“This, then, is the great white paradox: Whites claim to adore “diversity,” but they make every effort to avoid it. They make every important decision in their lives — where to live, whom to marry, where to send their children to school, whom to choose as friends, which church to attend — as if it were made for racial reasons, but deny that race had anything to do with it. As one wag put it, in their mating and migratory habits, liberals are no different from members of the Ku Klux Klan.”

                 — Jared Taylor, A Race Against Time: Racial Heresies for the 21st Century (p. 325)

— Comments —

Bill R. writes:

It is a great paradox, and it is a paradox that tells us that you can’t really get rid of racial consciousness and identity, not even in whites, because it’s a deep and profound aspect of human nature, just as is attachment to one’s family (and members of our own race are, after all, only more distant cousins). You can, however, to use Samuel Francis’s metaphor, repress that identity. It then expresses itself on an unconscious level. And this is what has happened with whites. They repressed their racial consciousness and did so for the same reason people repress anything: fear.

And we know what generated that fear: the triumph of the myth of racial equality and the hardening of this myth into the most ferociously rigid and unforgiving social dogma the West has perhaps ever known. Of course, what psychologists will tell you about repressed contents, is that they have an ugly tendency, indeed an insistence, on returning to consciousness by the back door, in the disguised form we call “neurotic.” These disguised contents then proceed — or so goes the theory, at any rate — to exercise a destructive and maladaptive influence on the conscious mind far out of proportion to the influence the contents would have had had they remained conscious and been accepted and integrated into the personality with all the rest of its conscious qualities.

So, since whites have lost the healthy, conscious expression of their racial identity, and with it the glue that enables them to form open racial solidarity with fellow whites, we see them, instead, for example, fleeing towns that have become too violent because they’ve become too black. The racial identity and solidarity are still there, in fact, but since they cannot be consciously acknowledged, they are forced to play themselves out in a neurotic, maladaptive fashion. And fleeing is neurotic and maladaptive because, for one thing, you’re literally not adapting, you’re fleeing instead — and you’re not just fleeing blacks but yourself as well — and for another, you may eventually run out of places to flee, and even if you don’t, you’re liable to find the reason for your fleeing is now in hot pursuit because they don’t like living in those conditions anymore than you do but, unlike you, are unable, on their own, to rise above them, and see in you and your state of racial intimidation and guilt, a means they can exploit to do so, even if only temporarily. In contrast, an open, healthy, conscious expression of racial identity would immediately translate into an open and unabashed racial solidarity that would enable whites to remain in such towns and retake them — and retake them swiftly, self-confidently, and totally — to the benefit of all. Of course, if white racial identity can be cured of its repression, that will also spell the end of its oppression, and the issue of taking back towns will be moot because we will have taken back the entire civilization. And what could be more just and natural than that?  It is, after all, ours.

Laura writes:

That’s a great statement.

Taking back those towns would benefit all.

Please follow and like us: