On Vetting & Entry into a White Ethnostate, Part IIISpencer J. Quinn
For this last installment, we focus on what to do with applicants of good character who for any number of reasons failed the criteria for entry into a white ethnostate. This process is called “Racial Vetting” (point B5 on the flowchart from Part 2) and deals almost exclusively with individuals who are:
- non-white, quarter-white, or half-white and half-black;
- under a certain age; or
- unmarried or married to a non-white, or at least half-black and married to a white.
A person who passes Racial Vetting will be awarded Minimal Citizenship regardless of their race. Racial Vetting is a way for ethnostate authorities to reserve the right to retain a small number of non-whites for the sake of national or cultural interest, or simply for the sake of recompense or gratitude in the case of “allies of color” who truly deserve it due to their service or sacrifice. Of course, demographics would play an important role, with criteria being stricter in cases where whites have less than than an agreed-upon majority percentage (say, ninety percent), and looser when they have more. The criteria I present might be considered moderate in terms of strictness.
The main thrust of Racial Vetting is about, as Peter Brandt said in the film Moneyball, “getting things down to one number.” The process by which we can do this is fairly simple from a statistician’s standpoint, but may require some explanation for the layperson. The Racial Vetting process includes four tiers, each of which contains a number of categories. An applicant is graded on various scales within each of these categories, producing a weighted mean based on different weights for each tier.
A weighted mean allows us to assign more importance, or weight, to some tiers and less to others. When you calculate a normal mean, the formula is simply to divide the sum of all the data values by the number of data values. For weighted means, however, we first multiply each data value by its weight (which increases or decreases based on importance). Then we sum the products and divide by the sum of the weights. We do this, in effect, whenever we derive a normal mean; we simply assume the weight per data value is 1.
I have decided that attaining a weighted mean of 0.50 across all categories should be enough to pass Racial Vetting. 0.35 should be enough if you are the spouse of someone who has also passed Racial Vetting or otherwise attained citizenship. Any score lower than 0.35 before a government or military intervention score (mentioned below in Tier 1) will be grounds for disqualification.
See below for an overview of Racial Vetting done up in Excel. The area encircled by a red line (cells C4-C16) is where to put the raw scores for each applicant per category. Cell B20 is where an applicant’s final score, his “one number,” will appear.
Tier 1: The top tier has a weight of 1 and only two categories: Race and Government/Military approval. For Race, a person scores 0.25 per white grandparent, 0 per non-European white grandparent, and -0.25 per non-white grandparent. Most applicants will score well below zero for this category and start off at a big disadvantage. Note that by not docking them for their race, we give non-European whites a boost in an effort to facilitate entry for truly exceptional people of this kind. The maximum a person can score in the Race category is 0.25, since most people with more than one white grandparent can avoid Racial Vetting to begin with.
Government/Military Approval allows the ethnostate’s leadership to put its thumb on the scale for whatever reason. Suppose there is an exceptional applicant whom someone in government knows will pose a problem. Suppose there is someone bound to fail Racial Vetting that a high-ranking military officer wants to bring in at all costs. It’s impossible to predict these things, but I think allowing for the option ahead of time would be wise, since it is natural for leaders to use their influence to get what they want, anyway. Most applicants will receive a 0 for this category, with the ethnostate leadership showing no interest one way or the other. If the leadership is positively inclined, it could award the applicant a 1, which would be enough to make a difference in many but not all cases. According to Racial Vetting, even the government cannot salvage a true disaster of an applicant. On the other hand, a veto, at -3, will be enough to shut the door on anyone.
Tier 2: The second-highest tier has a weight of 0.75 and includes White Character References, STEM, IQ, and Political Value.
An applicant must have a minimum of five recommendations from fully-vetted whites who are not in the applicant’s immediate family. A 1 is awarded if this is the case, and a -1 if not. For STEM, we determine if a person’s line of work falls into the Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math umbrella. If so, there are a range of values assigned to various professions. For example, an engineer would get a 1 for the STEM category, and, with weighting, ultimately score 0.75 (1 x 0.75). A dentist, on the other hand, would score a 0.75 and receive a weighted score of 0.5625 (0.75 x 0.75).
For IQ, assuming we would have a quick and accurate way of assessing it, a simple range is in order. Anyone who scores 130 or more gets a 1. Anyone between 110 and 129 gets 0.5. Anyone between 100 and 109 gets 0, and the rest get -1. The basic idea here is to peel as much technical talent from the non-white population as we can afford during a time when we would likely need it for our survival.
Political Value, otherwise known as the “Huggy Bear Clause,” is assigned to “allies of color” who have honorably served the cause in one way or another. Such people will earn a 1. Everyone else gets a 0. Its name is based on the streetwise black character Huggy Bear from the 1970s television police drama Starsky and Hutch. Huggy often infiltrated the black community, gathering information for the police, the original ally of color. If an applicant earns a 1 in this category, that automatically waives any monetary payment Racial Vetting requires (see Tier 4 below). So, if an ally of color can pass Racial Vetting, he can enter for free.
Tier 3: This tier includes some more subjective criteria and has a weight of 0.5.
People who work in technical non-STEM fields such as nursing or computer programming can also be of great use to a white ethnostate. So are people who are fluent in languages of interest and can work as instructors, translators, or spies. Such people will score between 0.5 and 1 in this category. Also, if a person has a score in this category, he cannot have one in the STEM category, and vice versa. A person can be either STEM or technical non-STEM, but not both.
Net worth is another consideration. This assumes that the more a person is worth, the more likely the person will possess the connections or financial skills that can help a white ethnostate when it needs it most. Another is military experience and cultural value. If an applicant has a list of military honors to his name, this must be considered, especially during a time of war. Further, a popular non-white of great cultural value can serve both to raise morale at home as well as to deflect criticism of the white ethnostate abroad.
Tier 4: The bottom tier has a weight of 0.25 and concerns the amount of money an applicant is willing to offer the ethnostate, the applicant’s English proficiency, and the length of time the applicant is willing to work or serve in the military to attain minimal citizenship.
In the first case, we award freeloaders an instant -1. Someone with less than ten thousand dollars to give gets a 0, and the score goes up by increments of .1 from there. The highest a person can score is a 4 if they contribute twenty million dollars to the ethnostate. The idea here, of course, is that during its birth pangs, a white ethnostate will be strapped for cash, and the more it can extort from applicants the better. As mentioned above, if an ally of color can pass Racial Vetting with the maximum value in this category, then he can enter for free.
For English proficiency, an applicant gets maximum benefit for being fluent and the maximum demerit for not. This should apply for native speakers as much as it should for those for whom English is not their first language.
The final category simply gives an applicant a chance to get past the minimum weighted mean through voluntary sweat and toil. For example, agreeing to work three years for a nominal wage in the service of the state will award an applicant a 0.6 in this category. Being multiplied by its weight of 0.25 lands the applicant with a weighted score of 0.15. Often, the Labor/Service category will be juggled with the Financial Contribution category so that an applicant can choose to either pay more and work less, or work more and pay less, in order to gain entry.
And that’s about it. See below for the mathematical formulas used in the Racial Vetting process, which anyone with spreadsheet software can emulate and, presumably, improve upon.
As we did last time, I will offer several case studies which will give a feel for what Racial Vetting can do. The first three will be for real people and the last two for hypothetical ones. In all cases, these applicants will have garnered the five character references from whites needed to score a 1 in that category.
Case Study 1: Retired black basketball star Charles Barkley. From all accounts, Barkley is a nice enough guy who from time to time likes to spout common sense about current events, to the chagrin of the mainstream media. I find it hard not to nurse a mild appreciation for him, and, as the “Round Mound of Rebound,” he was a legitimate basketball superstar in his day. However, assuming that Barkley has no STEM or technical skills, but possesses an IQ in the 100 to 109 range, a net worth of over ten million dollars, and a willingness to give and work to the maximum in order to join, he would still fail Racial Vetting, scoring a 0.29. As this is below the minimum weighted mean of 0.35, he wouldn’t even qualify if he had a spouse who gained acceptance or if the government or military intervened in his favor.
Case Study 2: Famous black, anti-Islamic author and activist Ayaa Hirsi Ali. Of course, given her work resisting Islam, Ali would score a 1 in the Political Value category. Assuming Ali knows two languages of interest other than English, has an IQ between 110 and 129, a net worth of just over one million dollars, and a willingness to dedicate five years of service to the ethnostate, she would score a 0.43, well above the minimum 0.35 weighted mean for a spouse to gain entry. Her husband, historian Niall Ferguson (who is white), would likely make it to Minimal or Partial Citizenship on his own, and Ali, as a spouse, would get credit for that.
Case Study 3: Conservative author and blogger Michelle Malkin. Because Malkin is not married to a white man, it will be assumed that her spouse would face higher odds of passing Racial Vetting than she would. Therefore, passing Racial Vetting would be extremely difficult for her. Unlike Ayaa Hirsi Ali, she would have to earn the full 0.50 on her own. Of course, she would get a 1 in the Political Value category for her anti-Left and anti-anti-white track record. Assuming she has similar statistics as Ali, she still would be 0.07 short of 0.50. Only the government or the military could make the crucial difference in her case.
Hypothetical Case Study 1: A high-IQ East Asian scientist or mathematician. Those of us who have tech backgrounds know plenty of people like this: polite and industrious (at least when they are in the minority), with few interests beyond work, but poor English skills. Such people would essentially fail Racial Vetting unless they have government approval, military experience, and/or can throw some serious money around. For example, even with such a person getting 1’s in the STEM, IQ, and Net Worth categories, and even if he volunteers to work and pay the maximum, he won’t get past a 0.35. For such an individual, even government or military intervention wouldn’t do the trick unless he also has military experience or is proficient, at the very least, in an art or sport at the national level. Very few people of this type will make it into a white ethnostate.
Hypothetical Case Study 2: A Hispanic military general with impeccable service and pro-white credentials. The assumption here is that if a person serves as a leader in the US military with distinction, he will garner government intervention and be considered an ally of color. Assuming such a person has an IQ in the 110 to 129 range and can speak Spanish (a language of interest), he would score a 0.53 and pass Racial Vetting with little difficulty.
The Hispanic Question: In most cases, a person’s race will be easily determined, either visually or by consulting the person’s genealogy. In the absence of genetic testing, this should be enough. In the case of Hispanics, however, it may not be. Many Hispanics share a Spanish heritage and might be as white as anyone. Because their last names may end in a ‘z’ and all their grandparents are from Mexico or Argentina doesn’t necessarily mean they are not white. This is something ethnostate authorities will have to consider if genetic testing is not available.
The Question of Miscegenation: Of course, in a white ethnostate there should be anti-miscegenation laws which would favor a white majority. These might not be as simple as they might seem. For example, a non-white caught in sexual relations with a white should face immediate deportation (along with any progeny produced by such a union), and the white person involved should be punished somehow. On the other hand, non-white-on-non-white miscegenation (for example, black-on-Asian) should be accepted. Someone who is half-white and not half-black should be allowed to interbreed in any direction, with the understanding that unions with non-whites will guarantee perpetual Minimal Citizenship for them and their children. Someone who is at least three-quarters non-white in a white ethnostate can never have offspring that will rise above Minimal Citizenship.
This will create a permanent non-white underclass, which will discourage immigration to a white ethnostate.
So if the ethnostate is opposed to miscegenation, why is it so tolerant of applicants who interbreed? Well, it is and it isn’t. If a black-white couple were to somehow gain acceptance, so would their children. But being half-black, these children will not be able to take whites as spouses without facing deportation. Further, the parents would not be allowed to have more children (since that would be miscegenation) without also facing deportation. Basically, I think we should protect all newcomers from ex post facto jurisprudence. But once a white ethnostate is formed and everyone is made aware of the laws, then ex post facto no longer applies.
Final Thoughts on the Vetting Algorithm and Racial Vetting
None of the decisions made in the Vetting Algorithm and Racial Vetting should be onsidered final. I put a lot of thought into them, but I’m sure there is much I failed to consider. As I said before, this is a beginning, not the end. If we do ever get to the point at which a white ethnostate becomes a reality, I hope people will remember this article and the conversations it engendered and make decisions that will be the most beneficial for the white race while being as just and fair as possible to everyone else.
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!