How to Survive Communism in the USA? Part 4
Editor’s note: I can only post very short pieces, so this very interesting article is posted in four parts. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Go to Part 1
Go to Part 2.
Go to Part 3.
Historical amicability of a large number of Jewish-American intellectuals for antifascist projects have been amply documented by Kevin MacDonald. Most Jewish-American authors, for obvious reasons, are pretty tacit when it comes to analyzing the high percentage of leading Communists officials of Jewish origin in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union and their role in early communist-antifa movements, as well as their role in the establishment of repressive communist regimes. The very large overrepresentation of liberal-leftist Jews in the major media and elite academic institutions, as well as in financial contributions to political causes of the left, has also been critical in creating the culture of White guilt and fanning the flames of the communist temptation in contemporary America.
However, reducing the birth and the spread of communism, including its modern version of antifascism to Jewish intellectuals and activists is not the whole story; it means ignoring the all-encompassing, indeed democratic reality of the communist temptation. Gentile communist auxiliaries, reared in the culture of White guilt, operate as willing executioners; they fear being suspected of a lax attitude toward non-communist foes, or harboring themselves latent anti-Semitic feelings, and they often outperform their Jewish-communist comrades. It is no accident that the frontmen in modern antifa riots in US cities today are mostly troubled White individuals who have lost the sense of identity and who, driven by feelings of historical guilt (as is the case with most academics in Germany), look for atonement by becoming the loudest sympathizers or standard-bearers of antifascism.
Removing the communist temptation presupposes cleaning up the swamp, first in American higher education and then in defunding departments of humanities in all colleges. In order to do that, the fallacy of multiculturalism needs to be discarded; it has never worked anywhere in the world. It has always been a recipe for disaster and civil wars all over the world. Abandoned policies of racial segregation must be reconsidered as a viable option for a functional society. It is better to have fences than cohabiting with an alien partner in a fake marriage. Prior to that, however, the whole idea of progress, still strongly embedded in the American dream, needs to be re-examined. Of course, this may all sound like wishful thinking because, as we have seen thousands of times in history, it is the size of someone’s sword which only makes the difference between good and evil.
How to Survive Communism in the USA? Part 3
The good news is that even if American communists, under the banner of Antifascism or Democratism, or Liberalism come to power in the US they will soon start eliminating each other. This would be fully in accordance with the iron law of egalitarian entropy, a fact often overlooked by many analysts of communism. The still-strong myth that communists and antifas only enjoyed killing anti-communists and fascists during and after World War II must be dismissed. In fact, ever since their coming to power communists and antifas in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, in 1917 and 1945 respectively, were involved in the orgy of mutual purges and killings. It must be expected that American antifas or liberals, or whatever they may name themselves in the near future, will start, once in power, with similar mutual killings. Virtually all big masterminds of communist mass killings during the pre-WWII and the post-WWII Soviet era, heads of powerful Soviet secret police agencies ( Genrikh Yagoda, Lavrentiy Beria, Nikolai Yezhov, Lev Kamenev ) were at some point demoted or ended up themselves on the gallows erected by their former communist comrades. A fresh example of latent communist entropy transpiring in incessant intra-communist warfare could be observed on the eve of the violent break-up of multicultural communist Yugoslavia in 1991, falsely ascribed by the foreign media to local nationalists. However, a closer look at the profile of major decision makers in seceding ex-Yugoslav republics points to their common communist past. Similarly, on a positive side, if one carefully looks at the pedigree, or reads the early works of some of the best and brightest anti-Communist analysts and writers (Boris Souvarine, Arthur Koestler, George Orwell, Ante Ciliga), one can notice that they were at some point in their life ardent supporters of antifascism and communism.
Reductio ad hitlerum; reductio ad iudaeorom
The language arsenal of modern American antifa activists is another field of study that merits closer psycholinguistic attention. Antifa rioters and their college mentors, along with pro-communist US main media outlets, including a large number of their Democratic party coaches are using a revised communist jargon borrowed from the defunct Soviet Union. The Soviet talk was once the daily menu of the communist propaganda in Eastern Europe, its goal being to dehumanize, demonize and criminalize political opponents. The language processing was simple — it consisted in reversing the meaning of words and redefining political concepts. Similar practice can be observed today in the US amongst modern antifa activists and main media outlets who resort to the principles of reductio ad absurdum, that is, they posit propositions that elicit contradictory yet self-serving conclusions. Along these reductionist lines of verbal sophistry, the process of vilifying Whites as fascists is being facilitated by the methodological tool of reductio ad hitlerum. By now this equation, i.e., Whites = Fascists has become a standard practice in social science studies and in the media in the US. For modern antifa rioters in the US, the word fascism is a pivotal killer-shut-up word. Once uttered it disables any communication. This word, however, has completely lost its original political designation, standing now instead for a synonym of the absolute cosmic evil.
The same verbal demonizing wordings apply to another killer-word i.e. “Nazism,” a derogatory hyperbolic abbreviation of the word in usage since 1945. The word ‘Nazi’, however, was never used in the official National-Socialist documents or academic journals in Germany from 1933–45. Ironically, it first appeared in the late 1920s as a deriding title of the book Der Nazi-Sozi [i] written as a short lampooning manifesto against Jews, Communists and capitalists by Joseph Goebbels, who was to become in 1933 the main figure of the NS German propaganda war.
Using the pejorative word ‘Nazi’ today is the equivalent of the pejorative word “commie”, the difference being, however, that in a polite academic company in the US, or in academic journals nobody would ever use the word ‘commie’ in the description of communists. The whole array of new euphemisms, as well as torrents of killer-words have been manufactured over the last fifty years in the US , such as “white supremacism,” “ hate speech,” “affirmative action,” “Afro-Americans” instead of Negroes, the modifying adjective “Jewish” instead of a more piercing noun ‘Jew’, with most of these words being taken now as a commonplace either when criminalizing political opponents or when praising non-Europeans to the skies. When inspecting the prose of many leftist or Jewish-run journals or pro-Jewish news agencies in the USA, such as the SPLC or ADL, it becomes obvious that they function primarily as antifa educational loudspeakers when blaring on all frequencies the demonizing labels neo-Nazis, white supremacists, or fascists.
How to Survive Communism in the USA? Part 1
Editor’s note: There is some kind of processing glitch in our software. I will try to post Tom Sunic’s article in several parts.
Go to Part 2.
Go to Part 3.
Go to Part 4.
The fundamental mistake made by most American conservatives, both old and new, is to think of communism solely as a violent ideology designed to abolish private property. During the so-called Cold War, they imagined that by mimicking some communist practices they could tone down the very real communist threat and elicit some Soviet sympathy. They should have been more careful what they wished for. The reason why communism fell apart in the early 1990s in the communist East was due to the fact that communist ideologemes, such as the idea of progress, economic equality, and the instauration of a borderless and multiracial society, had been more successfully put into practice in the capitalist West than in the communist East — albeit under a less abrasive name and without resorting to a large scale state terror.
For many Americans, surviving communism is therefore a contradiction in terms given that they have already fully aligned themselves to the System, i.e., “the deep state”, oblivious to its repressive crypto-communistic principles. Unsurviving communism, by contrast, is a destiny of a hapless few who are prepared to live a life of dissent — and also pay a heavy price for their non-conformist views.
Modern day neo-communist BLM and antifascist activists in the US know well that parading with the name of communism could backfire. Their self-ascribed title “antifa” resonates far better in the ears and eyes of the modern media. Many of them, including many of their Democratic party overlords are heirs to a now defunct Homo sovieticus species who once thrived in communist countries of Eastern Europe. The twin brotherhood between former Homo sovieticus and the present Homo americanus has had a very long history irrespective of their often feigned feuds and fake semantic posturing.[i] Given that the US, since its inception, has also been involved in a large number of world-improving projects, not least its century-long messianic virtue-signaling adventures aimed at elevating foreign peoples world-wide to a global City on the Hill, it was to be expected that at some point the communist temptation would gain in popularity in a new garb and hit home in the US. For example, US campuses continue to be the main breeding ground of antifa activists, having now more of their adepts than campuses in Western Europe where, over the last decade, there has been a noticeable recycling to populism and nationalism by many former leftist, but also Jewish authors (Michel Onfray, Alain Soral, Eric Zemmour). In post-communist Eastern Europe, organized antifa groups and their LGBT sidekicks are virtually non-existent, except when temporarily hired and exported by EU or State Department-sponsored NGOs in order to unseat some local populist and anti-globalist ruler. Hatred against antifas in all segments of East European society is understandable given that for many the term antifascism rings the bell of communism. Worth recalling is that words and locutions containing nouns or modifiers related to the word “antifascism” were in surplus in all official communist documents in Eastern Europe, even on marriage certificates, lasting well into the late 1950s. During the Cold War, and without any exception, all East European dissidents were squarely depicted in communist court proceedings as fascist agents.
The brainwashing of young American masses by the word antifascism owes much to the early Bolshevik agitator Leo Trotsky and his collection of essays under the title What is Fascism and how to Fight it,[ii] in which he depicts fascism as the ultimate stage of capitalism and showing how communists in the USA must smash it:
The backwardness of the United State working class is only a relative term. In very many important respects, it is the most progressive working class of the world, technically and in its standard of living…The next historic wave in the United States will be the wave of radicalism of the masses, not fascism. Of course, the war can hinder the radicalization for some time, but then it will give to the radicalization a more tremendous tempo and swing.[iii]
The recent antifa riots in many large cities in USA are also a belated follow-up on riots carried out by antifa “sixty-eigthers” half a century ago all over the West. [iv] They were successful in imposing communist cultural hegemony in higher education and in paving the way, a decade later, for the political takeover by the Left. Sixty-eighters spawned the modern-day antifa. However, neither the psychology of sixty-eighters, nor their modern antifa offshoots can be fully grasped if one loses sight of the world order created jointly by the capitalist US and the communist Soviet Union in 1945, both being part of the common antifascist block. In the final analysis, the entire West, with America at the helm, is unable to repudiate modern antifa activists, let alone declare them a terrorist organisation, unless it first revises its own writing of the history of World War II and overhauls its own system of liberal governance.
[1] T. Sunic, prefaced by Kevin MacDonald, H
Is Civil War Inevitable?
The conclusions regarding France and Europe more broadly in Guillaume Faye’s final book Ethnic Apocalypse—like The Culture of Critique and my own book The God that Failed: Liberalism and the Destruction of the West banned by Amazon for said conclusions being “inconvenient” to the Establishment, ie-true—were that yes, the regime has made it inevitable. The conditions imposed upon us have made life intolerable, and Faye states that for Occidental Man to survive and reclaim his homelands from usurpers and aliens that violence has become the natural consequence of the Establishment’s actions. Indeed, the daily indignities and violence visited upon us in our nations is enabled and encouraged by the occupation government’s shock troops, be they hostile aliens or indoctrinated white janissaries. This ranges from so-called petty crime to acts of terrorism and everything in between; they are on the same continuum. The violence, which has been a fixture within formerly peaceful nations for generations now and continues to increase in prevalence and intensity, can be directly attributed to those in power who arrogantly build their Tower of Babel and laugh in the face of decency. Their legion of ready censors work overtime to ensure that anyone who dissents is silenced and destroyed.
Pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall after all.
The meek, however, will not inherit the earth, but will go quietly to their destruction along with the entire rotten system. Nature always wins in the end, but at what amount of sheer wreckage and collateral damage? Faye predicts that the civil war will be terribly savage (Selco Begovic is a great resource for the realities of what it might look like having lived through the worst of the conflict in Yugoslavia in the 1990s). If there is to be open conflict, it will be equal parts civil war and revolution. A revolution is, however, what is required.
America as an entity has very obviously lost the will to live; I’ve been feeling this way for a while, but the overturning of the death penalty for Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on account of “prejudice” has solidified it. Nietzsche’s Last Man rules, and maggots crawl over his corpse. He (it?) is dead and doesn’t even realize it. A healthy society would never tolerate a terrorist to live—or have even allowed the Tsarnaev brothers to be in the country in the first place—and though Circuit Court Judge Ojetta Rogeriee Thompson affirms that Tsarnaev will remain incarcerated for life, do we even really expect that at this point? How about the fact that the US re-settled almost five hundred “refugees” over the months of May, June, and July in the midst of the on-going pandemic?
It is as always not my intention to demoralize the reader when publishing my extensive research into the ins and outs of the system and its operations, but rather to illustrate its comprehensiveness and the inextricability of its constituent parts. Most whites still have a mental block where they have some modicum of trust in the system and believe it can be reformed. It cannot. This is actually a major “white pill” to use the parlance of the Alt-Right because the noise does not matter. (As an aside, I’ve never referred to myself as Alt-Right, despite its brilliance as a term, because to me there is no alternative.) The system is not capable of reform and must be discarded.
You must ask yourself: what benefit do YOU get from this system, from America as it is, not as it was. More so, what benefit do your children, your children’s children, the bedrock of your people and your civilization get from this system? None—it is a downward spiral we want no part of. There can be no American nationalism and certainly no conservatism because there is no nation and there is nothing to conserve: America is dead, and I refuse to be trapped in its decaying corpse. I want to live.
We don’t want the assimilation of alien peoples. We don’t want integration. We want our own homelands free from aliens foisted on us by the occupying regime and we want that for all of the other peoples of the world as well. To quote Alexander Solzhenitsyn, “Nations are the wealth of mankind, its collective personalities; the very least of them wears its own special colors and bears within itself a special facet of divine intention.” Let us work to construct a world in keeping with natural law and the universal order of truth. This is to break from enslavement to a system that dehumanizes us and ultimately wants us dead after it’s sucked us dry, discarded as husks, grist for their mills. I reject the premise that this is what progress looks like.
But what of the inevitable urgings that we need to DO SOMETHING? Only a fool wants to be drawn into conflict with the system, and we want to divorce ourselves from this rotten system because of the violence visited against us on a daily basis, not cause more. There may be a universal truth but there is no one-size-fits-all strategy. The future of the West will be decided in the real world at the local level. What works for and resonates with the New Atlantic Nation cannot be replicated wholesale in Texas or Alberta, and why would we expect that? The federated nature of the American and Canadian systems is one of the major reasons we are in the situation we’re in today; the European Union is a useful analog here as well. As for New Zealand, Australia, and the Cone Countries of South America, those are ready-made nations waiting to be re-claimed, just as are those most of those in the EU, though there are some new/old nations waiting to be reborn there as well. Southern Africa is slightly more complicated, but to my mind it seems it could perhaps break down along the lines of a Boer Nation, an Anglo Federation, and possibly an allied German-Namibian micro-state.
The point is this: regardless of what’s coming we need to be prepared. Like a zombie virus, the system continues to animate “our” “societies” post-mortem, but it is in an advanced state of decay, and the final bullet in its brain will be most welcome. It will also signal a monumental opportunity, and everyone should know what it is they want, and what better world they envision. Out of chaos, order, but what order? A California that looks like Mexico and a Quebec that looks like Cameroon, or something else? These are questions everyone must answer for themselves and then get busy building an action plan. Start at home and build outward. Find workable solutions for your community, and if you don’t have a community, then build one. For men, the Mannerbund is a good place to start.
The New Atlantic Nation (New Albion) now has a prospective constitution, a flag, and a historical and ethnic basis. The movement to seize the mantle of our collective—and I stress collective—destiny and leave the dissolving union is growing, but it needs more. Right now there are just murmurs, but in every little corner of the Occident those murmurs are rising into an emphatic shout.
We do not want war and conflict. We want peace, which why we put ourselves out there and speak the truth when telling the truth has become a revolutionary act. The ideal is the Velvet Divorce of the Czech Republic and Slovakia, but if large-scale confrontation is to come to pass, the ideal must then be Slovenia of the Yugoslavian wars—the wars, it must be said, precipitated by the very Establishment trying to crush us today. The violence has been here, and it has been perpetrated against us in terrible fashion for generations. Confiscatory taxation of our wages while we’re on the hamster wheel, alien criminality, intolerable living conditions, suppression of birthrates, censorship, and open warfare are all on the same continuum, the continuum of violence visited against us by the alien occupation government that wants our history, our civilization, our people, and everything good we stand for erased.
What is more important: the survival of your people and civilization, or that of a rapidly-“browning” ideological and contractual project built on faulty premises of human nature at the tail end of the so-called Enlightenment?
We stand on the precipice of history. Do not despair for we have been chosen to re-light the torches and guide our people forward into the future we create, keeping the essence of the past and our ancestors while forging something new, dynamic, and True. This system is the enemy of all peoples, a rotten perversion of nature and a denial of the universal order that originates from the central timeless truths any legitimate system representing its people must be in accordance with. It is to those ends we dedicate ourselves.
Surviving the Contemporary Black Racial and White Intra-Racial Conflict: Anti-Millenarian Whites Must Seek Political Separation
In 1946 Winston Churchill delivered a speech at a small college in Fulton Missouri that offered this prescient analysis: “From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic an ‘iron curtain’ has descended across the continent.” This Soviet invasion made a prison out of the entire area for half a century. Dissenters were severely punished.
Without notice or debate, a similar regimen of speech control is descending on North America, from Bar Harbor, Maine on the Bay of Fundy to Nome, Alaska on the Arctic Ocean, and south to the Rio Grande and the Straits of Florida.
Political correctness, a phrase used almost playfully in the 1990s, has morphed into the viciousness and moral smugness of our current cancel culture, replacing the spirit of the First Amendment. By way of example, I offer the following observation from an early victim of cancel culture, my friend the late Sam Francis.
“The civilization that we as whites created in Europe and America could not have developed apart from the genetic endowments of the creating people, nor is there any reason to believe that the civilization can be successfully transmitted to a different people.”
Comments like this led to Francis being fired from his position as columnist for the Washington Times in 1995 and put him into media purgatory and economic distress until his premature death 10 years later.
Sam’s proposition makes no moral distinctions and is not much more than a paean to what in reality is his extended family. In the same context the creating people of Great Zimbabwe were Bantus, the creating people of China were Han, and the creating people of the Inca Empire were Quechuas. If, instead of making a claim about the racial origins of Europe and America, Sam had instead substituted any of these other peoples into his statement, it would have been equally plausible but would not have resulted in Sam’s discharge.
The frenzy to stigmatize any mention of genetics especially as playing a role in the development of White civilization began early in the twentieth century, essentially eradicating what had been a robust intellectual exchange based on the reality of race and the idea that there are important racial differences in behavior around the world. This anti-biologism came to dominate academic thinking after World War II and has become a bedrock attitude among those who are now labeled progressives. Such thinking is woven into contemporary intellectual tapestry; it is taught throughout the school system from elementary school through the university, and it characterizes entire mainstream media landscape. Among its White adherents, it has assumed a millenarian vision of a utopian future free from all racial conflict—the same sort of millenarianism that has characterized the moral crusades of the past, from the Civil War to World War II, to our contemporary regime-change wars in the Middle East.
Susan Sontag proclaimed “The white race is the cancer of human history.” If we limit her universe to the U.S., I’d say that she was about 40% right as this was the Hillary Clinton fraction of the White vote in the 2016 presidential election. This means that the remaining 60% of White voters represent our side of the family—at least potentially.
One birthday short of becoming an octogenarian, I charge the dissident right with the mission to begin the intergenerational process of founding an independent political jurisdiction in which anti-millenarian whites can gather, regroup and flourish. Along the way we will support other races with the same aspiration.
To this end, we must extract our side of the family from the embrace of the “White millenarians” who are yet intent on imposing their heretical notion of equality on Earth as it art in Heaven —even though the misery from such tampering with human nature abounds in history and has been particularly evident in the recent past.
Our goal must be a Bohemian Divorce of mutual self determination as deliberate and bloodless as the split between the Czech Republic and Slovakia in 1993. To this end there is long standing precedent which stretches back to the founding of the Republic when separation was recognized as a humane means of resolving ethnic and racial conflicts and sovereign tracts of land were ceded to indigenes.
Once separation is established, the internal political arrangements are less important than the maintenance of a unifying ethos by enforcing a variant of the Amish practice of Rumpspringa. This exercise encourages youthful apostates to leave the commonwealth before achieving citizenship. So that a mistake of inclusion is not immutable, I recommend making exile a part of the criminal and civil code, directed at those who are in fundamental disagreement with the ideal of a separate White community. Such a provision could also be used to correct immigration blunders.
We have entered very dangerous times for Whites in America. The summer riots of 2020 carried out with the blessing of much of the Establishment and the entire left is a clear indication that the American racial experiment is careening toward disaster. Whites need a separate political jurisdiction.
William H. Regnery II is the founder of the Charles Martel Society.
Why De-Colonization is “Junk” History and “Reparations” Is the Junk-Bond Offering of BLM
1Junk-Bond: “A low-grade, high-risk security, typically issued by an organization seeking to raise capital quickly in order to finance a takeover.” Oxford Lexico
‘Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.’— George Orwell, 1984 (1949)
“Having agreeably transacted affairs with the African Prince in his King’s Court in the Kingdom of Whydah (he demanded gold payment of one hundred dollars for each of his prisoners) we went to their warehouse where he had in confinement four thousand captives from his raid of the Tarkbar people, all in a state of complete nudity from which he gave me liberty to select one hundred and twenty-five as mine, and offering to brand them for me, from which I preemptorily forbid; commenced taking on cargo of negroes, successfully securing on board one hundred and ten.” Capt. William Foster, Journal of Clotilda, 1860, in present-day Benin and Ghana
“Looting is reparations.” Ariel Atkins, BLM Chicago Organizer.
“The problem with oppression and White supremacy is, White supremacy will have you criticizing the oppressed and worshiping the oppressors. Nothing falls short of a solution other than cutting a check. If you want to do something about reparations, cut the check.” Hawk Newsome, Chair, BLM Greater New York
“It’s all about bucks; the rest is just conversation.” Gordon Gekko, Wall Street, 1987, 20th Century Fox
Put aside the disturbing reality of BLM’s criminal violence, and now, financial reparations extortion. And put aside all of the legal ramifications to that organization and its enablers, in criminal law and domestic terror legislation (including the Patriot Act and RICO), and consider instead where its intellectual model even comes from—where this new genetic creation was conceptually incubated: In the history departments of America’s major universities (who then packaged and sold it to the legal academy, and to political science departments and public policy schools, with plentiful handouts to the broader social sciences and of course for its excitable ideological base camp, the Humanities). For the past nearly two decades, a new crop of historians has sprung up in large research universities including Princeton, Harvard, Yale, Columbia, UCLA, and Chicago, who have nurtured and cultivated a practice area known as “Empire,” broadly within a “Colonialism” framework, and through the deep irrigating rows in that field, fed a saturating stream of racism and oppression psychology, political class struggle, and ultimately the expectation of a bountiful harvest of financial pay-back and restitution.
It is junk history and junk scholarship.
This crop of historians—creative and well-supported—have engaged in a fascinating form of historical revisionism or a new “historicism.” It advances a “colonialism” and “empire” thesis that it appropriates from a rich, solid base of real economic history from mature scholars including Max Weber, Joseph Schumpeter, Gunner Myrdal, Friedrich Hayek, Charles Kindleberger, Douglass North, to former Eisenhower and Kennedy national security advisor W.W. Rostow at the University of Texas at Austin; Harvard’s David Landes; the economic history school at Cambridge University; even London School of Economics historian Nicholas Kaldor; Chicago’s Milton Friedman or Stanford’s Thomas Sowell—and then re-arranges, re-mixes and alters this genetic base of rigorous scholarship, and re-writes it in political and racial dimensions to include a general “oppression” narrative of “White Colonialism” and “European Empire” that lends itself to monetization, and into a reparations public policy platform, in the US, and now in Europe (evidently the “White Supremacy” Fatherland). Its thematic elements are centered in legal, social and economic guilt and ultimately in election mechanics and wholesale political reordering. It is the New Bolshevism. It is used as a financial extortion to satisfy grievance, and avoid more violence—a kind of “fine” or penalty in civil restitution theory, but more like organized crime and gang methods. And it obviously fits well into modern fear-based election influencing, as is evident in the identity of BLM and the DNC. And like Bolshevism, it celebrates violence for its own sake, with no idea or plan but perpetual psychological predation, economic control, and ideological coercion.[2]
Unfortunately the entire ‘reparations’ concept rests otherwise on some challenging scholarship. Congruent with other research, Gabriel Paquette has shown in his The European Seaborne Empires (Yale University Press, 2019) that the colonialism phenomenon was a product of a “chaotic pluralism,” or of such random private enterprise, that tying it to any particular nation—or campus, as in the case of current demands being made on the University of Chicago for “slavery reparations”—is impossible, or highly speculative, and therefore illogical, and ultimately, illegitimate. The entire “reparations” concept rests on faulty scholarship, and a flawed hermeneutics of historical interpretation. But it also stems from a classic scholarly “detour” after the ‘empire’ themes ran into trouble with incredibly complex records, conflicting information, and no clear unifying “grand theory” that could elegantly and conveniently present a thematic explanation as to European economic development and its manifestations in the New World. So academic historians invented one. One that also fit their natural suspicions, prejudice and hostilities: It must have all been the product of capitalism, along with a set of cultural behaviors including greed, possession, duplicity, and enslavement. And who better a villain than White Europeans themselves (who conveniently left the Western historians with understandable anthropological artifacts, and convenient academic bias confirmation.). And who better to have endured such disadvantages and exploitation than the ‘silent suffering:’ the primitive, the other. And who in more need of intellectual emancipation and advocacy—a ‘reframing” of history through the new tools of scholarship, and a final reckoning for the oppressor? The new history is a theory of revenge.
This made me wonder about the entire “reparations” construct going on now: how do you identify and assign a target and a center of modern liability, to a modern nation-state or corporation even, when empire and colonialism where of such porosity and chaos among an unruly, massive private sector of various individuals and small companies, and many with complicated trade agreements and shared resources? It seems you would have to dig up an awful lot of dead bodies to find out, and to extract your payment.[3]
A fundamental problem with the new ‘racial historicism,’ is that the scholars promoting it also have little if any credentials in economics and traditional political economic history (such as in the spirit of Smith, Locke, Hume, Ricardo, Mill, Malthus and others) and are instead fully pledged members of Cultural Marxism and its obvious weakness for explanatory history in class concepts, and by extension, race. They are also generally weak in statistical methods, and have limited, or no working experience whatsoever in the private sector; or in commercial and business enterprises, where economic history is tangibly centered (Thomas Picketty is an example). This leads to highly stylized, abstract and above all ideological mental models of history, and an attraction to retail politics and mass cognitive susceptibilities, where their wares can sell (especially if it advocates for redistribution through taxation). An especially attractive market is in the intake and breeding of new Ph.D recruits, fresh out of even more indoctrination from 4 or more years of academic influencing and molding.
The “de-colonization” concept also suffers from a broad mischaracterization of both its subject and its object: the development and growth of human colonies, societies, economies and other systems and features, are not so much the products of cultural anthropology or of social systems, but more strictly biological, like the growth of a forest or prairie, a coral reef or if you prefer, a natural animal colony (with man’s tool-making technology). So, to “de-colonize” is more to ‘de-humanize.” It is a misanthropic enterprise (it competes in that regard, with the UN’s Agenda programs in demographic and de-population management, in concert with private sector entities including the Rockefeller Foundation’s “Future Scenarios” program. The C19 program is one such manifestation).
The other cognitive error that de-colonization advocates make is to frame their entire worldview in history itself, and are blinded to “colonization” right in front of them. China’s slow absorption of Africa is an example, as is Israel’s de-population and geopolitical agenda in its “Pan-Israel” Middle East Transformation project, now in its 20th year (as for slavery proper, BLM also overlooks entirely the digital ‘Panopticon’ encroachment, in addition to its transformed cognitive basis). Indeed, by overlooking current Sino-Colonialism, the de-colonization school is missing one of the most profound geopolitical and social threats in the world today, while it busies itself with statues, flags and spray paint. (China is the modern slave state empire. And it is the BLM/Cultural Marxist/De-Colonization role model. This is incubating a powerful, growing consensus for a renewed “Anglosphere” to combat, in part, what is the de-colonization school’s real name: de-humanization).[4]
But it gets more inconvenient for the “reparations” syndicate: the single biggest block of identifiable common participants in the slave trade were Africans themselves. So, does that make West Africa especially, the epicenter of a reparations scheme? Certainly the spoils are rich in oil, minerals and land, and the Chinese, the most aggressive new “colonialists” because of it.[5]
Moreover, what does BLM have to say back here in the US, to the world’s modern slave owner class themselves: other Blacks? The American Black population makes up the country’s biggest concentration of ethnic predation in murder, prostitution, human trafficking, and drug crime, on other Blacks, while Black men run the inner-city Black gang syndicates, and recruit and “enslave” Black male youth, into the chains of their violence, extortion and social alienation. Blacks are the Black’s worst enemy, their greatest source of predation, commercial exploitation, manipulation and cognitive slavery. From Colonial history itself, to the “Reverend” Al Sharpton; from Louis Farrakhan to Jeremiah Wright to Barack Obama himself, who as a “community organizer” makes a career of provoking anger, envy, racial divide and most of all, self-hatred. He stoked the fires of revenge fantasy, joined by a cheering crowd of celebrity Blacks, including Oprah Winfrey and academia’s anachronistic racial opportunists such as Harvard’s Cornel West and Henry Gates.
But there is also another twist to BLM’s reparations agenda: whether the 14th amendment was even constitutionally ratified.[6]
Blacks themselves however, do not apparently accept the 14th amendment, ratified or not; in fact BLM is “ratifying” through its behavior and demands, that it was administratively deficient, as they are still evidently bound in chains, oppressed by their (global) White masters, and seeking to substitute economic freedom for taxpayer reparations in the US and EU.[7] BLM is effectively asserting (through their current criminal violations) that they were never freed (a “knee on our neck”). Moreover, there is a “Takings Clause” complication in reparations to slave owners (The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution includes a provision known as the Takings Clause, which states that “private property [shall not] be taken for public use, without just compensation”).[8] BLM criminal riots and destruction also fall effectively under the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the “subject to the jurisdiction” phrase of the Citizenship Clause. Blacks were brought to America on a Slave-ship, not a Citizen-ship: the were given a natural law emancipation under constitutional law, deficient though the amendment is in actual ratification.[9]
Moreover, if the abolitionist doctrine of natural rights of ‘property’ that each individual possesses in and of themselves, a Lockian “self-ownership,” then birthright would be a second-order right by, as Eastman argues, a process of acquired and earned rights leading to loyalty by effective contract (yet minors, even, cannot be party to contracts, nor vote as a citizen, but effectively through the parent). Why otherwise would the state issue a “social security” number to a newborn, but through application by the parent? The state is not sovereign over the child, unless abandoned, or able to act in loco parentis in any manner (or “cannot deprive or divest their posterity”).
Moreover, if BLM advances the position that they are still effectively enslaved (a ”knee on our necks”) and their enslavement is the product of White Supremacy ‘slave owners,’ then the entire reparations argument is turned on its head: payment must be made under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment, not to the slave, but to the slave owner, as compensation and consideration under the constitutional Clause.
Moreover, all current BLM criminal violation, destruction of personal and public property, arson, physical violence, pain and suffering, must be also be compensated back to the public at large, and also pro rata to Whites in settlement of pain and suffering, trauma, damages, duress and loss of life and livelihood. Those current physical damages alone total over $10 billion, plus replacement costs, insurance premiums and loss of business. BLM’s domestic terror could be cited as a war crime as well, under UN law, and as a domestic constitutional assault characterized as treason, can also be cited under strict Constitution violation, as well as Section 2.3 of the US Department of Defense Law of War Manual which defines crimes against humanity as the principle that forbids the infliction of suffering, injury or destruction unnecessary to accomplish a legitimate military purpose. BLM insists it has a legitimate purpose and is armed, outfitted, organized and led as an effective standing army, directed explicitly as a combatant against US citizens.[10]
Minneapolis alone has been called “the most expensive civil disturbance in US history.” [11] BLM should also be required to post bond for its clearly enunciated intention to produce continual riots, property destruction and mayhem across the US not only until the election, but beyond, indefinitely, if they don’t get what they demand. Indeed, the State of Wisconsin as of 25 August, declared a state-of-emergency after an obvious BLM agitation program was activated in Kenosha, leading to mass rioting and destruction.[12] BLM is an extortion outfit. The ideological founder and central agitator behind BLM is former US president and University of Chicago Law lecturer Barack Obama, the “community organizer.”[13] BLM is his “plantation,” and academic servants and apologists such as former economic advisor and UChicago professor Austan Goolsbee and Harvard Law’s Cass Sunstein, his effective “slaves.”[14]
Indeed, the modern academy embraces and even opportunistically stokes and fans racial agitation, which merely feeds its student intake machinery and triggers more finance, grants, loans and donations (an immediate abandonment of all professional standards in an eager broadcasting and ratification of the George Floyd event by modern law schools, is an example). Perhaps the most immediate reparations solution is academia itself: an organized syndicate of special interests with an ideological axe to grind, and money to make by selling hatred and the fantasy of ancient vengeance and retribution—one of man’s most reliable passions. Some of the worst offenders come from our so-called elite universities—and further amplified, taught and activated in policy, especially through their law schools, which are the modern workshops and strategic centers for social justice.[15]
In modern finance, “junk bonds” are a form of corporate debt, issued by organizations that cannot qualify for credit-based lending. They have insufficient assets for collateral, have unclear prospects and competitive legitimacy, but will bait buyers with hopes and promises of a large ‘upside’ to make up for their underlying lack of resources and clarity. They rarely are redeemed. Such is the market for BLM and race theory: BLM is the modern cultural junk bond. It might indeed be an appropriate time to demand a refund in product liability and financial fraud terms, under ‘academic reparations.’ Too many of our nation’s students, including our young Ph.D professors, are suffering a form of cognitive slavery, and victims not of race, but ideology, and junk history.
As for history itself, suppose for a moment that Aristotle’s ancient observation and opinion of an involuntary slave class in his time, is alive and well today in ours, but replaced with a new slave— equally indentured—one notionally emancipated, but worse, has voluntarily surrendered his freedom and virtue to the comforting consensus of ideological solidarity, and his thinking, abandoned; a sword laid down in defeat. Suppose Aristotle’s slave is even more a phenomenon today; a larger class; a swelling mass, equally unable but mostly unwilling, to command the virtues of maturity, and the self-sovereignty of real citizenship? How would, or should, an “Aristotelean” interpretation find its bearings in such obvious modern intellectual slavery? And what student, or professor, who casually accepts the comforting narratologies of identitarian moralism mixed with envy and contempt, is deserving of being a “free man” in a free society?[16]
Our Nation’s young adults should instead be liberated by the highest of restitutions: an independent mind.
[1] V.S. Solevyev is a technology writer and legal scholar.
[2] “He is mobilizing resentments among Blacks and others, and organizing them into battle, to get what they want from other people. Community organizers divide and polarize. But long before he came along, there was an attitude going back to Woodrow Wilson, repudiating the principles of the United States.” Dr. Thomas Sowell, The Hoover Institute, Stanford University (Ph.D University of Chicago) on Barack Obama, Acorn, and other racial agitators, from Dismantling America, interviewed by Peter Robinson, Uncommon Knowledge, 19 August 2010
[3] See https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2019/06/reparations-madness-mary-grabar/, and https://dissidentprof.com/index.php/8-home/155-reparations-a-history-lesson
[4] See ‘Why is Xi Jinping pitting China against the world?’ The Guardian, 23 July 2020
[5] See “It’s Time to Revive the Anglosphere: The U.K. should form a new union with Canada, Australia and New Zealand to work as a global partner of the U.S.,” WSJ, 8 August 2020. “The Anglosphere is the name given to all those countries in the world where the majority of people speak English as their first language, almost all of which have similar outlooks and shared values. The four “Canzuk” countries of Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the U.K. are a prominent historical subset of this larger group, and there is a mounting case that some form of federation among them—with free trade, free movement of people, a mutual defense organization and combined military capabilities—would create a new global superpower and ally of the U.S., the great anchor of the Anglosphere. Although the Canzuk idea traces its roots back to early 20th-century debates over the Imperial Federation, when Joseph Chamberlain was the British colonial secretary, the discussions taking place among its proponents today—mostly conservative policy intellectuals but also a growing number of political figures—are rooted powerfully in the present and in a cool assessment of realpolitik. The Canzuk Union would immediately enter the global stage as a superpower, able to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the U.S. in the great defining struggle of the 21st century against an increasingly revanchist China.” The problem with the De-Colonization Left, however, is that China is in fact their precise role model.
[6] https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/review/was-the-fourteenth-amendment-constitutionally-adopted/
[7] See the unfortunate racial agitation essay by UChicago political science professor Adom Getachew, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/27/opinion/sunday/decolonization-statues.html
[8] https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/takings. The public use provision stems in part from the conversion of slave owner profits and economic benefits from slave labor, to the freeman labor taxation by government. Free slaves represented enormous new tax revenues to both Northern federal and state government that was shielded by private ownership, and largely in Southern, competing states.
[9] https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/review/was-the-fourteenth-amendment-constitutionally-adopted/
[10] https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/law-of-war/principles/C314D298E401BA696E74DE30233D2D17
[11] https://www.foxnews.com/politics/george-floyd-protests-expensive-civil-disturbance-us-history
[12] https://www.fox6now.com/news/gov-evers-announces-state-of-emergency-in-wisconsin-curfew-set-for-3rd-night-in-kenosha
[13] https://mynorthwest.com/1922840/herman-fraud-human-rights-history-barack-obama-leadership-black-lives-matter/?
[14] My argument is somewhat cynical and sarcastic, but still logical, which is, if BLM considers themselves still “slaves” (a “knee on their neck”) then they must not accept the 14th amendment which freed them. If they are not free and still slaves, then they are owned, they assert, effectively, by “White” slave owners. Unfortunately they also trigger an interesting and still debated contention that under the Takings Clause of the 5th amendment, slave owners should have been compensated. So BLM’s reparations argument could be taken–by a strictly pragmatic legal theorist–as invoking a legal reparations duty to all current White Americans. But even putting that somewhat sarcastic argument aside, the 2020 BLM domestic terror violence has already created “the most expensive civil disturbance” in US history (potentially), and BLM has, in my interpretation, incurred a liability for damages of $10 Billion so far, and they should post bond for their public comments to continue and expand such terror. Obama, as the BLM founder, should have his estate liened as damages reparations.
[15] “The radicals have turned race into a lens through which to view the country’s history, and not simply because they are obsessed with race. They have done so because it allows them to identify and separate those groups that deserve affirmation, in their view, and those that do not. What is taking place is the re-segregation of America, the endpoint of which will be the rejection of everything the civil-rights movement stood for. The nature of this exercise, with its sledgehammer rhetoric that obliterates complexities in favor of one-dimensional “correct” interpretations, is as close to Marxist agitprop as one can get. The current radical trends carry the seeds of violence unseen in the U.S. I am deeply concerned about what has happened to our educational system. I spent almost 25 years in academia watching up close the neo-Marxist takeover of our college and university curricula (and pushing against it). Until we dismantle the educational cartel that indoctrinates our children, we will fail. –Dr. Andrew A. Michta, Dean, College of International and Security Studies, the George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany. ‘The Captive Mind and America’s Resegregation: Idol smashing and cancel culture are part of a broad ideological project to dominate society’, 1 August, The Wall Street Journal
[16] “The faction principally responsible for the regressive stagnation of civic dialogue referred to as “multiculturalist coercive moralists,” or “social justice warriors” confuse being offended with being oppressed. Coercive moralism turns on this single claim: to be offended is to be oppressed [and] the entire world is responsible for their psychological and emotional well-being. As long as multiculturalist coercive moralists cannot cope, their position is callous, feeble, and ridiculous, but above all hypocritical. And this, in turn, disqualifies them from being the self-appointed Warriors of Social Justice who will, by themselves and by coercive moralist fiat, reshape and transform our societies for the better.” –Otto Paans, Technische Universität Berlin
Also available at Barnes & Noble
Also available at Barnes & Noble
