Part One of this article dealt with the prevailing negative narrative, or story, about white people—what it is, why it is, how it works, and its consequences. Bottom line, it’s very hurtful to white people: it legitimizes abuse and diminution by those who resent and despise them; and it fosters self-destructive behaviors among whites who internalize its demonic conception of them. Part Two explores what can be done about that problem. I hope what’s here prompts your own best thinking.
* * *
To begin, a sobering reality. The wicked-whites story tellers dominate the main stage in America (and throughout the West, but America is the focus of this writing). With very few exceptions—Pat Buchanan? Tucker Carlson? who else?—everybody doing the talking, broadly defined, front and center in this country is to one extent or another pushing the negative narrative about whites. I’m referring to mainstream news and entertainment personalities, educators at all levels, politicians in the middle of the spectrum (which means both the Democrats and Republicans), the clergy, the publishing industry, and every reputable interest group. All of them are shooting paint balls at whites—splat! Unless it can be done very discretely, breaking into that that action—at least in the short run—looks really tough to me.
As I wrote the “Unless it can be done very discretely” lead-in to the last sentence, I thought of something William Pierce, a prominent white advocate who was shut out of mainstream discourse, said to me. “How does Tom Wolfe [the novelist, The Bonfire of the Vanities, A Man in Full, Back to Blood] get away with it? He’s worse [more pro-white] than I am.” I was writing a book about Pierce and didn’t think it was my place to say it, but I thought, “Because Wolfe’s slicker than you are. If you are going to be heard by anybody besides fringe types, you are going to have to be really slick like Wolfe.”
In this same sentence, note the other qualifying phrase: at least in the short run.” That underscores that there is a long run, and that it is a very important reality to take into account.
Decades ago—forty, even fifty, years ago—young people on the political left who wanted to change this country in directions they favored took it upon themselves to get in positions where they’d be able to do it. I’m thinking of Bill and Hillary Clinton and student activist Todd Gitlin and scholar Stephen Jay Gould and filmmaker Steven Spielberg and countless others like them who over time—it took the span of their careers—gained control of the core institutions in American life: politics, universities, the media, publishing. They ran for public office. They became university professors. They shaped the news and commentary in both print and electronic media. They created and produced television shows and movies and published books and magazines.
They came to control entry into their fields. Don’t expect to get hired as a university professor unless these people, or those they brought on board, approve of your ideas (at least what they know about them—back to the need to be slick). Don’t expect to make a movie or television show they don’t like, or get a book or article in print if it runs up against their commitments (I can speak from personal experience about this one).
Decade after decade, they indoctrinated and politicized the young people who enrolled in their classes and watched their shows and listened to their speeches (re: Bernie Sanders), until it came to a point that Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson became villains in society’s drama.
It should be noted that not every one of these left-leaning young people of the ‘60s and ‘70s stayed left throughout the course of their career. I’m thinking in particular of one young person from Wisconsin who forty years ago embarked on an academic career who didn’t.
Some context before continuing with his story: Books by university faculty rarely make any difference to anybody but the person who writes one—namely, they pave the way to his permanent status in the university (tenure) and promotion up the ranks to full professor. The book gets published, university libraries buy a copy for their collection (the profit to the publisher), the author’s mother buys one (and puts in her bookcase unread), and that’s it. You could put twenty-dollar bills in academic books and be very sure you’d be able to retrieve them from the pristine books five years later.
Every once in a great while, however, there’s an exception to that pattern. A prime example, in the 1980s, a book about university education, Closing of the American Mind, by a philosophy professor at the University of Chicago, Allan Bloom, became a surprise best-seller. Stephen Jay Gould, mentioned above, a university professor who argued (he has passed on) a nurture-over-nature take on human evolution, wrote books that were read by the general public.
Back to the story of the young left-leaning person from Wisconsin. He got his Ph.D in psychology and embarked on a career as a professor at the California State University, Long Beach, rising to the highest rank of full professor. Between 1994 and 1998, he wrote three books about the impact throughout history of Jewish individuals and organizations on gentile life.7 The experience of writing the books changed his outlook; he shifted to the right politically. His three books had the formidable look of the usual academic book: lots of pages, small print, and voluminous footnotes. It would have been understandable if his mother had bought the first one and taken a pass on the last two.
But the darnedest thing happened: the three books hit big, especially the last one, The Culture of Critique. All three asserted that Jews have been adversarial and detrimental to gentile cultures, societies, and political arrangements. That message ran head on into the party line of the academics who do the talking about Jews, and they were highly put out and let that be known. His university colleagues came after him as an anti-Semite, which he wasn’t. Witch hunters from the Jewish-dominated Southern Poverty Law Center descended on his campus. If his adversaries had had their way, he would have been fired from the university.
I’m reminded of how this same kind of thing went on from the opposite angle in German universities in the ‘30s dominated by National Socialist ideology, and how German academics in fear of losing their jobs—including the great philosopher Martin Heidegger—caved and told the inquisitors what they wanted to hear.8 But to his great credit, this quiet, proud man from Wisconsin didn’t cave: he stood tall and strong, and the notoriety of the attacks against him encouraged still more people, including me, to read his books.
Many of the readers of The Occidental Observer know I’m referring to its founder and editor, Kevin MacDonald. Kevin’s trilogy, as well as his books and articles since, and his editorial work—imagine keeping this complex site going day after day, week after week, month after month—have made the world a different place than it would have been if he hadn’t embarked on his life-long journey so many years ago.
The point here is that if you are young, you can choose to do the same kind of thing Kevin did. The same kind of thing, not the same thing. Kevin is Kevin and you are you. He lived in his time; you will live in yours. But you can be inspired by Kevin—and yes, by the Clintons and Todd Gitlin and Stephen Jay Gould and all the rest of the people who changed the world, including the narrative about white people (unfortunately, they took it in a negative direction).
As the ancient Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu put it, the journey of a thousand miles begins with one step. The challenge is to comprehend how today’s small step will someday get you a thousand miles. And keep in mind the destination doesn’t have to be a university professorship or a powerful political or media slot. Any reputable position on the inside in public life—a doctor, a business owner, a skilled tradesman—can be the base for influencing the thoughts and actions that define your time and set the stage for the times ahead. The school board takes you more seriously, you have money to give to political campaigns—little things add up.
* * *
That’s the long range. What can be done in the short range—today, tomorrow, this year—to change the anti-white narrative? Two things come to mind:
First, don’t yourself get sucked into the negative story about whites. Earlier, I alluded to the problem of white people—particularly young—buying the villainy attributed to their race. It’s understandable because it is the only story they hear, and they hear it over and over and over and over again from grade school through graduate school and beyond. I worked in a university and know how relentless the indoctrination is—every class in the social sciences, humanities, education, and social services—bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang. It stands to reason that many if not most students would take it in as gospel truth.
Practice critically analyzing the stories coming at you. In my last post on this site, I referred to developing what the novelist Ernest Hemingway called “a built-in, shockproof, shit detector.” Put a shit detector filter between you and the racial vitriol.
How do you do that? By doing two things they don’t want you to do:
Look hard at the facts, or lack of them, behind the story. What are three concrete examples of systemic racism? Name them. Did that knee on Floyd’s neck really asphyxiate him? Why haven’t they demonstrated with a volunteer that it cuts off air supply?
Employ reason and logic. Why is it you can predict with a very high level of certainty, anywhere in the world, what a place will be like if there is a critical mass of blacks there—a school, a community, a business, anything?
Come up with your own, positive, story to compete with the horror story you’re being told: “My people are artists and poets and pioneers and architects and composers and filmmakers and novelists and philosophers and scientists and business owners and internet designers and farmers and construction workers and mountain climbers and Little League coaches and loyal and loving parents and spouses, and I’m a good person and so are my parents and grandparents.”
And second, become a regular consumer of a positive white narrative. There was a time, and not all that long ago, when pro-white voices couldn’t be heard at all. There were only the three television networks—CBS, NBC, and ABC—and eight Hollywood movie studios, and a few New York publishing houses, and all of them were antagonistic toward white people. Now there is the internet, independent filmmaking, cable, and social media, and white advocates are readily accessible, and many of them are top of the line.
Here are some internet examples of special note. I’m not a social media and podcast person, and I’m sure there are equally impressive things going on in those areas:
- Kevin and this site. Among TOO’s fine contributors is Andrew Joyce, nobody better.
- Jared Taylor, a marvelous thinker and writer, and his American Renaissance site and the writers on his staff, including Gregory Hood. Jared has been at it for twenty years, an inspiration to us all.
- Greg Johnson, dedicated, and courageous—he’s taken shots—and his site Counter-Currents.
- Peter Brimelow and his VDARE.com site. Peter has been at it for many years and prevailed amid numerous attempts to discredit and silence him, including one that’s going on now.
- The Taki’s Magazine site has first rate contributors, including Steve Sailer and Jim Goad. Goad is arguably the best prose stylist of any social/political commentator in America.
- Ron Unz at his Unz Review is doing great work.
- Andrew Anglin on his site The Daily Stormer crosses the line at times, but he is an exceedingly bright, perceptive, and entertaining young writer. Old as I am, I’m not in his target audience, but I’m a regular with him and better for it.
The quality of writing in this list is so high, the arguments so compelling, I have to believe that it is having, or in the near future will have, a significant impact on the dialogue and debate in this country. And to think that little of it existed just a few years ago. It is a very encouraging phenomenon.
Ideally, every white person would know about the sites and people I’ve just listed, as well as, I’m sure, others I’m not familiar with. Absolutely, the most informed, persuasive, and articulate voices are on our side. Those skilled in getting the word out about their existence—through social media, however it is done, it’s not a skill I possess—would do a great service if they took on that challenge.
I’d like to think that in the coming years the Republican Party in particular will pick up on the white advocacy message and popularize it. And that whites will leave the Democratic Party that despises them and join up with the Republicans. With all the talk of whites becoming a minority in this country, whites will continue to be by far the largest voting bloc, and frankly, the most capable. Coalesced, whites can be the dominant political force in the coming years.
The challenge for white advocates is to present their case in a way that mainstream politicians, academics, and others can make use of it without being shot down as white supremacists, neo-Nazis, and the rest of the litany of epithets. As I see it, the argument for white interests should not be framed in radical, extremist, rhetoric and imagery, as historically it has been. The argument for white people can, and should, be grounded in the core values, ideals, of America—freedom, fairness, and self-determination. There’s nothing inherently extremist about white advocacy.
* * *
What can be done to counteract the negative racial message young people are getting from the schools and media? They need to hear the other side. One possibility is an internet site aimed at and operated by young white people that offers a counterbalance to the current indoctrination. I’m hopeful that it will appeal to whites from all social backgrounds.
That theme with me, the site I have in mind would not be a neo-Nazi repository. Selling Hitler and Himmler to the masses and equating white concerns with National Socialism in particular and the far right in general has a long and painful history of setting us up to be written off as wacko losers and cancelled hard and fast. White advocacy should be positioned as a centrist effort and presented as non-controversially as possible. That is what is going to appeal to the most people, make entry into the mainstream of American life an easier row to hoe, and make us a more elusive target.
What’s the content of the kind of site I’m talking about? I’m thinking of short biographies—Mozart, Lindbergh, Knut Hamsun, Rudyard Kipling. Accounts of events—the Alamo, Charles Martel, the Vikings. Excerpts from great fiction and nonfiction. Critiques of the diversity and multicultural propaganda. People to network with. Self-strengthening tips. Videos. Podcasts. Events. Suggestions of good books to read. Discussion forums. People of all ages could submit things to be approved by the young people who operate the site.
There will be the challenge to get the word out to every white high school and college student, that this site (or whatever it turns out to be) exists. But I am sure there are people who know how to do that effectively.
* * *
I’ve been attending to the nature and fate of white people for nearly twenty-five years. I’ve come to the conclusion that when all is said and done, white people come out on top. And that goes for those from working class backgrounds, who these days are having some issues with despair and drugs; I have faith that they’ll come through, especially if they can be given a way to ascribe a positive meaning to their lives.
I go back to the years of the Black Panthers in the 1960s. They were much like today’s Black Lives Matter activists—good at calling attention to themselves, posturing, threatening, media darlings. The problem for the Panthers, and I suspect it is true of the Black Lives Matters bunch, is they were incompetent (which is perhaps why they were so enamored with socialism, as is BLM). The Panthers were good at finger-pointing, but very bad at making anything productive happen. Businesses they set up failed. They failed in their personal lives.
The Antifa crowd is no better. Pull back the curtain and they are Wizards of Oz. I’ve read dire warnings that they are going to take their looting and burning act to the suburbs—oh, the menace! I publicly invite them to try that stunt. Those people in the suburbs are armed and bad-asses. The Antifa will scurry back to the basements of their parents’ houses and not come out for days except to reheat some chili.
The true story favors us, and we’re up against screw-ups and fakes. We’ve got work to do, but we’ll be fine.
- Robert S. Griffin, “A Message in the In-Box,” 2009, in the writings section of www.robertsgriffin.com.
- Neil Postman, The End of Education (Vintage, 1996) pp. 5-6.
- See, Herbert Kohl, The Discipline of Hope, (Simon & Schuster) pp. 319-20.
- Robert Griffin, One Sheaf, One Vine (1stBooks Library, 2004).
- Edward McNeil Burns, David Starr Jordan: Prophet of Freedom (Stanford University Press, 1953).
- See, Glen Jeansonne, Women of the Far Right: The Mothers’ Movement and World War II (University of Chicago Press, 1997).
- The three Kevin Mcdonald books, all published by Praeger: A People That Dwell Alone (1994); Separation and Its Discontents (1998); and The Culture of Critique (1998).
- See, Adam Knowles, Heidegger’s Fascist Affinities: A Politics of Silence (Stanford University Press, 2019.)