White vs other races when it comes to fairness

submitted by [deleted] from self.debatealtright

Jared Taylor has sometimes claimed that whites are a fair-minded people who will not act unless they are convinced a policy is right. As such, they must be appealed to in these terms, and this informs his approach. I've also heard Jared and many others claim that whites' commitment to fairness has made it easy for people of other races to manipulate and exploit us.

At the same time, I've heard black nationalists like Umar Johnson and others claim that whites are power-driven conquerors who follow a Machiavellian understanding of ethics and morality. Meanwhile, guys like Richard Spencer seem to actually endorse this idea of whites maintaining a conquerer mindset. And historically, whites have conquered a lot of other people.

It can be said that all races have attempted to conquer, but whites have simply been the most successful. But I still find the differences in perception interesting.

all 5 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Erasmus 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It's the difference between the in-group and the out-group.

Whites today are the victims of massive in-group confusion, to the point where they think all of humanity is their in-group, a ludicrous lie that no one else on this planet believes. Blacks know their in-group is other black people; Jews know their in-group is other jews; Whites say, "What's an in-group?"

This is the result of a massive multigenerational campaign to deliberately de-ethnicize and deracinate Whites, and as I think most people here understand, you have to be somewhere on the far reaches of either side of the bell curve to have resisted it.

To get Whites to think of their own interests, you have to get them to out-group members of their psychological in-group, a Herculean task. Think of it like someone trying to convince you that your parents or your children are bad people, that staying around them will hurt you, that you should cut yourself off from them. What would it take? Wouldn't you make every excuse not to believe this painful thing? This is why we are where we are today.

On a related note, I was just listening to the Ezra Klein podcast this weekend, where they had Harvard-educated Pakistani author Mohsin Hamid talking about his new book "The Last White Man", a Kafkaesque novel of racial apocalypse where White people start waking up with dark skin, to their disgust and horror. It's a novel of incredible contempt for White people -- imagine the reception a novel "The Last Jew" would get -- written as a sort of racial revenge because Hamid felt he "lost his whiteness" after September 11th, when he began being detained when getting on planes.

Klein has Hamid read the opening of his novel, which was so laughably bad one might think it was a parody of some sort. The White man wakes up with dark skin and immediately falls into an "unexpected, murderous rage" and begins physically punching the mirror until it breaks. I think this says more about how Hamid felt about himself after September 11th than it does about us.

Imagine thinking race was only about skin color and not behavior. You could paint every White man brown and give us afro wigs, or you could give them all light skin, blonde hair, and plastic surgery.... we'd still sort ourselves out by behavior alone. By our desires for different textures of life. This is why race matters. This is what separates the in-group from the out-group.

[–]Rakean93Identitarian socialist 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Whites being committed to fairness is a biased take. Everyone is, generally speaking, committed to something that they regard as right, even the neoliberals so to speak - they don't think to be evil. Obviously what's right differs between different cultures and it happened that the whites developed over the last 3 centuries a fixation on personal liberty, which can lead to what's called "fairness" in the sense that as society we tend to remove the obstacles to the exercise of such liberty - the so called rule of law. That's not fair for, let's says, the Muslim, which consider highly unfair the fact that people are allowed to live outside the Sharia law.

About the conquering drive, that's more realistic but also highly dependent on a series of factors. Mongols are highly aggressive and conquer-minded, as well as Persians; the same was true for some native American cultures. Chinese people on the other hand basically never engaged in external imperialism and the same is true for the Africans. However I doubt that the whites as a race are particularly conquer-minded. I think that it was mostly a result of several factors: Europe being culturally more or less unified under Christianity but politically divided promoted a fierce competition for centuries, and most of the colonies were indeed taken in order to get a competitive advantage in Europe. Christianity also, as much as Islam, is an universalistic religion and justify the conquest of non-christian people for the purpose of conversion. Islam and Christianity, as a fact, are the most aggressive religion on the earth (be aware of the fact that the decolonisation process started alongside tge secularisation of the West). Lastly there's the Roman empire example, which is more or less the foundational myth of the whites, that promotes the idea that is a duty to expand the civilization and that conquering people is a good way to do so.

All in all the whites are conquer-minded and fair as a result of their history, which could in turn be the result of their particular racial make up, bit honestly who knows? And why should it matters?

Ps Spencer is retarded.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Every group is committed to things they regard as right, but whites organized societies around principals of fairness and codified them into their laws. Ending slavery, one man/one vote, due process etc. Whites have even taken to treating animals with certain rights. Have black and brown done the same, to a comparable degree?

I'd say it matters simply to understand our own nature and the nature of other races.

[–]Rakean93Identitarian socialist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Blacks and brown never developed the idea of personal liberty and free market.

[–]asterias 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The history of Europeans is not that convincing. Take for example the barbarian tribes of the first centuries or the various wars between European countries. Or the crusaders acting like common looters. In more recent years, see the British policy against so many countries, from Ireland to Cyprus and from India to Palestine. Or the French policy as well. Not to mention local societies where corruption is a way of life, like in Italy or Greece. The road to fairness demands proper discipline and education and leadership.