There are two sides to the gigantic racial spoils system that has been erected since WWII.
One side consists of affirmative action, institutionalized (anti-white) discrimination, compulsory tax and wealth transfers, educational and job preferences, hate crime and hate speech laws, anti-colonialism, “anti-racism,” the Holocaust industry, Zionism, gerrymandered districts, foreign aid, refugee assistance, caste-based professional sports, forced integration, restrictions on property and free association rights, massive interracial prostitution of white girls by pimps, pornographers, and other assorted sex traffickers, replacement migration, and colored-on-white crime and violence.
On the other side, the economic self-interest and ingenuity of many whites have been enlisted to destroy their own culture and people. According to this model, or hypothesis, an alternative racial spoils system creates middle- and upper-income jobs that harm the race but economically reward their white holders.
Hollywood actors are a good example: people who are well-paid to defame their race and culture. The military and intelligence agencies with their innumerable private contractors, and associated Veterans Administration, also come to mind. They, too, are harmful to the country and race.
Another example is the “refugee” racket, a network of private, “nonprofit” agencies headquartered in Washington DC, or with lobbying offices there, that selects the communities where refugees will be sent, processes, transfers, and resettles them, and connects them to subsidized housing, new automobiles, and a vast array of welfare benefits. These nonprofits lobby Capitol Hill and state legislatures for funding and the admission of more and more refugees. (Lobbyists, too, are generally upper-income whites or Jews who make a good living.)
Refugee resettlement is a profitable activity funded by federal, state, and local tax money. According to one website , there are nine major refugee resettlement organizations with 450 affiliated organizations throughout the country. They are:
US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB)
Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service (LIRS)
International Rescue Committee (IRC)
World Relief Corporation
Immigrant and Refugee Services of America (IRSA)
Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS)
Church World Service (CWS)
Domestic and Foreign Missionary Service of the Episcopal Church of the USA
Ethiopian Community Development Center (ECDC)
The list reveals another pocket of the spoils system: “mainstream” (Left-wing) Christian churches, seminaries, publications, schools, colleges, and related organizations.
The fact that this massive spoils system is invisible, and never reported about to the public, makes it difficult to keep in proper perspective. It would require a massive research effort to get a sense of what is actually going on.
In “white” areas of the country a large majority of courthouse, license bureau, and similar government offices are filled with white women (not men). Even the bosses are women. These are stable, well-paying middle-class jobs with good benefits. White women also commonly serve as city managers, budget directors, librarians, and arts council heads. Post offices employ many women, though usually not a majority.
White men and women also work as university professors and administrators who socialize upcoming elites. Such people have long been, with few exceptions, hardcore Left-wing ideologues and bulwarks of the Democratic Party. When I went to college decades ago there was only one Republican in the entire political science department of a large state university. And he was just a Republican, not an extremist counterpart on the right—a neo-Nazi—of the Marxist professors who everywhere clog the universities.
The odds of this happening in the absence of ideological patronage or spoils are . . . zero. Such lopsided outcomes aren’t the consequence of an evenhanded merit system. The rules of the game are: heads they win, tails you lose.
These are exceptionally well-paid, high-status jobs. Universities always have clean, well-maintained campuses that are constantly renovated at taxpayer expense, even as they preach fanatic anti-white racism, anti-Americanism, feminism, totalitarianism, and racially discriminate against white applicants and students.
Elementary, secondary, and remedial schoolteachers and administrators are also conspicuous beneficiaries of the racial spoils system. With their university counterparts they complement the mass media as key pillars of the anti-white Establishment. In today’s mass society, culture is no longer transmitted by the family, but primarily by educational institutions and the controlled media. Together, they are far more important in socializing children than families are.
At the grass-roots political level, schools have long been sacred cows, enjoying automatic, unthinking voter support no matter what they do.
Millions of tax dollars are funneled to school systems and universities throughout the country, greasing many palms. Few government expenditures are more inimical to freedom, or to white survival, than money spent on education.
White school teachers and administrators are politically very active on behalf of the Democratic Party, have powerful, well-heeled lobbyists, and are unionized. It is here that you see personal greed and self-interest and political patronage tightly linked. Although it is never reported in the media, if you participate in local party politics you cannot fail to see it.
The careers of white policemen, sheriffs’ personnel, state troopers, conservation officers, federal law enforcement officials, and similar occupations are also aligned with the objectives of the anti-white state.
In addition, cops, schoolteachers, and others are the gatekeepers to vast, hidden “plantations” that employ many whites as wardens, guards, marshals, clerks, bailiffs, judges, prosecutors, public defenders, probation and parole officers, bounty hunters, consultants, psychologists, guardians ad litem, caseworkers, counselors, social workers, and in rehabilitation centers and foster homes.
As one System representative (a former police officer, SWAT sniper, and FBI agent) has noted:
The social services system and its affiliate, the public schools, are obsessed with what is normal. The definition is narrowed every day by new studies, new expert opinions, and batteries of ever more subtle psychological tests. [Note: this is where radical ideologies formulated by Left-wing academics, including racial ones, are injected into the bureaucratic system that molds society.] Anyone outside the acceptable range of behavior is, by definition, abnormal and subject to state intervention, supervision, and labeling. . . .
The social services plantation is staffed predominantly by women. Its attitudes are female, and, most importantly, its definition of normalcy is female.
For young men, this is a disaster. The system defines many innate male behaviors as abnormal and sick. For example, the social services plantation’s female overseers (teachers, social workers, counselors, psychologists) stigmatize boys for fighting, throwing and kicking things, teasing, resisting authority, etc. Yet these are things that [normal] little boys do. These behaviors are the play that become, in a man, fighting and hunting skills. (Dale C. Carson and Wes Denham, Arrest-Proof Yourself , 2007, pp. 35–36)
This out-of-control bureaucracy, fueled by Left-wing ideologies and policies, also intrudes into the family, dividing husbands from wives and parents from children.
This was well-illustrated in an episode of the long-running reality television series COPS, in which two patrol officers during a traffic stop removed a little blue-eyed, tow-headed lad from his mother and father. I believe a small amount of methamphetamine was involved. The female patrol officer, probably in her 30s, made a remark about the boy’s diapers not having been changed.
The blonde policewoman, cooing, cradled the boy in her arms. Though young, he was bigger than an infant. The child’s distraught mother was in tears. The cameras followed the policewoman as the boy was taken to what was either a government facility or a facility that contracted with the state—a place the officer had been directed to go by dispatch, and had obviously never seen before.
The camera followed her inside, and I was immediately appalled to see that the entire staff was non-white. A Negress blocked the camera and ordered the cameraman outside. However, you could still hear part of the conversation because the policewoman’s mike was still on.
She emerged shortly thereafter, literally in tears, because the place, she said, had no bed, no blankets, nowhere for the boy to sleep.
So, a child was torn from his mother and father under dubious circumstances and dumped, alone, into a nonwhite hellhole with no one to reliably look after him or safeguard his most basic interests. Director D. W. Griffith memorably condemned exactly such behavior in the modern segment of his silent film classic Intolerance  (1916). The incident illustrates in microcosm how middle class whites often make a good living wreaking havoc upon their own community.
If one were to closely examine white middle- and upper-income participation in the present system, one would find that many whites are rewarded for destroying their nations, their culture, and their race. It is in their (narrow) self-interest to do so.
It would be optimistic to believe that a substantial number of these people can be persuaded by moral arguments to oppose white genocide, or not to crawl before the Jews.
If they do as they’re told, their political, academic, law enforcement, judicial, government, theological, etc., careers may flourish. But if they stand against evil in even the slightest way, the howling mob will kick them to death (Nobel laureate James Watson, best-selling military historian David Irving, Ernst Zündel, and countless others).
Years ago Robert Welch responded to a question about how businessmen and the wealthy could be persuaded to stop supporting Communism. (Welch was the candy company entrepreneur who founded the John Birch Society.) His startlingly cold response was, “They’ll stop supporting it when it’s no longer in their interest to do so.”
That principle still holds true today. Moral suasion will only take you so far. Much less far, I am afraid, than one would like to think.