How does this photo make you feel? 94% of Americans say they think it’s fine.
2,353 words
There was a study published by the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology in January of 2017 and then reposted at American Renaissance by the title of “‘Yuck, You Disgust Me!’: Affective Bias Against Interracial Couples.” It is so instructive that I have kept the link close at hand since it was first published. The study used neural imaging to measure reactions to images of interracial couples. In a 2021 survey, 94% of Americans said that they approved of interracial couples. One expects that their brains would light up with approval when the participants saw images of interracial couples. Their brains lit up, not with approval, but with disgust.
This is a remarkable situation. 94% of Americans are afraid to speak their conscience on an anonymous survey, and likely afraid to admit it even to themselves. They know instinctively that interracial dating is wrong, but are brainwashed to see their own true feelings as evil. White men and women have good hearts, but their minds have been corrupted so far that they regard their own conscience as evil.
That our people anywhere live under such extreme and traumatic psychological repression is an outrage of its own. But there are even more important things to understand. This has dire implications not only for White Nationalists, but for anyone who cherishes freedom of speech, conscience, and thought.
A white man sits down at a table, utterly free of any preconceptions or biases. In front of him are two drinks. On the left is a diversity, inclusion, and equity (DIE) cocktail, brewed from mouthwash, cat urine, and bleach. On the right is White Nationalist wine. He is free to enjoy them as he wishes. He examines the two drinks with an open mind, lifts them to his nose, and samples the aroma of each. The DIE cocktail turns his nose. At a level beyond the rational, his brain lights up with disgust. He instinctively knows in his gut that that drink is pure poison for him. He never learned this reaction; he never had to. He sets the DIE cocktail back on the table, then samples the smell of the White Nationalist wine. He has never had wine before, yet the flavor agrees with him. He has a sip. It is sweet, with a very slight alcoholic sting. He finishes the glass, leaves the DIE cocktail on the table without taking even a single sip, and as he stands up from his chair, thinks to himself how nice it would be to have some more of that White Nationalist wine another time.
The egalitarian Leftist is in the unenviable position of trying to get the man to drink the DIE cocktail and turn his nose up at the White Nationalist wine. It is a difficult task, but not impossible. Everything that the cultural Marxist Left promotes is rejected instinctually. Man evolved, like all organisms, to reproduce or otherwise preserve his genotype; a thoroughly heteronormative, sexist, homophobic, racist, transphobic, patriarchal, white supremacist, even outright fascist goal if there ever was one. All his instincts were designed to that end. But there are a few of those instincts that always served him well in the past, but could give the Leftist proponents of the DIE cocktail the psychological opening that they need.
This white man, in every way typical of his kind, has a good heart. He wants to fit in. He wants his fellows to like him. He hopes that his company is pleasant for everyone else. More selfishly, he wants his interactions with others to be pleasant for himself as well. He fears outcasthood. His instinct to stick with the pack, if felt strongly enough, can overcome the initial revulsion that he feels upon sniffing the DIE cocktail and the tempting taste of the White Nationalist wine. So the Leftist arranges for all of the advertisements to show happy couples enjoying DIE cocktails, and all of the characters on the TV shows drinking and praising DIE cocktails and condemning White Nationalist wine. The Leftist persuades our white man’s religious and political leaders to sing the moral praises of drinking DIE cocktails, and make it clear that White Nationalist wine, however it might taste, is a morally abhorrent drink. The reporter on the news speaks about a conference of White Nationalist winetasters in the same tone as she speaks of an outbreak of cholera. His children come home from school and tell him of the lessons they learned of how wicked men, drunk on White Nationalist wine, committed horrible deeds all throughout history until finally DIE cocktails became the beverage of choice and now things are at long last beginning to be set right. The message is clear: Only the most morally abhorrent, cretinous, spiteful, and downright evil element of the population partake in White Nationalist wine. Decent people everywhere drink DIE cocktails.
You can buy Greg Johnson’s It’s Okay to Be White here.
The moral intimidation works. He stays clear of the White Nationalist wine. He still can’t help recoil from the stench of a DIE cocktail, so he sips only as much as he must to convince himself that he is a good DIE cocktail drinker, and therefore a good person. Every sip he takes brings him a day closer to death. Some small element of the population keeps on drinking White Nationalist wine, and boldly denounces the DIE cocktails. They warn the people that they are drinking poison, and they try their hardest to reach them and to tell them that there will be dire consequences for themselves, their children, and their nation if the DIE cocktails are not all poured down the drain. But the egalitarian Leftist has the TV news, the sitcoms, the newspapers, the schools, the universities, the magazines, the scientific journals, the churches, the politicians, the radio networks, the corporations, and Wall Street on his side. The dissident voices cannot reach the people, and most of the public is unwilling to give them a fair hearing, anyhow.
The Leftist rubs his hands together and smirks to himself. It seems his work is complete. Then comes the Internet, and with it, social media. Information is democratized. Now the newspapers and the TV channels have to compete on an even playing field with blogs and YouTube channels. And on social media, there is the freedom of anonymous communication. No one need fear moral intimidation or judgment there.
Our man begins talking with his fellows online. Among them are the proponents of White Nationalist wine. He had never realized that there were so many of them. He feels a hostility toward them, beaten into him by the hegemonic media line, so he engages them in argument. Though they seem angry, he is surprised by how much sense they make. Every instinct, other than the urge to conform, agrees with them. On more open-minded forums, soon everyone is agreeing with them. They are spreading. More and more the temptation to drink White Nationalist wine grows. Even those too nervous to take that step are getting more and more of an uneasy feeling when they look at their DIE cocktails. Even if they stay away from the White Nationalist wine, many stop drinking the poison.
What is a Leftist to do? There are only two paths for him: accept defeat, or escalate from mere brainwashing to actively censoring and terrorizing the dissidents. There is no other way for his ideology to survive. It is at odds with man’s instincts. The DIE cocktail will not sell in the marketplace of ideas. Even with prohibition, some people will break the law for White Nationalist wine.
This analogy is my own, but the assessment is not, nor is it White Nationalist in origin. No one is more qualified to assess the effect of unrestricted free speech online than Fredrick Brennan, the founder of 8chan. He had libertarian leanings at first, and to save time coming up with rules for his site, allowed anything permitted under US law. He has since moved leftward, and now wants the site shuttered. He explained why in an interview with the editor of the socialist Jacobin magazine:
[The White Nationalists’] strategy was to say, “We’re just here to talk, like you; we’re just here for our free speech. Just leave us alone.” That was the way that they dealt with the wider community in the beginning. Their theory was: “Why are you so afraid of us? The best ideas will rise to the top. Don’t you believe in free speech?” And this theory worked.
The Leftist interviewer asked Brennan if free speech could have led to socialism:
Do you think there was something intrinsic about fascism that appealed to the user base? In another universe, could the apolitical culture of 4chan have morphed into a socialist subculture instead of a reactionary one?
Brennan quickly stomped his interviewer’s naïve hope into paste:
No. I do think that there is something intrinsic to fascism because it preys so much on people’s emotions; it’s not as intellectual as socialism. The things that do well on 4chan are things that you don’t have to think too hard about — easy, simple, good-and-evil stories. It’s the same on Facebook, it’s the same on Twitter, but it’s heightened to such a degree on 4chan because there are no rules.
The Nazis are never getting banned on 4chan. They are just going to keep growing.
The irony of the interviewer calling White Nationalism “reactionary” could not be thicker. Leftism has — as Brennan, himself a Leftist, says — no chance in a free society because it is emotionally unappealing. It is a dying creed, and it went into critical condition when the Internet democratized media. As access to media grows more open, and technological progress takes us ever farther from the time when a few media bosses could brainwash entire nations with their consolidated business empires, White Nationalism can only grow. The only thing that can hold it back is repression and population replacement by a backwards regime bent on stopping this transition towards a free and open society in collusion with monopolistic tech oligarchs. Time may be ticking for our people as the Great Replacement advances, but the clock is running out for the system, too. We have already seen that wherever there is a marketplace of ideas, White Nationalism wins. The Internet will continue to invade every part of our lives, and alt tech will stay a step ahead of the censors. If they cannot replace us in time, we will not stop at merely replacing the system. We shall bury its entire worldview; everything that it stands for we will stomp into the dust of history.
Non-racialist advocates of freedom of speech must understand that White Nationalism, which makes no compromises with the system’s values of diversity, equity, and inclusion, is the only worldview that can end the West’s lunge into totalitarianism. If one accepts the moral premise that the preference for one’s own race is wrong, he has already lost. Wherever there is free speech and an open discussion of ideas absent the censorious repression and deafening, unified voice of the system blaring from every TV screen and newspaper, the instinct for racial survival awakens from hibernation. The Left’s instinctually repulsive values can only win out over the natural values of White Nationalism in an age where anyone can have his own anonymous blog or video channel through censorship and terrorism. Only an ideology that benefits from a culture of free expression has any motive to defend and promote it. Even if one cares only for free speech, and nothing about his race, he should long for the triumph of White Nationalism. White Nationalism only benefits from free speech, and a White Nationalist society will not only tolerate free speech, it will be as energetic in promoting a culture of free expression as the Left is in repressing it. White Nationalism is in the interests of every white man or woman opposed to totalitarianism, and everyone who values online free speech.
If you care about free speech and are opposed to cancel culture and censorship, but are not yet a White Nationalist, or even against us, you must make a choice. I cannot force you to agree with my own ideas, nor would I ever force anyone to believe in anything even if I could. But the system has the power to censor you, to destroy your livelihood, to close your bank account, even to send the police after you and to imprison or kill you. Every time you show deference to its values, every time that you agree that White Nationalism is immoral or pay lip service to the totalitarian notion that our moral instincts are wrong, you help justify the system’s assault on freedom of speech. White Nationalism is the inevitable outcome of freedom of speech in Western nations in the twenty-first century. Anyone who tries to defend free speech, but won’t defend where it has led everywhere that it has been tried, has already lost the argument. Only when we have buried the system’s sick values will its crusade to enforce them end.
Whatever the downsides of an increasingly online society, the system’s newfound inability to control information has led to a drawing of the curtains on it, its institutions, and its ideology. We are on the brink of a more open, honest, and free society than has ever existed before. Such a society could have no place for the moral bullying that whites have been subjected to for over half a century or the kind of elite that practices it. The system wants to bury us in resentful, low-IQ, Third World masses before the full effects of the information age can bloom. With every migrant who arrives in the West, our demise hastens. With every Westerner who abandons the sick, unnatural, imposed values of the system and instead listens to their own instincts, the system’s demise hastens.
If everyone who claims to care about free speech attacked not only censorship, but the unnatural Leftist values that justify and demand it, we would be rid of both already.
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.
- First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:
Paywall Gift Subscriptions
If you are already behind the paywall and want to share the benefits, Counter-Currents also offers paywall gift subscriptions. We need just five things from you:
- your payment
- the recipient’s name
- the recipient’s email address
- your name
- your email address
To register, just fill out this form and we will walk you through the payment and registration process. There are a number of different payment options.
6 comments
As to the response to the “anonymous” poll, I would simply never take it because I no longer believe anything is anonymous. It’s why exit polls are stupid, too.
In 2001 I was working for the brand new corporate division of Verizon Wireless. We were trained to use the selling point of CDMA (code division multiple access) technology because “no one could hack it” like they easily could with Nextel. Yes well, then 9-11-2001 happens and dozens of FBI agents show up at our office because it was where the “switch” was located for the calls made from Daytona Beach, where several of the terrorists communicated from. They hacked every single text and phone call made from that switch, and that was 21 years ago!!!
Of course now I believe it was all for show and the real terrorists were/are running our country.
The main point of the essay is not the poll on interracial relationships. It is that the values and ideas we currently live under are unnatural and unappealing and have to be artificially maintained. We have entropy on our side. Our worldview, at least as I understand it, is nothing more than that that our instincts are designed for—genetic survival—codified into an ideology.
The conditions for our victory are different, and far more likely to come about long term, than the conditions for the enemy. The enemy must maintain his control, as we have seen everywhere there is free speech on the internet, we need only break his control.
We are in a race against time. But so is the enemy. As information technology advances control slips from his grip.
The question is not ‘are whites going to wake up.’ The web traffic for this website alone should answer that. The question is which clock runs out first. White demographics or the system’s hold on our people’s minds?
{I will read your article when it leaves the paywall.}
Many whites will never wake up. Our race possesses a huge number of genetic defectives, people irrationally in thrall to universalist ideology which sits at the very core of their beings. For many whites, antiracism (which of course seems to mean opposition only to white racism, which itself gets expanded to include any expressions of white self-interest) is literally the paltry meaning of their confused lives. Given, further, the self-sacrificial nature of whites relative to other races, many of these antiracists would and will prefer to die rather than relinquish their egalitarian delusions. This type of moral as well as genetic insanity is, unfortunately, not new to our race. Whites collectively seem to have the best imagination among the races, but the underlying genetics which produce that trait can manifest in different ways. As Kevin MacDonald has observed, whites seem to be prone to moral panics, which, I suspect, is related to our superior imaginations (that is, is an outgrowth of the same mental structure which gives rise to our imaginative superiority).
The real issue, then, is whether enough normal whites, those who are genetically ‘awakenable’, will in fact awaken “in time” – that is, in the period during which we still possess the modalities (or at a minimum, potential modalities) of physical force sufficient to ensure our racial perpetuity. This is what many, going at least back to Wilmot Robertson, and including Jared Taylor, call our “race against time”. For me, the answer is negative. I do not expect in the normal course of unfolding events that sufficient whites will awaken to restore their conditions for enduring existence. “If we do nothing”, as Jared says, whites are already racial zombies – walking dead, our extinction built into our situation.
Therefore, we must create an abnormal course of events. We must change our path via political will. My belief is that this will primarily happen less via mass metapolitical education (such as CC offers – not that this is unimportant, only that I don’t think it will ever be determinative), than by militant groups of white nationalists relocating to already heavily white geographic areas, and proceeding to educate and persuade enough of the non-WN white population into seceding (from the USA, perhaps from the UK, from France, etc) and pursuing sovereignty. The other possibility is a variant on Robertson’s idea of the global Northern European ingathering. WNs worldwide may well have to congregate in one nation which we can electorally conquer. In either scenario once we are the majority somewhere politically sovereign, we can begin Greg Johnson’s “slow cleanse” and perhaps make our way to ethnostatist permanence (it will be dicey, and we will face enemies, especially from the insane and brainwashed among our own people).
Basically, the only way I think our race endures (absent “acts of God”, like, say, a mad scientist, as in the recent Bond film, developing a respiratory toxin, or even one arising naturally, which is devastating to nonwhites, but impotent against whites) is via parallel metapolitical education and white nationalist ingathering, electoral politics (perhaps even ‘on the sly’, at first anyway), and secession/sovereignty.
“94% of Americans said that they approved of interracial couples.”
There are a lot of white men that have inter-racial relationships and the thing is this: I don’t want anybody telling me who I can date or poking fun at it. On the other hand it bothered me at times for reasons I cannot explain. Races are tribal as are religions . Religion being far worse and even politics. We all don’t have to agree with each other on this issue but should be aware of the tribal instinct as only one can dominate.
Jewish politician Jacob Frey has ensured with a new law to hamper the American police officers in their mission for law and order and to expose them to a considerable security risk, in which they now have to knock on the doors of suspicious suspects before they are allowed to enter their hideouts. In addition, they must film themselves doing their job and present these results to the public. Frey, as might be expected, had already behaved in typical Jewish anti-white fashion by siding with BLM. https://www.amren.com/search/?q=%22Jacob%20Frey%22
Many good points in this article. It has also since always been my impression that rejection of interracial couples is congenital. It begs, however, therefore the question: why is “right” against Freespeech? I mean, since when is “right” the proponent of Freespeech… it is certainly new to me. Lift your arm if you associate “Freespeech” with “right”… I should be hardpressed to expect many arms… (and that doesn´t get better by the fact that the left is wildly practicing censorship).
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber 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.