Waking Up From the American Dream
Obama’s Racial Socialism
The Broken Social Contract
Taxes are no longer the price you pay for civilization. They are the subsidy you provide towards its destruction.
The purpose of a government run by the Lockean principles of American classical liberalism is to safeguard “rights” and provide the basic services needed for people to engage in trade and own property. While American politics consists of the never ending argument about what exactly these services should be, the overwhelming majority of Americans would agree that government should provide law enforcement, national defense, public education, transportation infrastructure, and other basic functions of the state.
Of course, the existence of these basic services has led some progressives to charge that no one actually is responsible for their wealth or accomplishments because “we” all paid for them. Barack Obama famously said during the 2012 campaign that if you started a business, “You didn’t build that.” And Elizabeth Warren, the progressive favorite to challenge Hillary Clinton in 2016, said:
You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your factory because of police-forces and fire-forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory — and hire someone to protect against this — because of the work the rest of us did. Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea. God bless — keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is, you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.
The problem is that the American government today does none of these things well, and some not at all.
- American transportation infrastructure is crumbling and deficient.
- Public high schools turn out graduates that few other societies in history would call “educated.” A sizable percentage of these graduates can’t even read.
- Police forces don’t actually protect life or property anymore – they show up to arrest you when you defend yourself.
- You may not have to worry about “marauding bands” seizing your factory – you have to worry about someone filing a nonsensical lawsuit and taking your life’s work because they say someone told an “offensive” joke. Or because some bureaucracy says you violated an impossible regulation. Or just because a lawyer just feels like it. And if “marauding bands” show up to your property and you try to have them arrested, you better hope they are white, otherwise someone is going to sue you and make you pay them.
Admittedly, this isn’t true in all places in the country. But it’s becoming more prevalent everywhere. It requires real sacrifice to find a community with mildly capable government, good schools, and efficient police. And there is still no complete escape from the DC Regime.
The “social contract” doesn’t exist because even the bare bones “night watchman” state of classical liberal imagination does not function. If Elizabeth Warren and those like her went away, or DC itself were vaporized out of existence, the peace and prosperity of the Republic would be dramatically improved. Unfortunately, it’s not just a matter of “big government” incompetence.
Think carefully. Especially you younger readers — have you ever seen government power used to your advantage in your life?
Have the police ever done anything other than give you a ticket? Have bureaucrats ever helped you out with a problem? Has a government program actually put money in your pocket instead of taking it out?
(And those of you who are raising your hands – I mean if you didn’t lie to get on disability or say you were actually half-black so you could get a job.)
This isn’t meant to insult those of you who work as police officers or work for the government. You aren’t allowed to perform your legitimate function. As Richard Spencer has put it, we have a government that doesn’t govern. Institutions like the State Department or the Department of Agriculture no longer fulfill any actual functions. They simply exist as an excuse to give unqualified minorities invented jobs and administer programs that transfer wealth away from European-Americans to nonwhites.
This even extends to the “hard” functions of government like the military and the security services. The military does not exist to protect Americans. It exists as part of the welfare state for nonwhites, most of whom will never see a real deployment and will simply refuse to go (and not be punished) if they are asked. Those whites that continue to serve in traditionally dangerous billets like piloting fighters or spearheading armored columns are used in questionable military interventions overseas that make Americans more at risk. They don’t fight and die for nothing. They fight and die for something worse than nothing.
The Border Patrol does not exist to patrol the borders. Today, it exists to provide daycare for illegal aliens.
Even NASA doesn’t exist to explore space anymore. In the words of NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, President Obama said his “foremost” concern was to “reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with predominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math, and engineering.” No wonder we haven’t been to the moon since the 1970s.
Obviously, the government also exists to transfer massive amounts of resources to the already wealthy and powerful, especially financial institutions and contractors. However, this is not the ideological justification for government action nor the explanation why so-called leftists are far more angry at white nationalists than Goldman Sachs.
Today, leftism is far less concerned with eliminating capitalism than with establishing control over the wealth that capitalism creates. Government will not seize failing banks or collapsing financial institutions – they will bail them out with taxpayer dollars and in so doing, establish de facto government control over them.
But the ideological justification is multiculturalism. Global capitalism benefits from the breakdown of traditional European identities because it enables cheap labor at home through mass immigration and abroad through outsourcing. Nonwhites and white enablers receive political power and lucrative financial positions. And of course, Jews as a group derive disproportionate financial, cultural, and political benefits within the deracinated Occident.
What governs the West is best described as “racial socialism.” Racial socialism is, in Peter Brimelow’s definition, the “use of state power to shift resources from taxpayers, predominantly white, to [favored] constituencies, predominantly minority and above all black.” It’s this regime that Paul Kersey of Stuff Black People Don’t Like has called “Black Run America” (BRA).
The point is not that blacks actually govern America (although they do symbolically through the Obama Administration). Nor would I agree that blacks are always at the top of the food chain of state favored “victims.” The point is that multicultural grievances provide the ideological justification for the confiscation of resources from whites and their redistribution to minorities. Black slavery is the most well-known “Original Sin” of the American Experiment and thus the most widely deployed, but all the other victim groups are represented – and new ones are being invented all the time. Aside from serving as a framework for policy, the various victim groups provide a way for opportunists to accumulate power and wealth – as Elizabeth Warren, who claimed to be an American Indian while at Harvard, knows full well.
A kosher conservative might say racial socialism is simply National Socialism (Nazism), only with nonwhites and Jews in charge. The difference is that a fundamental precept of National Socialism is only a member of the nation can be a full citizen of the state. Or, as some white nationalists have put it, “our race is our nation.” Therefore, socialism is married to a project of social justice, eugenics, health, territorial expansion, and technology. The upward development of a racially homogeneous national community is the purpose of the state and the source of its legitimacy. The “socialism” of National Socialism is the subordination of the private economic interests of the rich to the well-being of the entire national community.
In contrast, racial socialism as practiced in Obama’s America does not require racial homogeneity. Indeed, it could not function in a racially homogeneous community. Racial socialism relies upon the confiscation of the wealth of European-Americans. White communities are targeted by the government in order to make them more racially diverse and therefore dysfunctional. The problems inherent to diversity result in greater inequality and social unrest, which paradoxically provide the purpose of the government and the source of its legitimacy. In short, a multicultural government will pledge itself to fighting the problems that it has created.
Samuel Francis wrote that most elites in history were conservative because they had a stake in the continuity of the civilization they created. However, the managerial elite described by James Burnham that runs our society has its power increased by social dysfunction. Thus, we have a government which deliberately imports people because they will be burdens on the state, outsiders in the culture, or sources of social dysfunction. The more chaotic and incapable the society is and the more time and money government has to waste providing for helpless clients, the more empowered are the managerial elite. Multiculturalism and opposition to white “racism” is simply the ideological justification for the system of power and control that we call racial socialism. And while the use of Cultural Marxist rhetoric makes “racial socialism” a useful designation, a more accurate one might be “racial parasitism.”
Racial socialism encapsulates the core argument against America. It is the systematic sacrifice of the best of society for the sake of the worst. The structure of incentives created by government actually promotes dysgenics, welfare dependency, single motherhood, family breakdown, and the collapse of a social order that doesn’t require constant government intervention. These are not problems but features of the system. The gradual decline of a once great country is no threat to American rulers – they have more to gain from expanding access to welfare programs than by championing the conquest of space.
The continual dysfunction of government also creates its own controlled opposition – libertarianism. Because government in a multicultural society can’t govern, dissenters turn away from the idea of power in disgust. They assume no government can do things like provide quality education, administer a transportation system, or pioneer technological advances. As a result, instead of the American Right seriously discussing seizing power for themselves, American conservatives and libertarians convince themselves that they are actually fighting the Left by opening the borders or providing tax cuts to their plutocratic enemies. The creed of “limited government” ensures that the rulers of the government never face any actual resistance, as the American Right focuses on the hammer rather than on those who wield it.
Ronald Reagan famously joked that the most terrifying words in the English language were “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.” Today, the government does not bother with the pretense of saying they are here to help. Instead, they offer us frank hostility – justifying mass immigration on the grounds that it “punishes” us or will “rub the Right’s face in diversity.” And unlike in Reagan’s joke, they may not even announce themselves at all — just toss flashbangs into the house and shoot you.
As Jack Donovan reminds us, “Violence is Golden” and one can hardly complain about a state that is backed by violence. That’s the point of a state. But this state doesn’t give us order – it makes sure there is no resistance to the destruction of strong communities.
For example, state power, and thus state violence, was used to destroy white communities in Chicago in order to create the violent dystopia that exists in the Second City today. To borrow a memorable phrase from Mayor Daley at the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago – “The police aren’t here to create disorder. The police are here to preserve disorder.”
Racial socialism is perhaps the most skillful accomplishment of our enemies because of how easily it transcends the labels of Left and Right. The plutocrats are in league with the community organizer; the National Security Agency shares common interests with the “anarchist” anti-fascists. This is why the political debates of mainstream politics seem so hopelessly petty, and the rhetoric of conservatives and libertarians so irrelevant to the actual problems faced by the American people.
But in another way, racial socialism is actually simple to explain. It is whites paying for their own dispossession. It’s the multicultural elite encouraging and monetizing the dysfunction of the poor and the deracination of European-Americans. And it’s eminently simple to point it out to other whites once you understand that every urban wasteland, black flash mob, or immigrant invasion isn’t a “problem.” They’re just your tax dollars at work.
Enoch Powell, poslední tory
Counter-Currents Radio Podcast No. 525 On Capitalism, Socialism, & the Ethnostate
Body Cams Never Lie
Twelve Months Later: Anthony Burgess’ 1985
Public Transit in Multicultural Hell
Před a po Táboru Svatých: k další tvorbě Jeana Raspaila
Pox Populi on Greg Johnson’s “Against Imperialism”
White Nationalism vs. Racially-Conscious White Ethnonationalisms Part 2
Today, the government does not bother with the pretense of saying they are here to help. Instead, they offer us frank hostility – justifying mass immigration on the grounds that it “punishes” us or will “rub the Right’s face in diversity.”
I’ve had my “face” rubbed “in diversity” all my life these past 50+ years here in New Brunswick, NJ, that’s why I detest it so much, that’s why I speak out against it every chance I get.
Does every White person in America have to undergo the same bitter experiences I’ve had to as well as other lower income whites who can’t afford to live in “Whitelandia” before they come to their senses?! That’s where its heading because of the vast, nonstop brainwashing and guilt-tripping and propagandizing of Whites via every medium of news and entertainment and communication. By then, it’s game over.
I know I’m preaching to the choir but still I’ll say it: Wake up White people!
Greg, your site is totally freezing up on firefox and crashing the browser.
Really? I haven’t noticed this at all. Every now and then it’s a little slow loading but once it has, it’s usually fast. I always thought it was from traffic.
fyi. You should try our superior Canadian technology for it is all working fine up here. And Greg, did my order for Bowden’s book come through? The pigeons had the day off when I put the order in.
I am glad somebody brought up the this site’s slowness.
Of all the Web sites I am regularly visiting now, I can’t think of a worse one… perhaps the Occidental Dissent only, after a technology upgrade a month ago. This site is heavy on graphics, seems to be full of scripts and launches many plugins.
I visit it with several browsers on various devices and am never fully comfortable with its behavior.
Here is from a Firefox pop-up ten minutes ago:
A script on this page may be busy, or it may have stopped responding. You can stop the script now, or you can continue to see if the script will complete.
And I see 15 plugins sitting in blocked states “behind the browser” now.
This site is a performance hog, I am sorry to tell you.
These are not Web-traffic but design issues. Expecting a lot of traffic here is kidding yourself, too, it seems to me. Compare yourself with VDare.com, for example.
I use Google Chrome. In terms of page loading times, whichloadsfaster.com rates us at a tie with VDare, 25% faster than Radix and The Occidental Observer, 79% faster than Occidental Dissent, and 420% faster than Takimag. AmRen loads 33% faster, which I guess is important if you are slavering for the latest Negro mischief updates.
Nobody likes a slow website, but let’s get real: if somebody decides that they are going to read Commentary rather than Counter-Currents because Commentary delivers its swill 33% faster, should I feel that is a real loss?
I’d wait 30 minutes for Counter-Currents if I had to
Occasionally the home page appears in a Word-style Times New Roman format but that’s not really a problem (though I do like the water image at the top of the screen — where does it come from?).
Amren is great but I can’t visit the site too often else I’ll be in low spirits for the rest of the day. Fortunately I tend to prefer the metapolitical approach of Counter-Currents, though I have great respect for Jared Taylor.
Unfortunately, it will take a society calamity for these thoughts and words to break into the “mainstream.” This is bread-and-butter, every day thoughts and reasoning instinctually known and felt by the white everyman. Fortunately, that calamity will happen. I just hope there’s enough left in the aftermath to turn this philosophy into action. What a helluva of an essay.
Everyone is thinking it, but noone knows how to articulate it. Hence the endless complaining about what’s ‘racist to white people.’
Samuel Francis wrote that most elites in history were conservative because they had a stake in the continuity of the civilization they created.
But G.K. Chesterton said, “The simple key to the power of our upper classes is this: that they have always kept carefully on the side of what is called Progress. They have always been up to date, and this comes quite easy to an aristocracy. For the aristocracy are the supreme instances of that frame of mind of which we spoke just now. Novelty is to them a luxury verging on a necessity. They, above all, are so bored with the past and with the present, that they gape, with a horrible hunger, for the future.” What’s Wrong with the World.
Greg, you need to get Mr. Hood’s contributions to Counter-Currents into a single volume some time. Once again, a great essay, with real insight.
Itz closer than you think!
Well said. In the Draka novels of S.M. Stirling, the Draka affirm their world view by the ritualized greeting, “Glory to the Race” to which the response is “Service to the State”. The order is all important: Glory to the Race comes first. Service to the State means service to a state that gives glory to the race.
This is very complete and concise. I’ve reprinted it, with gratitude and commentary and illustration, here:
Socialism, National Socialism, or Racial Socialism?
Obvious exaggeration of government under-performance is a poor and common WN habit, one that I’ve engaged in as well.
I agree. Outside of Atlanta, where the government is filled with passive-aggressive, sullen blacks, my interactions with government bureaucracies have been universally positive. And the worse bureaucratic experiences I have had were with private institutions: a university and a hospital. We have to stop sounding like libertarians or Republicans. Libertarians and Republicans blame bureaucracy like blacks blame “racism.”
Yes look at the Post Office – over a century of fine service in general. Local conditions can vary. My local main branch is staffed by two loons: one of them took offense that I didn’t laugh at his joke; the other one insisted that I use their over priced envelopes. The other offices are perfectly fine though.
My response is intended for both this article and “Turn Left, New Right!” by Eugène Montsalvat…
However, the managerial elite described by James Burnham that runs our society has its power increased by social dysfunction.
I first read Burnham’s “Suicide of the West” back in high school and what a turning point! Burnham provided a system for understanding the politics of the era: the attack on white rule in South Africa and the cozying up to communist insurgents abroad; the kowtowing before guilt mongering race hustlers at home; the debacle in Vietnam; the capitulation of liberal officials to leftist radicals on the campuses and in the streets; the lockstep orthodoxy in academia and the media. All this holds true to today. Post-modern liberalism is the underlying ideology and it provides two things:
1: a justification for global elites insofar as they can claim to be promoting a universal democratic world order (while simultaneously crushing all national competitors and looting every manner of country).
2: a rationalization for catastrophic defeats suffered by the Western/White world: e.g., the collapse of the American borders are turned into an opportunity for humanitarian assistance; third worlder rioting in Paris or London becomes noble protests against “xenophobia;” the takeover of cities such as Detroit or Chicago by minority street gangs and Big Men is a triumph for civil rights; the ethnic cleansing of White people from southern Africa is transformed into the advance for universal democracy, equality and brotherhood; and, etc.
Here’s the thing about point “2:” normally, an ideology provides a justification for the maintenance of power for a group. For the great mass of liberals, liberalism does just the opposite: it provides the justification for surrendering power. This is what makes post-modern liberalism so odious. Even if you wanted to believe in it, how could you rationally do so when liberalism’s policies will dispossess you, your family, and your people?
By comparison: an individual might have become a believer in the communist ideology during 1918-89 on the grounds that communism meant more power, territory, prestige, loot, etc., for the overall polity which would eventually trickle down to oneself (assuming one could steer clear of purges).
But why would anyone (I mean white person) in their right mind want to believe in liberalism when that means your cities will be pillaged by a rampaging underclass, your children will lose out in the affirmative action hustle, and you might end up living under a regime of third world gangsters? i.e., you will have less power, territory, wealth, etc.
Burnham provides an answer of sorts in the irrational elements of liberal ideology, its roots in a pathological guilt complex. Honestly, what sane people beats themselves up in guilt over the slave raiding of three centuries ago (does anyone see Muslims or Native Americans acting this way)? Whatever liberalism is, it is not rational. And this more than anything else is the reason to reject liberalism, because who wants to be part of a self-deluded mob?
(Of course, to global elites the dialectic of liberalism enhances their own power by destroying nationalist rivals and undermining the middle class. Elite promotion of liberalism serves self-interest–and one wonders how much of the ideology they believe.)
Anyway, not too long after reading “Suicide of the West,” I dug up a copy of “The Managerial Revolution” in a university library (as it was not currently in print). Again, Burnham provided an explanation for what was going on (plus or minus a few details). Orwell is generally acknowledged for parodying the managerial revolution in “Nineteen Eighty-Four.”
Interesting thing is that Burnham is one of the few analysts to provide a cohesive picture of the power structure in existence. Yet he seems to have slipped into obscurity. Perhaps most people do not want to face up to the actual situation? There’s an edition of “Suicide of the West” which came out in the 1970s that had an afterword by the author. He noted that the events of the years since the book was originally published bore out his analysis (such as the general European capitulation to the Arab oil embargo). He also wrote that while a Reagan might come to power, this would not reverse the trends. Well, Reagan was elected president and while the USSR did collapse, we have seen much of Western Civilization disintegrate since the 1980s.
1. how to counter liberal ideology.
2. how to form a new elite of White Nationalists to displace the current managerial class.
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Edit your comment