused "tension" WHERE THERE ARE MOSTLY WHITE PEOPLE- just ask the white Irish and almost everyone else.

What Taylor conveniently skips over (he does a lot of convenient skipping), is that in many cases it is WHITE people who instigated, created and pushed tension, sometimes with murderous results, as the numerous lynchings, riots and mass murders against black, brown and yellow Americans attest. Taylor papers over how WHITE America is a supreme example of a force creating "tension" and "conflict." But see, only those troublesome cullud minorities are to blame in the simplistic racial fantasy world of the "Taylorites"...

4-- ONLY WHITES CONTINUE TO BELIEVE IN TRANSCENDING RACE AND TRY TO MAKE THE UNITED STATES A NATION IN WHICH RACE DOES NOT MATTER, AND ALL THE GOOD THINGS DONE BY WHITES ARE DISPARAGED BY THE CULLUDS.

Laughable nonsense that sets one on the floor rolling in mirth. In fact the main obstacle in United States to "transcending race" is white racism. It was white racism that put vicious violence in place for centuries, that erected the apartheid system of unjust Jim Crow barriers, and that continues in some more subtle ways using institutional levers to perpetuate certain patterns. As a result what has been created is a legacy of poisonous suspicion and resentment that will last for even more decades. To many, indeed most whites race does indeed matter, and Jared Taylor is one of the greatest hypocrites on this score- a race-monger par excellence who purports to be concerned about the issue of "transcending race"... One can only marvel at the sheer hypocrisy of Taylor- but then again he is working from the Gobbels playbook- where a huge exaggeration or bogus claim, if repeated long enough, will eventually be accepted by "the white faithful."

As for all the good things being done for the culluds, are they really being done for said "culluds" or is white self-interest the bottom line? "Southern heritage" types for example always like to point out the northern industrial hegemony factor in how the Civil War came about. Such is not the only reason for the abolition of slavery but it is a clear factor of white self-interest. Likewise it was in the interests of white America to give "the culluds" basic civil rights because its apartheid system was an embarrassing point of vulnerability in the Cold War competition with the Soviets. Minor concessions here and there also served white self-interest as a placating force that kept the natives quiet and avoided raising wider questions about discriminatory white privilege. White unions and corporations for example could fund a few minority programs, or incorporate some token employment while leaving their unearned privilege untouched, and unexamined in detail.

And Taylorites are indeed hypocritical speaking about the "good things" created by white people. When the whole record is examined whites were often reluctant to share any of said good things with "the culluds," and indeed fought hard NOT to.

5-- TAYLOR ARGUES THAT WHITES MUST EXERCISE THE SAME RIGHTS AS OTHER GROUPS--THAT THEY MUST BE UNAFRAID OF CONSIDERING THEIR OWN LEGITIMATE INTERESTS.

Anyone with a little knowledge of history and social policy will see through this claim for the rubbish it is. Who says that whites ever stopped exercising their rights "like other groups"? What plane of fantasy do "the Taylorites" live in? Who says whites ever stopped guarding their own selfish interests?

And who says whites are not asserting themselves numerically and culturally? Whites just don't want to be PERCEIVED as mean-spirited baddies. They want the mantle of goodness, virtue and justice. This is not necessarily new but is part of America's founding ethos- a sense of special virtue above and beyond the supposed cynicism and corruption of "Old Europe." But the bottom line of whites guarding their selfish interests has never ceased in America, and the cynicism and corruption of "Old Europe" found fertile ground in white America. Taylor well knows this but his method is to churn out a steady stream of bogus propaganda that the naïve "faithful" gratefully consume.

Anyone with a "realistic understanding of race" knows whites are busily protecting their privileges around the clock. It is in their interest these days to not present the snarling visage of the Nazi mass-murderer or southern lynch mob, or Irish race-rioter. It's just not good publicity. WW2's mass genocide was the final, naked exposure of white racism- the final bottom line of "racial reality"- although there was plenty of such exposure before. But the mass graves and crematories of the Shoah could not be buried in the back pages, or in backwood towns. Racists like Taylor have never ceased sympathizing with that reality, albeit in a "softer" Jim Crow form that celebrates the heyday of American apartheid system, and hopes for its modified continuance.

6--"DIVERSITY" AND "MULTICULTURAL" PROGRAMS SERVE TO MUZZLE WHITE EXPRESSION AND MAKE WHITES FEEL GUILTY.

Multicultural initiatives are not necessarily anti-white- in fact some have been very useful in creating a more accurate narrative of history and policy- much better than previous segregationist or "manifest destiny" propaganda in various places and school textbooks well into the 1960s. And "multicultural" initiatives have given more exposure and more accurate coverage of WHITE ethnics- a development conveniently missed by "the faithful." And other "diversity" initiatives have not really touched the core of white power or dominance. In fact whites have moved to profit from them- whether as "diversity" bureaucrats and functionaries.

And "multiculturalism" does not necessarily create "white guilt." To the contrary- some "multicultural" initiatives promote white self-esteem and self-congratulation. Whites feel noble for "progressive" measures that removed the Jim Crow apartheid system, and other measures to help blacks get a stake in the system, like opening up democracy via gasp- actually allowing black people to vote! Imagine that!

Another benefit of "multi-culturalism" to whites is that it allows restive minorities to be fobbed off with chump change- a small grant here, a "diversity coordinator" job there. "Beads for the natives" if you will.. This keeps them quiescent and ensures that more fundamental questions about the power structure, and the systematic networks of white privilege are not effectively raised. This is an old pattern going back to some of the "War on Poverty" OEO programs when small-potatoes grants, jobs and programs were dispersed, "cooling off" unrest and/or criticism of discriminatory white privilege. In some cases it even helped split minority coalitions into petty recipients squabbling with one another over petty funding that ultimately served as a more effective lever of control than snarling dogs, ranting racists and blasting firehoses.

And "Multicultural diversity" has opened up new opportunities for white people to get paid: including assorted funding and jobs for white coordinators, bureaucrats and miscellaneous processors of paper. Twenties (1920s) style marches in white hoods and robes are not needed for white people to enhance their control and profit. They are accomplishing the same by more subtle means- with a veneer of civility these days. Whites have figured out numerous ways to get paid using "multiculturalism."

There has been SOME "muti-culti" abuse, most notably by mostly "politically correct" WHITE lefty types on mostly WHITE college campuses. They deserve criticism and both whites and blacks have been doing that. More can always be done to curb excesses. But one thing glaringly missing from the blanket condemnation of "multiculturalism" is that in many cases it delivered a more accurate rendering of history (actually telling the truth oftimes- a slippery concept to Taylor and his cultists), and that truth is not all bad. It is a matter of record that the US did eventually move to clean up the abuses of its oppressive apartheid system, and such helped restore US credibility overseas to talk about democracy- an extremely important consideration in the face of a ruthless Cold War enemy. These are worthy accomplishments, accomplishments that would never have come to pass if the segregation-loving Taylorites had held the reins of power.

7--WHITE PEOPLE ARE BEING CRITICIZED UNFAIRLY BY MINORITIES AND ARE NOT ALLOWED TO SPEAK OUT

This is a key complaint of Taylor but like his other complaints it is full of distortion, half-truths, and outright dishonest propaganda. There are 5 reasons for this.

7A- IN MANY CASES, "THE COLOREDS" HAVE GOOD REASONS TO CRITICIZE WHITE PEOPLE. Think dear reader, think! Why would the coloreds criticize at all? Can you think of a reason? I KNEW, you could. Under the Taylorite propaganda barrage, the coloreds should be perfectly content and stop mentioning, oh say... slavery, lynchings, mass murdering riots and pogroms such as that against the Chinese in California, or blacks in the town of Rosewood, Florida etc, outright strong arm robbery and thuggery in seizing of Native American land in many cases, a long history of biased "justice" in the courts, and a century of oppressive apartheid otherwise known as Jim Crow. All these things done by white people have created a deep legacy of hurt and anger that will take multiple generations to erase, and they have produced damaging fallout that scarred and hurt millions of non-white lives. The generations deep fallout did not magically go away because white people signed the civil rights Act of 1964. White people poisoned the field, and reap the fruit of what they have sown. But see none of this counts. The coloreds should just be quiet- singing gentle songs of Old Virginny... And when white people like the white Irish criticize their British oppressors, well see that's OK. It's only when "the coloreds" do the same that it becomes a "problem" for Taylor and his followers.

7B- IN MANY CASES, BOTH WHITE AND NON-WHITE PEOPLE ARE DOING EXACTLY WHAT TAYLOR SAYS HE IS DOING, AND ADVOCATES DOING- "REPORTING THE FACTS". Taylor rails against what he sees as anti-white bias but much of his complaint is based on embarrassment by the truth being reported on white behavior. Taylor himself wastes no time in amassing negative statistics to on blacks for example, but hypocritically, is offended when statistics are gathered on whites. Yes there are relatively high levels of violence and criminality among SOME blacks- mostly young males, but there are likewise the same on whites- from the well documented violence, substance abuse and criminality of the white Irish, the similar high rates of violence among white southerners, to the violation of laws and protocols themselves put in place by white people- the mass violence and genocide of the Holocaust, or the mass murder of Stalin's collectivization push- the Holodomor. Why is it OK to report on blacks but not on whites? A persistent streak of hypocrisy and double standards runs throughout Taylorite propaganda.

7C- WHITE PEOPLE ARE NOT BEING "MUZZLED" BASED ON RACE. IN FACT THEY WASTE NO TIME EXPRESSING THEMSELVES IN THE MEDIA- INTERNET, BLOGS, BOOKS, WEB FORUMS, ETC, INCLUDING GIVING FREE REIN TO RACIST SENTIMENTS.

Has anyone checked the Internet recently? Seen the vast, snarling, sneering sea of anti-non-white prejudice (particularly anti-black prejudice) in countless venues- from discussion forums, to blogs to Youtube videos maintained by whites? What fantasy land do the Taylorites live in where white people are "not allowed" free expression? But then again it may not be fantasy for Taylor. He knows the above quite well, but his bogus propaganda method, like that of Gobbels before him, is to relentlessly distort what is actually going on. As Gobbels proved, lies can be established as "truth" with enough repetition.

And in older media like print books and magazine articles, white people have not been "muzzled" at all- contrary to the dishonest propaganda insisted on by Taylor and his cultists. The 1980s and 1970s for example saw a vast outpouring of books and articles against "political correctness" "liberals" and the pathologies afflicting blacks. Black crime, out of wedlock births, etc. etc. were, and have been well reported, and sneeringly commented on. None of it is "hidden" by "the media." In fact, credible scholars of "the media" have noted how it continually plays on white fears and double standards- showing whites engaged in similar activity as blacks in a more sympathetic or neutral light for example.

Time and time again, white media have seized on the most sensationalist black imagery to reinforce the image of the feckless, threatening, primitive negro-- like the bogus, but suitably lurid "stories" of "baby rapes" during 2005's Hurricane Katrina. Books like: Welfare: Race, Media, and the Politics of Antipoverty Policy. 2007. By Martin Gilens) and The Black Image in the White Mind: Media and Race in America, Robert M. Entman, ‎Andrew Rojecki - 2010 expose much of this detail. Blacks have received little special treatment from "the media"- to the contrary. All this continues today, in more muted and coded form than in the past, but still in place. Where is this mysterious "muzzling" of white people the Taylor cultists cry so piteously about?

And white right-wingers for decades have been milking anti-black sentiment among whites often using "coded" references and campaigns. Yes there was a "southern strategy" and it was based on race as detailed works on the Nixon era show. This is but one example. The "coded" references of the Reagan regime on a number of fronts are another example. White right-wingers hypocritically cry about how the "liberals" are playing race cards, when they themselves have been milking "race cards" about "the culluds" profitably for years. Tayor's bogus pose of injured innocence on this score is an all too typical pattern of his modus operandi.

In SOME venues, like white politically correct ones, and non-white ones as well, anti-white sentiments have been expressed. Sure. But is this some vast conspiracy by "the media" that is "muzzling" white people, supposedly "shutting down "free expression"? Not at all. And since when is the US supposed to be a land where there is no ethnic tension? You mean after 100 years of Jim Crow there should be no anti-white sentiment among SOME blacks? Whence this magical land? Is there such a fantasy country with multiple ethnics where tension and hostility miraculously disappear? Whereabouts? Mr. Rogers' hood? And where is the fantasy land where the white people are all nice and polite and say nary an unkind world against the culluds? Disneyland?

7D- One key reason white people keep silent is not because they are "muzzled" by "the coloreds" but that they do not want further exposure of white behavior and discriminatory privilege.

It does not seem to have occurred to the Taylor cultists that it actually pays some white people to NOT go about arguing with the coloreds, because to do so risks even more EXPOSURE of negative white behavior and discriminatory white privilege. The vast information explosion of the Internet means accurate facts are a few clicks away. Things covered up in the past can no longer be. The cruel story of how white unions forced hard working black men out of decent jobs is but one example, as is the vast web of even more negative history just lying beneath the surface. Why for example were black women who tried to protect their families also murdered by white lynch mobs? Why were blacks lynched for such "crimes" as being RELATIVES of people who were lynched? Such ugly facts and many, many more are there, just below the veneer. When Taylor moans about white people not "speaking out" there is a reason. They want things to quiet down, and to cool off, and not give opportunity for further exposure.

Similarly, one of the reasons for AA quotas via the consent agreements often made to settle lawsuits is that quick quota programs shut down further exposure of discriminatory institutional, corporate or union practices. It is a lot easier to hire a small number of blacks and make a lawsuit go away than risk exposure of deeply entrenched racial-preference practices in favor of whites. Numerous institutions took the "quick fix" approach of quotas. The much commented phenomenon of "tokenism" in the 1970s and 1980s is part of this. Police departments for example have long been entrenched strongholds of discriminatory white privilege in employment (such as the "good old boy" Irish networks) until lawsuits started to expose them. Quick fixes made headaches vanish- another way of imposing a silence, lest more messy dirty linen be revealed. White people are not anxious to see such linen.

8--INTEGRATION HAS BEEN "A FAILURE".

This claim is a half-truth and partial strawman erected by the Taylorites, delivered as if they are making some new, profound point. But its old news, and flawed for 3 reasons.

8a- Most blacks and whites were always realistic about the limits of integration despite the headline grabbing platitudes of people like Martin Luther King.

This is well documented by credible historians in books on Civil Rights (such as Taylor Branch's trilogy on the King Years). Many civil rights activists and ordinary blacks for example were skeptical of King's "love" meme and saw it primarily as a tactic. If it worked at the moment they were willing to go along. People getting their heads beat in for the mere right to equal service for a cup of coffee, or getting on a bus did not "love" white people. They simply wanted the same deal under an equally constituted law, as everyone else. The Taylorites act as if they just discovered this "truth."

Likewise there was ALWAYS black ambivalence and anger about how segregated institutions were dismantled. Taylor insinuates that blacks PREFERRED segregation. Nonsense. They deeply resented America's apartheid system. They wanted to build up their own institutions BUT ALSO wanted the same rights as everyone else in society-- including the right to have their institutions equally treated, the right to move around freely, the right to enjoy the fruits of their labor unmolested, and the right to freely participate in free market transactions without a web of harassment, restrictions and barriers imposed by whites. Furthermore much black disappointment with integration is/was based not on the concept of "integration" per se, but HOW whites went about doing it, and HOW WHITES GOT PAID in doing so. In some cases whites were quite malicious- quickly tearing down black schools that were sources of community pride and achievement, and implementing the wholesale firing of experienced black administrators, teachers and coaches.

How did white people get paid by integration? Credible scholars and researchers like Dorn 2007 and Sowell (1993, 1981, 2004) and others show:

(a) they got huge amounts of federal money to ease along better facilities for blacks,
(b) the money could be and was diverted to improve white facilities as well -more so when the black ones were destroyed,
(c) they got more jobs as the black teachers and administrators were displaced,
(d) they gained even more jobs as white bureaucrats- soaking up the fed money being put into social programs,
(e) they profited from social policy like "affirmative action" that actually made whites its biggest beneficiaries (white women, in particular),
(f) the end of legalized Jim Crow opened up numerous profitable transactions for whites with blacks and
(g) they gained in profitable real estate transactions as older housing stock in formerly "reserved" white communities could be unloaded on "the coloreds". See the book Some of My Best Friends Are Black, by Tanner Colby 2012 for some chilling examples of cynical white profiteering, including unscrupulous white real-estate "blockbusters" at work- using scare tactics and even bogus negroes to conjure up a "colored menace" to stampede whites into selling. White profiteers gained from direct sales, or snapped up the stampeded bargains and resold to "the culluds" for additional profit.
And on the political front, integration helped white Democrats pick up the bulk of black votes by the late 1960s, whereas before it was more evenly spread.

In short, white people of many stripes have done fairly well from "integration" but you would never know this from reading Taylorite propaganda.

8b--Far from being a so-called total failure integration was helpful in securing American victory in the cold war.

One of the things for example that moved along civil rights for blacks after WW2 was not white goodwill but how American whites were embarrassed internationally by their apartheid system and the conduct of its guardians. Bold talk about "democracy" and "justice" was repeatedly exposed as mere hypocrisy when the brutal realities of the apartheid system came into view. In the face of a powerful Soviet competitor that relentlessly exposed their hypocrisy US whites sought to save face and thus were forced to grant the basic concessions that they did grant. There is much scholarship on the issue- such as Mary Duzdiak's "Cold War Civil Rights." The bottom line however is that integration helped the US in fending off its international enemies, by removing a source of their countless attacks- America's apartheid system.

8c- Integration had some failures but also attested to much to be proud about for American society.

The failures are well known, like some of the dubious school initiatives including busing. Again, criticism has been widespread and in many cases deserved. Ironically, such long-standing criticism gives lie to the Taylorite propaganda bout white people being "muzzled" against "speaking out." Nonsense.. There has been no shortage of white people "speaking out" against things like busing, school integration or AA quotas. Whites don't speak out as much on the AA quotas (whether historical or present) benefiting whites, but that is another story..

Integration like any other difficult social policy was no panacea. It NEVER was. The naiveté or high hopes of some have been adjusted. Nothing earth-shattering there- that's social policy 81, not only in the US but elsewhere. The Catholic Irish for example experienced several difficulties integrating into British society and they have done so in large measure, while retaining a distinct sense of being Irish. There is still tension between the Irish and the larger English society, and the Irish still show certain negatives such as substance abuse problems, violence etc but their integration is well in hand. Blacks and others are on their way to doing the same.

It is telling that Taylor wants to distort the whole picture on integration as a "failure", because he opposed even basic civil rights for blacks, as a number of white right wingers still do. This position is no longer considered respectable so they dance around it and repackage their arguments to be more palatable, but that racist bottom line remains. It Taylor and his cultists had held power America would still have remained an unjust apartheid state, and even the tiny number of interracial couples would still be "criminals." Ever the propagandist, Taylor wants to have it both ways: he wants to take credit for things HE and his followers would never had done in the name of whiteness (like civil rights) while at the same time condemning and disparaging the very same. He wants to take white credit for civil rights while condemning civil rights for blacks- not as openly before but in a more subtle way by alleging that it is all a "failure." Well if it is all a "failure" why are you trying to claim credit for it in the name of white people?

Regardless of such double standards, it is a fact that the United States, to its everlasting credit, and despite massive white opposition in some quarters, did discard its repugnant apartheid system, freed up artificially locked markets hindering black AND white people, improved its standing overseas and thus against the Soviet competitor and to some extent at least, approached the promise of its founding constitution and documents in a real, concrete way. This is an accomplishment to be proud of, helping restore full credibility to American democracy. Furthermore it promotes a needed unity and shared values among all Americans- something alien to the racialist bottom line that underlies Taylorism and its sympathizers. Integration doesn't mean you have to "like" somebody. It NEVER did. The Taylor cultists go around like a freshly-minted Captain Obvious- who has "discovered" this and is now "sharing" this keen insight with the faithful. Integration overall has not been the "failure" in the United States. SPECIFIC programs, policies and people have SOMETIMES failed or been flawed. They can be tweaked, adjusted or discarded/dismissed, just like any other set of programs, but that does not mean integration is a "failure."

-------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- --------------------

SUMMARY AND BOTTOM LINE

What the Taylorites don't get is that to maintain their "new look" racism, they need to continually demonize a "race enemy" a non-white "Other." This in turn will provoke pushback from the no longer quiescent "Other." White contenders on the liberal side will seize on this conflict to inflict pain on their conservative opponents- one contemporary example is white gays piggybacking on the black civil rights movement to win sympathy and backing for their agendas. Claims to the contrary, many liberal whites are just as much concerned about white supremacy as right wingers- they just don't want to appear mean-spirited, and brutal- but pursue the same bottom lines in a quieter way. White privilege, profit and self-service are well in hand. In this sense, Taylorism is more than simply and unwanted embarrassment, it is ultimately irrelevant.

Imperial Wizard Taylor needn't have written a whole book because his thesis can be summed up quite neatly like this: Black people are dumb and violent. Everything they touch turns to dross. They are incapable of forming a civilization and will eventually cause the downfall of any civilization that integrates them in too great a number. The United States would be better off if the races were segregated. With this last point Mr. Taylor plants himself firmly in the Louis Farrakhan camp, who thinks blacks should be given several states of their own. Those two deserve each other. Obama's election may not have propelled us into a post-racial America but to speak longingly of the good old days of segregation isn't helping us get there.

Excellent and timely book. If you're tired of being lectured to by scruffy SJWs about how you "should" feel embarrassed by/ashamed of/perpetually guilt-ridden by your very existence, this is a great read and also fact-based resource. Racist = Someone winning an argument with a leftist liberal! Celebrate your heritage and learn more about it. Learn more about how the U.S. and European countries have been methodically overrun with illegal immigrants and how the Obama administration has effectively fueled terrorism aided and abetted by his socialist cabal. Interesting stuff you won't likely hear about in the discredited mainstream media.