A White Nationalist Praises Charlie Kirk & Offers Constructive CriticismJames Dunphy
If you’re trying to build a race-blind movement, the scariest thing is for the media to link you to white advocates. You may fear that the mercurial public will write you off as an extremist, causing you to lose momentum.
Maybe you think the problem isn’t with white advocates per se. You may believe that there is no logical reason why whites shouldn’t have their own racial advocacy group just like blacks have the NAACP, but you know the public isn’t logical. They operate on animal spirits that stem from emotional programming. It is these waves of emotions you seek to surf, and it’s terrifying when what appears to be the shark fin of a white advocate comes to the surface.
However, surfing the waves of political correctness will eventually be impossible due to the oncoming Tsunami of demographic change. It will come to an end one way or another.
In this article I will show that Kirk’s compliance with political correctness requires detachment from reality that is embarrassing. In future articles I will show that: 1) if one believes in gender, he should believe in race, 2) racial nationalism is better than race-blind capitalism, 3) we’re in the twilight of the idols regarding non-white figureheads in the GOP, and 4) evangelicals represent an intellectually abandoned people.
Congratulating Charlie Kirk for his work with Turning Point USA
First, we must congratulate Charlie Kirk for doing wonderful things with Turning Point USA. Group members have openly supported building Trump’s wall, deporting illegal immigrants, ending affirmative action, defunding sanctuary cities, and stopping unassimilable Muslims from immigrating to Europe.
The organization is quite large too. The website claims to have over 380 chapters and to have raised $5 million in revenue in 2016. Much of what Youth for Western Civilization tried to accomplish a decade ago, Kirk and TP USA have brought to fruition today.
Having said this, TP USA does not advocate a homeland for whites. If they did, leftists would subject their business tycoon donors to painful boycotts which would force them to withdraw support. (Only Zionist student groups can get away with supporting an ethnostate because of prevailing Jewish hegemony over American political culture.)
Despite having many differences with white nationalists, TP USA will benefit white nationalist movements on the net because the number of people who will migrate from its platform to a white nationalist one will be far larger than those who do the reverse. After all, there’s nothing like priming the libertarianism to white nationalism pipeline.
Kirk Contradicts Himself on Race
Having said this, Kirk’s modus operandi to surf the waves of political correctness has led him to contradict himself in embarrassing ways. For instance, in a series of tweets on April 14 he begins with a statement intended to support pro-life causes that includes the phrase “A ‘fetus’ in the womb has . . . unique DNA [and a] different race . . .” “Different race” can only mean that each fetus has racial characteristics. On the same day, perhaps in an effort to cover this statement—which could be construed as race realist in nature—he proclaims, “Race is a made up concept.” Later in the same day he tweets “Race is made up. Stop using it.” It’s almost as if he’s chiding himself for referring to the racial attributes of a fetus. Funnily enough, another tweet from the same day reads “Different day, same facts” when in fact, so far as his ideas on the existence of race are concerned, it was the same day and different facts! To make matters worse, five days later, on April 19, he tweets “Affirmative action is a racist program . . .” Because one can only believe in racism if one also believes in race, he’s apparently gone back to believing in race even though he thinks it is made up. Yes, I know, going over his contradictory statements is tedious.
Kirk has been stupid on race, but overall, he isn’t a stupid guy. He alleges to have scored high enough to get into West Point but claims his spot was given to an affirmative action candidate. The same evil political correctness that allegedly did this now forces him to tow the left’s contradictory beliefs on race. It has not only kept him out of west point but is now making him act stupid.
The Same Logic that Leads one to Believe in Two Genders Leads One to Believe in Race
Although Kirk wavers on racial differences, he firmly believes in gender differences. He often wears a T-shirt that states “There are only two genders.” However, just as leftists say gender is a social construct, Kirk says race is “made-up,” which implies he thinks it is a social construct. Everything to some degree is a social construct, so pointing out that aspect of it means nothing. The question is whether something is real and useful.
Gender is based a binary system, yes, but it’s more complicated than the simple black and white social definition. There are alphas and betas after all. However, we equalize people within sexes to promote cooperation. We don’t incorporate intermediate hermaphrodites for the sake of convenience. This way we have useful definition that isn’t too far off from reality.
Likewise, racial groups exist in genetic clusters, but it’s more complicated than that. There are differences within races, but we ignore those for the sake of cooperation. There are mixed race Tajiks and Mexican mestizos, and there are intermediate groups like Iranians, but we overlook those for the sake of convenience. This way we have a useful definition that isn’t too far from reality.
Gender involves survival of the basic human form, and race involves survival of the racial form that eons of love and conflict have created. The former primarily involves individual selection and the latter, group selection. Both are legitimate evolutionary mechanisms.
Jews, Hindus, and Muslims Outperform Evangelicals and Blacks in Capitalism
Kirk claims to be an evangelical Christian and a champion of capitalism, but according to Pew research, the US capitalist system isn’t working out so well for evangelicals. Jews are three times more likely than evangelicals to have a household income of $100,000 or more. Hindus are over twice as likely, atheists are 50% more likely, and Muslims are 43% more likely. By voting Republican, evangelicals support capitalism more than Jews, Hindus, atheists, or Muslims, yet they benefit less from it.
Kirk has been lauding his black sidekick Candace Owens for some time now. Blacks fare even worse in capitalism than white evangelicals. According to Forbes, for every $100 a white family has, black families have just $5.04. The reason is that they have on average both lower income and lower tendency to save.
Token black intellectual Thomas Sowell said he was a socialist until he worked for the government, saw how incompetent and inefficient it could be, and switched to being a Friedmanite capitalist. But did he ever work in a US corporation? Maybe if he did, he’d hate corporations too.
Kirk started TP USA at the age of 18, and he has never, to my knowledge, worked for a corporation. I wonder if he would idealize the free market so much if he did.
Ramzpaul on the other hand has worked a lot in the corporate world. He doesn’t think the government should allow foreigners to invade a nation to help corporations’ bottom line. He values nations more than corporations.
TP USA as Political Evangelicalism
I am not against evangelicalism per se. Evangelical voters were the main reason Trump was elected, and they are probably more pro-white on average than members of other denominations. So long as they can learn to be pro-white enough to live in a white ethnostate, I have no problem with them. However, I have noticed some things about TP USA that remind me of the more problematic aspects of the evangelical mindset. The first thing is that it’s cultish. Charlie Kirk and Candace Owens don’t feature positive smiles like Joel Osteen but rather heartwarming testimonies of blacks converting to free market beliefs. They don’t preach the tough love of Joyce Meyer but self-reliance under capitalism (while living off socialistic donations).
Just as evangelicals believe the Bible has all the answers (which I won’t approve or condemn here), Kirk seems to think he has all the answers as he quotes Friedman, Sowell, etc. Every time he uses his fingers to count off a list of reasons why his beliefs are right, it’s like he’s attempting to further push himself beyond the point of open reflection.
Evangelicals seem to use similar techniques to drum things into their head. They use short, repetitive lyrics in their worship songs, which in terms of complexity and originality are somewhere between pop music and the recorded sign language of Koko the gorilla—wait, I take it back. Koko was more original. Evangelical music has neither the poetic prowess of old Protestant hymns nor the nor the otherworldly spiritualism of medieval polyphony. History will remember no evangelical songs. Neither will it remember Kirk’s tweets, though I must say they are more thoughtful than evangelical song lyrics, which isn’t saying much.
White Nationalists are very different from Kirk. Sure, they have a sort of credo in the fourteen words, which they sometimes repeat, but they’re constantly arguing over the proper tactics, strategy, and system of government. They don’t seek idealized affirmations of their beliefs everywhere like evangelicals use a kind of cultural Amway as they try to find a Christian version of everything and like TP USA seeks token non-whites. Instead evangelicals are mulling over what kind of society is best for whites. They’re driving, moving, and thinking rather than driving a preconceived doctrine into their minds. They’re building on and breaking away from each other. They are fluid in their attempts to close in on the problem of white demise and solve it. They have goals that transcend the individual and centuries. They don’t rationalize beliefs for the sake of comfort but sincerely try to understand the world to gain the knowledge necessary to save their race. They seem to be a lot more self-directed than those who passively buy in to an all-encompassing system.
Dodging the Jewish Question Makes you Look Foolish . . . or Extremely Witty
TP USA’s relationship with Jews and Israel mirrors the absurd relationship evangelicals have with Jews. On most surveys, evangelicals love Jews more than any other non-Christian group despite Jews disliking evangelicals more than any other goy group. Evangelicals are like the skunk cartoon Pepe LePew and Jews are like the female cat he mistakenly chases around, thinking she is a female skunk. Just as the cat sees the skunk as an oppressively stinky threat, most Jews view evangelicals as unreasonable, oppressive goyim to be avoided. Put it another way, evangelicals beta orbit Jews as they support Israel, and so does Turning Point USA. Meanwhile, Jews voted for Clinton more than any other religious group, and even neoconservative Jews such as Ben Shapiro and Jonah Goldberg didn’t vote for Trump. Just as Pepe LePew turns a blind eye to the cat’s resistance, evangelicals and TP USA turn a blind eye to most Jews disliking them.
Kirk turns a blind eye to Jewish warmongering despite seeming to be anti-war. In an interview with (((Mark Levin))) he states:
In the middle east . . . the two big players consolidating power are the Iranians and the Saudi Arabians, and the Saudi Arabians have lots of different proxies throughout the middle east, and I think we . . . should be very careful to just think immediately Saudi Arabia always has our best interest at heart . . . Some people call them a ‘frenemy.’ I would call them very close to an enemy . . . The Iranians aren’t our friends either, but we should not fight a Saudi Arabian proxy war and have American blood lost.
Funnily enough, fellow guest (((Daniel Horowitz))) follows it up with “We went into the wrong country when we went into Iraq. I mean I think it would have been more prudent to go after Iran,” and (((Levin))) replies “Yeah I came to the conclusion that we picked the wrong country.”
Kirk claiming the “Saudi Arabians” want to start a proxy war when the two (((neo-cons))) sitting next to him are overtly talking about the merits of sending the US to fight what in my opinion would be a proxy war for (((certain country in the middle east))) is ironic. Complaining about Saudi warmongering with those two is like complaining about Hispanic crime with two black guys who proceed to talk about how they should have robbed a different store last week. Was it “Saudi Arabians” in the Bush defense department who lobbied for war with Iraq? Did they author a Clean Break Strategy for Securing the Realm in the 1990s? Is their leader going on television and holding up a poster board portraying a cartoon bomb filling up to the brim to rouse fear over Iran’s nuclear capacity? Iran will never use a nuke, but if they get nukes, invading them on behalf of a (((certain country))) in the middle east will be impossible.
Kirk seems silly blaming Saudis, but if he was using “Saudi Arabian” as a euphemism for a (((another group))), he is an outright genius. Those darn (((Saudi Arabians)))!
The Disclosure Ethic Equally Implicates Anti-Communists
Kirk’s last resort in dealing with my critiques might be to claim he is a better person because he makes public speeches and videos about his ideas, and I don’t. This appeal to the disclosure ethic—that something is ethical only if it can be done in the full eye of the public—equally indicts all those dissidents in the former Soviet Union who secretly circulated anti-communist literature. The reason they needed to act covertly is that their movement would be snuffed out if the small number of them who believed in it didn’t covertly spread their views at first. Likewise, the only way for many white nationalists to survive economically is to spread their views covertly.
Anti-communists in the former USSR were going against the system in a fundamental way, but Charlie Kirk isn’t. His non-profit can pay him an alleged salary of $100,000 a year because he’s supporting something that is within the Overton window: race-blind capitalism. His idea that the Alt Right is inferior because it is largely covert is not an argument against the Alt Right per se but against covert political activity in general, including that of Soviet era anti-communists.
Charlie Kirk is an Ally
Having said this, I don’t want to make it seem like Kirk is an enemy. I rooted for him in his debate with Hasan Piker of the Young Turks. He did a fairly good job, especially when he called out the middling IQ Piker for claiming there was no room for (((Ben Shapiro))) to speak at Berkeley. However, he should have corrected Piker for saying that Richard Spencer is a “violent Nazi” because Spencer repeatedly called for Charlottesville attendees not to engage in violence prior to the event. Plus, when Spencer gathers with only his people, there is never any violence. When ANTIFA gather with only their people, there is violence, so ANTIFA are the ones causing it and not the Alt Right. Furthermore, Spencer is not a Nazi. He is simply what he is. Kirk failed to defend our honor in front of liars, but at least he supports our freedom of speech so that we can defend ourselves.
The growth and development of Turning Point USA is a metapolitical victory. They haven’t shifted the Overton Window but rather have let in more light from its far-right side. That makes it more probable, in my opinion, to make an overall shift in its position.
I regret having to constructively criticize Kirk and TP USA and look forward to their continued success. What’s certain is that our common enemy, ANTIFA, is not just attacking white nationalists and the Alt-Right but normie conservatives. For example, they allegedly disrupted meetings of Young Americans for Freedom—a group following the race-blind, surrender-oriented tradition of William F. Buckley. They also of course, regularly harass and assault Trump supporters.
If Kirk insists on equivocating the Alt Right movement with ANTIFA, despite sharing, in my opinion, more policy stances and psychology with the former, he might as well stop the one he’s able to stop, which is ANTIFA via legislation that bars their violent obstruction of free speech. ANTIFA isn’t about free speech. They’re about using low value track speech such as noisemaking to silence it. TP USA members on the other hand value free speech because they are capable of rational debate. Maybe TP USA will be instrumental in pushing legislation to criminalize ANTIFA’s methods, which threaten not only them but all rightist groups.
Advocating for White Rights in Turning Point USA
So, just how many token non-whites belong to TP USA? Kirk posted as his Twitter background a Where’s Waldo-esque photo of himself standing cross-armed in front of a crowd of about 300 people, and I was able to count using a painstaking but thorough method about 215 white faces out of 246. I would have counted all of them, but only 246 were large enough to categorize racially. Now, 215/246 = 87% white. I usually erred on the side of the person being non-white, so there are probably a few white kids with a deep tan in the non-white figure of 246-215=31. The GOP has been about 87% white since 2000 and 87% of Trump voters were white. Moreover, most of the non-whites in the photo seemed to be either middle eastern or Hispanic and thus genetically not too far removed from the 87% of them who were white. If that photo is representative of TP USA members, I would be okay with founding a white ethnostate with them. They’d be collectively white enough for me.
Kirk claims Kanye has doubled black male support for Trump, but even if that’s the case, non-whites would still be less likely per capita to be Republicans than in 2000.
As I counted the white faces, I saw a lot of white guys that looked like me. They had that semi-preppy, destined to loaf around the golf course look. The white girls, though it was difficult to see them very well, left faint impressions of beauty. They had such kind smiles. They looked nothing like the “haters” the left makes them out to be. It makes me mad that the university system tells them that, unlike blacks, Jews, etc, they are forbidden from taking their own side racially.
Kirk should become something other than the historic deadweight of the 87%. He should tweet, in his usual Philosoraptor-esque way, that if it’s okay for blacks to have the NAACP, it ought to be okay for whites to have an organization for whites.
Candace Owens should do likewise. Shouldn’t all those white faces in Kirk’s Twitter background photo have the same rights that she does? Every black, Hispanic, Asian, and Middle Eastern Muslim who belongs to Turning Point USA can participate with their college ethnic support groups without suffering censure. Why shouldn’t white members be able to do likewise? How can she represent them if they don’t have the same rights on campus as she does?
Eventually, someone will normalize white identity on college campuses successfully. I’m just suggesting that Kirk or Owens be the person to do it.
Stop Worshipping the Troops
Counter-Currents Radio Podcast No. 374 Greg Johnson, Richard Houck, Gaddius Maximus, & Thomas Steuben on How to Respond to Being Called “Racist”
Robert Ruark’s Uhuru
What Do You Say When Someone Accuses You of Racism?
Columbus’ Fourth Voyage
David Duke’s Bottle of Red Pills
A White Nationalist Take on 9/11
The Abortion Fight Returns