91 words / 55:34
To listen in a player, click here. To download the mp3, right-click here and choose “save target or link as.”
This is the audio of Kevin MacDonald’s presentation at the Northwest Forum on February 25th, 2017. I have edited out the voices of the questioners at the end (with one exception), but the gist of their questions can be inferred from Dr. MacDonald’s responses. Next week, we will publish the written text on which the talk was based. I want to thank Kevin MacDonald and our audio guy for the recording.
3 Comments
Some thoughts…
Getting the White Nationalist message out: this is the job for agitprop (or infowar as it’s termed these days). This is a field where the political right has been deficient for decades…one of the great big shortfalls of mainstream conservatism has been a lack of professional posters, flyers, films, pop songs, slogans, protest marches, TV shows, civil disobedience and so forth. Leftist ideas tend to dominate in the media and on the campus because the left has an agitprop apparatus which operates non-stop. Still, the Alt Right appears to be gaining an edge on the Internet front these netcentric days.
Empathy: I know otherwise intelligent liberals who see empathy as their determining motivation and indeed as the only proper motive for anyone. When it comes to the current “refugee crisis” (i.e., third world invasion of White countries), they openly state that it is a matter of putting oneself in the place of the “other” and thus opening the floodgates. When the downsides are pointed out – the crime, terrorism and general dysfunction which the refugees bring – they may recognize all this but nonetheless insist that empathy must take precedent. It’s kinda disturbing because it comes down to letting emotions run the show to the point where a Rotherham or Cologne becomes not only possible but acceptable.
Morality in the social sciences: I should put “morality” in quotes, since its really moralistic posturing on the part of liberals. The take of many university departments on, say, physical (biological) anthropology is that since a century ago racial science was used to justify policies like segregation and imperialism it can not be taught today. Effectively, liberalism says that science must be subordinated to ideology.
It’s as if astronomy departments started teaching only Ptolemaic epicycles and made advocating helicocentricism a crime. Then they started wondering why satellites crash into the ground and space probes end up falling into the Sun. This, on top of the emotionalism (empathy) means that policy as a whole is determined by irrationality with the results, as could be anticipated, disastrous. Just look at education, criminal justice, immigration, urban development, wars abroad, whatever.
Much of the dilemma comes down to a lack of pro-White ideology. In the 19th century, the ideology of Manifest Destiny provided the moral justification for Americans conquering the continent. And until the mid-20th century, racial ideology provided the moral justification for White rule in the USA (and much of the world).
Liberalism so permeates today’s political and cultural climes that it is difficult for many Whites to realize that until circa the 1950s race was the determining factor for politics. This is where the Red Pill metaphor comes in. It’s not just a matter of the political right having good agitprop (though that is important). It’s waking people up, mainly White people, to the matrix of ideological delusions which has been constructed around them.
I’d give you that the Alt Right will have to fulfill this historic function. Let’s give it a good start.
R Moreland writes: Whites to realize that until circa the 1950s race was the determining factor for politics.
And RACE is still the determining factor of politics today:
https://www.amren.com/features/2013/04/race-the-central-question/
Conservatives possess master morality — they see liberals as ‘bad’
Liberals possess slave morality — they see conservatives as ‘evil’