2,350 words
There is a fundamental divide in the MAGA movement. On the one hand are those who understand and embrace the full meaning and implications of national populism. On the other hand are those who still cling, openly or implicitly, to globalist, elitist, and civic nationalist ideas. This conflict emerged most clearly in the “counter-Jeethad” against Indian H-1B visa scammers, which began on Christmas Eve, 2024.
One front in this battle centers around the concepts of “meritocracy,” “entitlement,” and “competition.”
Against Absolute Meritocracy
Many people on the right are opposed to affirmative action and DEI because these policies award education and employment to leftist client groups based on identity rather than merit. Wouldn’t it be more just to award schooling and employment based on merit rather than race? Wouldn’t society be better off as a “colorblind meritocracy”?
In my essay “How Diversity Destroys,” I argue that diversity impedes all institutions from performing their proper functions by introducing a competing value that overrides all others, namely diversity. So yes, a colorblind meritocracy is definitely better than a society in which airplanes fall from the sky and babies are decapitated in the birth canal because diversity is placed above merit. But colorblind meritocracies are still not what we want.
For one thing, colorblindness is only necessary in multiracial societies. But White Nationalists want monoracial societies. You don’t need to be colorblind if there are no people of color.
Moreover, nationalists don’t really want meritocracy as such. Instead, we want what I will call nationalism with meritocratic characteristics.
Let’s be frank: white people espouse the general principle of colorblind meritocracy because they think it would be better for whites than affirmative action. This is true when whites are competing with low-functioning blacks and browns, but it is not true when whites are competing with high-functioning elites skimmed off of Near- and Far-Eastern societies. Under these circumstances, color-blind meritocracy is a prescription for whites losing control of leading positions in our own societies.
This is compounded by the fact that these foreign strivers tend to be highly nepotistic, meaning that they will appeal to meritocracy to gain a foothold in institutions, but when they gain power, they immediately drop the pretense of meritocracy and begin filling institutions with members of their own tribes, locking out more qualified whites.
At this point, one should ask: Must your political principles serve your people, or must your people serve your political principles? I hold the former view. Meritocracy literally means the “rule of merit.” But I do not believe in being ruled by merit or any other principle. I believe in popular sovereignty. I believe that a concrete people should rule itself, and political principles and institutions are merely tools of popular self-government. Thus I reject meritocracy, because it does not serve our purposes. Instead, I want national populism, the system that puts my people first. But I want a nationalism with meritocratic traits. How does that work?
Purely merit-based decisions can be described as “impartial” and “objective,” meaning that they are based solely on criteria relevant to a particular task, not other factors, such as personal connections or “identity.” For instance, when you are looking for a college for your son, you judge prospective colleges based on merit. But it doesn’t matter to you if your son is not the best possible student. You’d be a bad father if you gave your son’s college money to the neighbor boy because he had better grades.
Before any personal or political deliberation about the best course of action can begin, we have to ask: For whom do we want the best? Obviously, for ourselves. But are we the best? It’s a flattering thought, but probably not. There’s only one best in any category, and there are billions of candidates.
But why should it matter? Every child has someone who loves him, but should we only love the best child? Every country has patriots who love it, but should they only love the best country? Obviously not. Being loveable is not the same as being the best. Nature makes us love ourselves and our own, regardless of merit. And if we don’t take care of ourselves and our own, nobody else will. “The best” can look out for themselves.
It is natural, normal, and right to prefer our own children over our neighbors’ children, regardless of merit. Nationalism is the politics of such preferences. We naturally love our own blood over strangers, regardless of their objective merits. We feel the same about our own homelands, as opposed to foreign lands. Nationalism is the politics of loving our own.
Because nationalists believe in giving preference to their own people, they don’t accept “meritocratic” arguments for high-skilled immigrants. You don’t serve your people by replacing them, although some people (the bosses) definitely serve themselves by replacing you. But benefiting oneself by degrading society as a whole through replacement immigration shouldn’t be allowed.
Ultimately, family and community are more important than merit. Merit is a criterion of choice. But we don’t choose our families or communities. We are born into them. We don’t love our families or communities based on merit. We love them simply because they are our own.
But if we want the best for our families and communities, then we will make merit-based decisions about who performs our surgeries, flies our airplanes, or leads our nations. Within limits, though, because we don’t need the best in the world, just the best among us. But the best of our own people were good enough to send men to the moon. Once we start talking about importing new people based on merit, we have lost sight of the Alpha and Omega of the whole process of deliberation: love of our own.
You can buy Greg Johnson’s The White Nationalist Manifesto here
The defenders of colorblind meritocracy often object that nationalism is just “DEI for white people.” After all, DEI is all about putting identity before merit, and ultimately so is nationalism. This is a clever but cheap rhetorical trick, because DEI has become a dirty word. But nationalists must hold the line here. Yes, nationalism ultimately puts identity before merit. But it puts our own identity before merit, not the identity of outsiders. That makes all the difference.
Team America
The advocates of colorblind meritocracy in immigration often liken a nation to a business or a sports team. Just as a team wants the very best players, shouldn’t your country want the very best citizens, even if that means importing them?
But a nation isn’t a business or a team. A nation is a community bound together through shared blood, as well as a common culture, history, and destiny. Unlike a business or a team, you are born into a nation. You don’t choose your nation, and it doesn’t choose you. That’s fine, because only liberals make a fetish of choice. But the most important relationships are the unchosen ones of family and nation.
Your nationality is what liberals sneer at as an “accident of birth.” But it isn’t really an accident, for if you were born to another mother in another land, you wouldn’t be you. Yes, your lineage and nationality are part of what defines you as a human being. They are essential, not accidental.
Yes, it is possible for people to be “naturalized” and become part of a nation. Yes, this process involves conventions like laws, creeds, and oaths. But calling this process naturalization belies a hesitancy to treat nationhood as merely conventional, merely as a matter of laws and values. You only really become naturalized though intermarriage with the natives, which means that it only really happens to your children. Beyond that, every naturalized citizen is the born citizen of another country. Thus birth remains the primary, and I would argue, the only real way to become a member of a nation.
Unlike a business, you aren’t hired into your nation based on merit. Moreover, your continued membership in a nation is not contingent on performance. Rather, your nationality is a birthright. It is what conservatives sneeringly call an “entitlement” and liberals decry as an “unearned privilege.”
In Defense of Entitlement
Many center-Right normies don’t like any talk of entitlement, because it brings to mind affirmative action, DEI, and welfare kangz and queenz looking for handouts. When they hear Americans saying that they are entitled to more consideration than foreigners, there’s a tremor, then a twitch, then they reach for their “Pull yourself up by your bootstraps, bucko” talking points.
But there’s nothing wrong with entitlements and privileges, and nationalists need to defend them as such. An entitlement is just a right. Nationality is a birthright. The rights of a citizen are privileges, because they are not shared equally with everyone. A citizen enjoys privileges that foreigners don’t but there’s nothing unfair about that because every foreigner has a birthright to a homeland where he is privileged and you are not. Aside from podcasters, most nationalists don’t want to live on welfare, but nationalists all feel entitled to a homeland.
Our Way of Life
A nation is not just a community tied together by blood. It also shares a common culture and way of life, which nationalists also wish to preserve.
One of the most heartening turns of the Counter-Jeethad began when Vivek Scamaswamy made an effortpost on X explaining why Americans can’t compete with Asiatics: our culture. While white Americans play sports, watch sitcoms, and hang out with their friends, people like Vivek grind away at their math homework under the watchful eyes of tiger moms. If Americans want to compete, we need to become more like Asian nerds.
To my great surprise and pleasure, this view was widely condemned. Basically, when forced to choose between white American culture and Indian immigrants, most Americans chose to stuff Vivek in his locker. The conclusion was: if Americans can’t preserve our culture while competing with Asians, then we need to exclude Asians.
This is a solidly nationalist position. Again, what is most important is a people and its way of life. We embrace competition and meritocracy if they help us maintain our identity and way of life. Otherwise, we reject them.
Destructive Competition
Vivek’s fun-free childhood is just a taste of the dystopia being offered under the guise of “colorblind meritocracy” and “competition.” If a system is truly colorblind and meritocratic, then it is also globalist, for there can be no borders for the colorblind, no barriers to the best. So that means Americans must compete with the whole Third World.
Americans love competition. When we hear the word, we always imagine sporting events. We think competition is manly. We think it is fair. We think it promotes excellence and upward development. A common signal of superiority is the taunt, “You’re not afraid of a little competition, are you?” This is now as “Boomer”-coded as “Just ask her out” or “Just ask to see the manager, give him a firm handshake, and . . .”
But again, nationalists need to brush aside this cheap, manipulative rhetoric and say: “Yes, actually, I am very, very afraid of competition with the Third World. You should be too. Here’s why.”
Competition with Third Worlders sounds innocuous, even wholesome, when it is depicted as nerds squaring off in math Olympiads. Wouldn’t such competition for excellence make everyone better off, winners and losers alike?
Yes, but inside that wholesome wrapping paper is a box of rotten meat: economic competition with billions of coolies who are willing to do your job for a fraction of your pay and living standards. That sort of competition is not the upward path to excellence. It is the downward path to pauperization. First Worlders want no part of it.
Globalization is always tempting at the start. Who doesn’t like cheaper consumer goods? What employer doesn’t like paying lower wages?
But any basic economics textbook will tell you that in a single, global market, there will tend to be a single, global price for any good or service. Thus, in the long run, globalization means one thing: the equalization of wages and living standards over the entire planet. First World living standards will fall a great deal, and Third World living standards will rise a little bit, until parity is achieved. In other words, globalization means the reversal of the progress in living standards since the industrial revolution.
Globalization will also reverse the genuine progress made by the Left: the higher pay, shorter work weeks, and benefits won by the labor movement; the health-care, welfare, safety regulations, and old age pensions created by progressive governments; and the environmental protections won by ecologists. It is a pretty good way of life. Globalization will destroy it while allowing a few oligarchs and their political servants to grow obscenely rich in the process.
Economic competition, like merit, is not an absolute good. It is merely an instrument. We use it whenever it helps preserve and perfect our identity and way of life. We set it aside when it impedes these goods.
Competition easily becomes destructive unless it is constrained by the common good of the nation. F. Roger Devlin gives an excellent example of destructive competition. Imagine you are sitting in the bleachers at a sports event. Someone in the front row stands up to get a better view of the field. Others stand up to compete with him. Eventually, everyone is standing, but once everyone is standing, nobody has any better view of the field than when they were seated. But they are all worse off, because they are standing as well.
Individuals seeking their own interests can trigger competitive processes that make everyone worse off in the end. The only way to prevent or roll back destructive competition is for the state to set boundaries based on the common good of society. American workers need protection from Third World competition, whether it comes from offshoring jobs or importing immigrants. American national populists will give them that protection.
Only a fool stakes his nation and way of life as the prize in a fair competition with foreigners.
42 comments
Vivek is running for governor of Ohio. I hope to God his post on X comes back to haunt him. I wouldn’t count on his democrat opponent to shed light on it.
He has to go back. His X post is very typical of the soulless Indian American diaspora. Vivek was able to masquerade as a conservative American for awhile, but eventually he could no longer hide the seething resentment for normal white Americans.
This resentment is not unique to him.
“He has to go back.”
They all do; this is our homeland.
The pathetic part of the video is the American (who knows what Vivek is trying to do) tolerates Vivek’s lying about what is an American. The correct & polite way the American should have handled it is – look Vivek your a nice guy & all but your not American, you can never be America. India is your country. Again, the reason this sort of thing happens to us is because we are too tolerant. We are really too blame.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnmXtnrUOfk
Vivek is a fraud.
Yes, but what do we actually do now? The problem was created by our parents and grandparents (not mine, of course: they were all racial immigration restrictionists to the bone, as am I!) – and it continues to be ratified right now by the American voter. I started getting involved in anti-immigrationism in high school in the 70s. If you had told me in college in the 80s that we would STILL be suffering from the invasion – and worse than ever! – in 2025, I, despite my innate neo-Spenglerian gloom, would have accused you of being too pessimistic. But here we are.
No one in the public eye can tell Vivek that he doesn’t belong here. He was born here, and, as far as I know, not to illegal aliens. Moreover, this isn’t Europe, in which the same people (Whites) are both the sole indigenous and the sole civilizational builders of all European nations. Nonwhites in Europe are truly race-replacist, demographic imperialist colonizers. A firm Christian could tell the “Viveks” (or Muhammeds, Chang-Hos, Mbothos, etc) to get out, that their mere Presence = Violence.
A Christian cannot say this wrt America (or Canada, Australia, Argentina, etc). Especially America, a territory which contained nonwhite indigenous peoples, and to which were additionally brought African slaves nearly coincident in timing with its European peopling. Yes, the White man founded, settled, and built America, but the territory always contained these others. Obviously, that was no excuse to embark upon the deliberate dewhitening of the country via imported diversification since the ruinous decade of the hated Sixties. But it does mean that nonwhites have an infinitely greater moral claim to residency here than in Europe.
For America, the most that the vast majority of Whites would consent to would be mass deportations of all illegals; sealing the Mexican border; an end to nonwhite immigration (which I suspect pragmatically could only be effectuated via ending all immigration); continuous attacks on any type of DEI or AA crap; and maybe, just maybe with enough metapolitical education and awakening, the creation of a secessionist Ethnostate.
But American Whites will never have the support or the power to deport lawfully resident nonwhites. A peaceful, separatist Ethnostate is, absent nation-wrecking civil war, the most that Whites can hope for in North America.
I had to chuckle at the line about him getting stuffed into his locker 🙂
By the girls. And left there for the summer. Or better yet, daniel stern in Rookie of the Year when the moron trapped himself between the doors.
Both Outsourcing to and immigration from the third world has caused Americans innumerable misery and suffering for multiple generations now.
I also think the idea of meritocracy is based on fallacious pretenses. There can be a correlation between meritts, such as intelligence and work ethic, and success, but American society does not necessarily reward people based on who has the best attributes. On a micro level, compensation and promotions are often subjective and based on feelings about a worker rather than actual performance or achievements. On a macro level, the powerful often create laws and contracts to destroy any possible competition to them. The business elite are obsessed with outsourcing, irregardless of the actualy quality of work it produces or the social consequences. American CEOs are willing to destroy everything to keep outsourcing going; it’s almost a fanatical religion for them.
All this is to say that meritocracy only exists on paper and there maybe elements of it in certain environments or situations, but greed and inherent human emotion or irrationality makes it an untenable system.
A great and timely article! MAGA supporters of the civ-nat, alt-lite variety leave us utterly vulnerable to ethnic scamming. I saw one the other day on FB, a big Trump booster, saying that now we can return to a color-blind meritocracy.
But a color-blind meritocracy would in fact constitute a huge improvement in White status and prospects versus the hard oppression we experience now. And, moreover, at least some nonwhites support it. You don’t go from 0 to 100 instantly. In politics, you must achieve victories, and then build on those to push for further victories.
I agree completely. While white advocacy must be explicit, the politics that follow in its wake will be gradualist.
No man will treat with indifference the principle of race. It is the key to history, and why history is often so confused is that it has been written by men who are ignorant of this principle and all the knowledge it involves… Language and religion do not make a race—there is only one thing which makes a race, and that is blood.
Is it what you call civilization that makes England flourish? Is it the universal development of the faculties of man that has rendered an island, almost unknown to the ancients, the arbiter of the world? Clearly not. It is the inhabitants that have done this. It is an affair of race…. All is race, there is no other truth.
Benjamin Disraeli
This is an outstanding essay, Greg, that gathers together a number of threads into a comprehensive argument against one of the primary right-wing mind traps. I hope it can be spread far and wide.
“Just as a team wants the very best players…” This is why I find modern sports boring. Why should I care about my home town’s team when almost none of the players are from there? What is there to root for? It’s just a corporation owned by a foreigner, played by foreigners, and held together by money. A little league team from my neighborhood would be far more interesting.
“Let’s be frank: white people espouse the general principle of colorblind meritocracy because they think it would be better for whites than affirmative action.” That’s it, really. Hurt someone less than you were hurting them before? They feel better. Like having an abcessed tooth removed. You feel great, but in normal circumstances you would be in pain.
I think the AA debate was framed at a time before Asian competition was really a significant factor, I’m talking the early 80s and 70s. The non-white percentage of the population from Asia has increased dramatically in that time period. The truth is, the issue, and its talking points are calcified in an anachronistic form which strangely pretends that Asians and Hispanics are not even really there. I think it’s because neither side really wants to admit the Asian question. Whites because whites at ivy leagues are discriminating against Asians, and Ron Unz’s famous essay on the topic will give you the granular nature of that issue, and blacks and others don’t want to admit the question of Asian overachievement because it sort of breaks the myth of an oppressive white majority. How are Asians coping under our crushing heel? Unpleasant truths.
I agree with most of your assertions here, but what do you mean by saying “I think it’s because neither side really wants to admit the Asian question. Whites because whites at ivy leagues are discriminating against Asians …” ?
How are Whites discriminating at the Ivies? They certainly haven’t done so to benefit their fellow Whites since about the 1920s. Perhaps you mean they’re discriminating against Asians on behalf of other nonwhites? That is likely true, but, first, the main victims of AA are Whites (especially working class and rural Whites); and second, a huge proportion of the leadership of the Ivies is now Jewish.
Read Ron Unz’s long article on the topic, or at least a summary.
Hard disagree. I think we should let the meritocracy rip. Whites have groups such as Jews and some nordics who are fully able to surpass and equal any Asians, and who are also civic minded and give back, which likely accounts for European civilizational superiority. They will raise the best of us and Asian innovations will create abundance. I can’t think of any situation where meritocracy is not the right answer.
You think Jews are whites. Hard pass.
Sorry, but you’re part of the problem.
Well, in my experience the DEI enjoyers try to re-define merit into those exact terms, not actual meritocracy.
So you only have to be the best Negro to fly the aircraft, or the best one not to actually flip it over on the runway during landing.
They also use certain DEI buzzwords like Resilience (meaning “oppressed” PoC) and Community (meaning only Darkies).
🙂
The oh so predictable republican answer to the colorblind meritocracy challenge from the desperate token negro seeker is ben carson. Ask them to name one other. Crickets.
Hey fellas, look: Altorl=A Troll! It’s a troll! Don’t let him dupe you!
The past 2 years the left has tried to create hysteria that “democracy is under attack” by the right.
But the right position is one of populism, which is more “democracy” than what is proposed by the left: appoint our elites to rule you. We make good decisions for you.
In my experience, this clinging to Buckleyite, National Review-style conservatism is probably the biggest stumbling block to “red-pilling” folks on the right. Most of them go into full Rainman mode when confronted with anything other than lip service to MLK’s “dream” and a colorblind society. Explaining the importance of populism and group solidarity to them is like teaching algebra to the proverbial pig.
“Meritocracy”, as Greg noted, can only work in a homogeneous environment. It also only seems to operate in countries with the rule of law and a sense of fair play, i.e. European and of European origin.
Organized nepotism by motivated and corrupt outsiders will always defeat a meritocratic system, especially when the rules are only applied to the majority. If this situation is allowed to persist, any pretense of meritocracy will disappear along with the rules themselves.
To those who believe, or more accurately try to shame us into believing, in the fantasy of a “propositional” or “creedal” nation, Auron Macintyre made an interesting rebuttal in a recent video: Liberia’s constitution is nearly identical to that of the United States.
This excellent article was much needed.
Oh please !
As if Hollywood , high finance , or elite universities or worse grad schools are “ meritocracies” .
The worst thing I ever did was earn a marketing MBA from Stern New York University – supposedly the #1 MBA program in the USA when I graduated there in 1989.
I didn t get a job at graduation or even a job interview through Stern NYU career center . My one good job lead I did on my own ( an advertising account executive job at a Chicago Ad agency Leo Burnett) was almost certainly sabotaged by woke , lib feminist lesbians that outed me just as a center right Republican and anti NYC murder ( > 2,000 murders in 1989 , I noticed . George Bush Sr then US President didn t seem to notice or care – too busy invading Iraq to get SADDAM HUSSEIN )
IMO anti ha White Lib politics aside , > 90% if my MBA program had/has no practical value – mostly highest level math calculations with that HP Engineering that didn t have an “ =“ sign . has anyone ever used that HP Engineering calculator in a real $ paying job ?
how about Calculus ? Trigonometry ? Foretran mainframe computer programming ? I had to learn all that at Vanderbilt undergrad BA History/economics.
Damn I wish I had learned a trade , been a plumber , electrician or elevator repair union worker .
Some ugly poop colored East Indian guy is now the President of Stern NYU Graduate School of Business . The President of NYU as a whole is some Jewess Chosenite – the first women NYU President . The NYU alumni magazine is unreadable from cover to cover all about “ Change” working for DEI – Diversity , Rwuity and Inclusion – and that doesn’t t include CIS ha White Midwesterners like me .
Sorry that was a ling rant .
So , I don t believe our elite colleges and grad schools are meritocracies .
This is not the first time I have seen the spurious claim that the jews are white. In his book Can the White Race Survive (1929) by James Denison Sayers; I quote “I assert that the Jews are the conservators of the purest white blood and the keenest intellect in the world,” so the jews have been peddling this nonsense for a long time. The jews are the greatest enemy the white race have ever faced!
Even if they were as EuroNordic-looking as a Madame Tussaud’s Dolph Lundgren, their behavior should permanently exclude them from the European family forever. Like the junkie disappointment insufferable son or daughter who has been given endless chances by the family and repaid their patience and kindness by selfishly spitting in the face of the family name; forever estrangement. “You are dead to me and not a part of this family anymore. Get the fuck out!”
Sigh
There is little or no use trying to use sweet reason , logic , appeals to real history with these open borders , race denying civic nationalists , Libertarian , Constitutionalists God knows I ve tried .
Instead , dox them – pit the word out to the worst Black , Shudra East Indian , Paki sexual grooming gang leaders , COVID , TB , Bubonic plague infected migrants to go and
stay with them
talk to them
Instead of trying to get them to read and understand ( this will be real ) Jean Respaul s “ Campaign of the Saints “ , make the “Camp of the Saints” real for these traitors /enemies .
No pain , no gain
share the plague
I will never stop believing that as the jewish problem is inseparable from White survival/reconquista/prosperity, so does the colored world (no, the Japanese are not an exception despite glimmers of admirable light) losing to lessening in perpetuity. When we win there must be severe punitive consequences for what these cancer-countries have done to Whites, and especially to the animal kingdom and Gaia. Much lower numbers, less territory, a drastic curtailment of power, and proWhite PlusMax power-expansion asserting itself by Natural Divine Right to commandeer world-administration. No ethnonationalist with a conscience turns a blind eye to the horrific torture of animals and corrosion/contamination of Earth from these disgusting soulless dregs cause it happens elsewhere. They are not like you and I, and the sun must circle around us!, not the ‘middle kingdom’ of sneaky little slits’ bangarangspeak, slurping down their mucoidal gunk, and killing our kids with fentanyl. They should be humiliated by their gross race’s behavior and not one century but just like brownblacks, self-awareness of them just being lowlife sacks of shit never registers. colored populations are majority hordes that destroy White countries and Whites are small minorities that assimilate and build up their countries, which they destroy cause their people suck and then flee here to destroy ours and blame us. I’m so sick of it. Whites are a collective + and they are a collective –
Does the modern world actually need longer and more harder work hours?
Back in the 20th century there was a widespread understanding that automation could reduce the number of work hours. Presumably, workers would show up in the factory or office for, say, a 20 hour week of pushing buttons and punching IBM ™ cards, then have the rest of their time free for whatever artistic or recreational pursuits in which they might take an interest.
More recently, artificial intelligence has become the “in” thing which could potentially run much of the “machine” or, better, gin up some efficient way to cut down on the number of hours worked while handing workers a coupon book for their weekly percentage of the Gross National Product. And just consider how many jobs are utterly useless anyway. Yes we start by canning the DEI commissars, DOGE take note!
So why the current call for longer and harder hours?
Well, maybe the upper echelons do not want your average person having too much free time on their hands. Might start thinking on their own and all that sort of thing. Or maybe it’s that old Puritanical mindset of people seeing idleness as the road to perdition. Hence the “fun-free” future where the Big Line Goes Up to infinity.
Regardless, there is fertile ground here for the Dissident Right to make this into a meme campaign. Take back that Big Line!
How long as the 40 hour week been a norm? More than a century? With all those productivity gains, maybe we need to move the norm down to 30.
As of the last few years all of the most expensive & academically rigorous private schools in the metropolises of Sydney & Melbourne (home to half the country’s people) are attended predominantly by Chinese & Indian children. White flighters must now send their children to lesser institutions if they wish them to be in a White majority environment. Free selective high schools set up a century ago for the children of the Anglo lower middle class have been almost exclusively Asian for at least twenty years with barely a handful of orphan Whites in each year.
Excellent article, though I do think colorblind meritocracy should be what we overtly support, at least in the US, on the Right, and at this moment. But we must always make clear that such meritocracy only applies within the (let us hope one day severely restricted) borders of the US. We do not want a global colorblind meritocracy, especially not one involving complete freedom of labor movement.
But as I mentioned in a comment above, colorblind meritocracy would be better for Whites than what exists today – and it pushes the political debate a little more our way. After all, absent national collapse, we likely won’t get to our harder core nationalist goals without various baby steps, ones which give momentum and hope to our side. Attacking DEI, AA, and at least the out of control border invariably gets our people thinking in ways the Occupationist Regime doesn’t like. And those “heretical” thoughts can rapidly lead to embracing other heresies against the regime.
It may be better than AA, but it won’t rid you from diaspora cliques of Jews, Indians et cetera, where they hire each other.
One of the problems with “meritocracy” is that the concept of merit cannot be strictly defined. For any job, who is going to be hired is the consequence of interviewers’ choice. Eventually, it will be someone who the boss prefers. If the boss is Indian, he is likely to hire another Indians and dress it up as “merit”. And it’s false that anyone can hire people based on the merit alone, even if he believes in the concept.
Americans have built a country with a huge industry in a very tough environment on their own. Trains, plains, submarines and rockets were constructed exclusively by White men. Just look at the photographs before 2000. I only once saw someone looking like an Indian on a 1980s photo with Hennessy (the inventor of RISC and MIPS computer architecture, not alcohol 🙂 ), and that’s all.
Concerning hiring Indians – they are just coding monkeys. You can look their code up somewhere.
The quality of work has greatly declined since they arrived. Just as an anecdote – we worked with a specialised IC by Texas Instruments (an Industrial Ethernet PHY interface). One of the problems was that it didn’t switch to a desired speed mode. Eventually it turned out that they made a mistake in the datasheet concerning the procedure, and they couldn’t correct it (one line was needed)! Actually, it was not the only problem – the entire thing was a mess. And Texas Instruments began as a serious company…
Another example is last years’ Intuitive Technologies Moon landing, when someone forgot to flip the switch before the launch. I don’t know how satellite testing is performed in America, but I suppose it should be quite pedantic with a lot of cross-checks. If someone left a switch in a wrong position and it was not found during pre-launch tests, that means a lot of things have gone awry. You didn’t have such problems when engineering was all-white.
You can find a lot of other examples yourselves.
Much of the Silicon Valley is a scam, anyway.
East Asians are competent, but their presence in America is net detrimental to you. For example, what party are they going to support?
Overall, chasing merit alone is like burning furniture to warm up the house. It’s mainly this stupid cult of “efficiency”, which actually leads to inefficiency, ironically.
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.