Absurd assumptions about life’s advantages

Eugenics was universally condemned as being either cruel or pseudoscientific until genetic engineering and the human genome project made positive eugenics increasingly practical. Now many on the Left argue that we must make reproductive technology available to everyone. Others argue that genetic manipulations for the purpose of eugenic enhancement should be forbidden. Sometimes the argument is made that children born with these artificial “enhancements” will be deprived of living an open-ended life, free to choose for themselves what they shall become.

The idea seems to be that in a just society, a well intentioned person would naturally shun any unfair advantage over others. Paula Rothenberg’s White Privilege: Essential Readings on the Other Side of Racism, 2008, makes this argument. She writes: “But, let us assume that I am a white person, and after reading the articles in this book I am persuaded that there is such a thing as white privilege and that I benefit from it. Why might I want to rid myself of that privilege rather than continue to enjoy it and pass it along to my children? The answer has to do with simple notions of fairness and justice. Most people would feel little sense of pride or accomplishment in winning a race they started with an unfair advantage or winning a game when the deck was stacked in their favor. The satisfaction of such ‘victories’ is short-lived at best. Once I begin to recognize how much of my success is a consequence of unfair advantage, I cannot help but begin to seek ways to make amends.”

This argument rests on two assertions: first that Whites win in the game of life because they somehow “stack the deck” or “cheat” in ways that others refrain from ever doing; and two, if they were only aware of the great magnitude of their cheating ways, they would want to desist, and even pay restitution for what they have done.

Humans have evolved complex cultural emotions that include hate, envy, shame, guilt, love, etc. We have a complex set of social attitudes that at the very most would dictate that when participating in a rule-governed contest, such as chess, running a race, or sleeping with another man’s wife, there may be some diminution of the joys of winning if one cheats. But most of life is not lived within a set of rigid rules, and most people are aware that some people do better than others. In life there are losers and winners, which does not take a conspiracy theory to explain. But when it comes to racial inequality, envy sets in: reasons must be found that will indict Whites and hold other groups blameless for their failures.

Rothenberg claims that any advantage that Whites have in comparison to Blacks is due to racism, and that White privilege is just as bad as White supremacy and must be opposed. Isn’t it odd for any group to voluntarily want to give up an advantage over another group out of a sense of fairness? Can anyone think of any ethnic or racial group that has used such a nihilistic moral argument to step aside, and give away resources and advantages to a competing group? This would be an astounding position to take.

Hhumans are primarily competitive. When there is an “unfair advantage”, it is to each one’s advantage to ignore it when possessed and to protest it when someone else possesses it. We live in a petty, confrontational, comparative and competitive social world that few people are willing to even begin to understand. And when understanding is sought after, most people look to the likes of Oprah Winfrey rather than to evolutionary psychology for answers.

“White privilege” is just pathologization of Whites. No attempt to dissuade people from trying to bestow advantages on their children or their kin will work. The only reason that it is even attempted is because Caucasians, according to Kevin MacDonald and others, are universal moralizers and take readily to attacking our own kind. Virtually every other racial group is far more particularist when it comes to moral chastisement. However, knowing we suffer from this evolutionary maladaptation allows us to self-indoctrinate ourselves against egalitarianism and to embrace our genetic interests.

According to Rothenberg: “Beyond questions of justice are matters of self-interest. History tells us that in the end, an unjust and inequitable distribution of resources and opportunities leads to terrible violence. Increasingly, wealthy white people in America find themselves living in gated communities as they seek ways to protect their lives and their property, and people of all racial/ethnic backgrounds and every economic class complain of feeling unsafe on the streets and in their homes. A society that distributes educational opportunities, housing, health care, food, even kindness, based on the color of people’s skin and other arbitrary variables cannot guarantee the safety or security of its people. In this sense, all of us, both the victims and the beneficiaries of racism, pay a terrible price.”

I claim that history has a different warning for those who entertain an egalitarian answer to violence and social antagonisms: separation of competing groups is the only practical way of reducing rivalry. No amount of redistribution can purchase peace. We can look forward to increasing conflicts between indigenous peoples, low- and high-achieving minorities, religious cults, wealthy eugenicists, and the criminal underclass. The more diverse societies become, the more conflicts there will be.

Rothenberg does deviate from the normal White bashing, claiming, “The media, politics, education are still in the hands of white people, still speak for whites while claiming—and sometimes sincerely aiming—to speak for humanity.” But who is White? She makes numerous references to “neoconservatives,” claiming they are promoting racism. But the neoconservatives are primarily Jewish! If there is any privileged group in America, based on wealth, income and power—based on their own claims—it is the Jews. As usual, Jews are either different from Whites, or they are the same as Whites, depending on how the Left wants to spin their just-so stories. She claims, “In contrast, races exist only in relation to one another.” Then I suggest a little more clarity on the part of egalitarian academics, when discussing Whites, to make if perfectly clear what ethnic groups they are including. Since they claim that race is a “social construct,” why don’t they clarify their arguments by lumping ethnic/religious groups into their taxonomies for vilification?

As an example she states, “Attacking the civil rights tradition serves many functions for neoconservatives. By mobilizing existing racisms and generating new ones, neoconservatives seek to discredit the egalitarian and democratic social movements of the post-World War II era and to connect the attacks by those movements on wealth, special privilege, and elite control over education and opportunity to despised and unworthy racial ‘others.’” Then she fails to mention “who” the neoconservatives are, their history, or any aspect of them that would identify them as predominately Jewish. The book is about White privilege—so neoconservatives must just be regular White people!

Group conflict is good news for us Whites who embrace racial success over others. Watching the 2010 Winter Olympics with my wife, we discussed the notion of fairness in sports, at work, among friends, within families, etc. It seemed that no matter where we looked, humans would do almost anything to get at advantage over others, and rarely feel bad about it or apologize for it. Nepotism, cronyism, racial politics, sports teams, gender—everywhere one looks factions are trying to win out over others and the rules of the game are few and primarily ignored. Life’s advantages are welcomed, embraced, pursued, and rarely apologized for or turned down out of some sense of fairness.

Posted by Matt Nuenke on Sunday, February 28, 2010 at 02:03 PM in White Communities & Micro-Economies
Comments (9) | Tell a friend

Comments:

Posted by Drifter on February 28, 2010, 03:43 PM | #

Eugenics is not synonymous with transhumanism. Within transhumanism we’ll find an array of methods, including genetic engineering and cybernetics. Genetic engineering however is not found within eugenics.

Because public ignorance is the default, the blurring and misuse of terminology is one of the Left’s favored weapons. Why help arm the Left?

Posted by PF on February 28, 2010, 04:50 PM | #

Hhumans are primarily competitive.

How do you quantify this enough to say whether humans are primarily competitive? It seems we may be primarily cooperative, and secondarily competitive?

Your assertion presumes a quantitative breakdown of these two behavior paradigms.

I think within the family and within the community, and amongst friends, we’re primarily cooperative!

O/T : Here is some humorous jokes:

Life is precious, and God and the Bible

Posted by Dave on March 01, 2010, 04:36 PM | #

Well, as Caucasian people we absolutely must develop a religious and moral doctrine which considers only Caucasian people as the focus of their concern. When and only when we do this will we be finally able to answer such altruist arguments effective. I mean effectively in the sense that our answer is focused upon our own racial needs as a people. Thus, we must do away with the moral universalism as it pertains to us that has been foisted upon our people by the Christian religious hegemony for the past 2000 years.

There is a moral universalism that we must pursue, however. Now, when we finally formulate a moral code that is thorougly Caucasian-centric—that is, totally oriented toward the well-being and furthurance of Caucasian people—we must always demand that all others be subject to our moral code, regardless of any negative impact upon their own narrowly defined interests they may perceive from doing so. That is the only type of moral universalism that we should adopt. We, on the othe hand, must never be held to any moral code whatsoever if in any instance it can be shown by our own analysis to be in any way counter to our interests as a people. The survival and furthurance of our people is the standard of morality in other words.

When you reject the specific self-destructive moral dictates of the Christian religion and adopt in turn a morality based upon your racial self-identification and protection, arguments such as those presented by this Rothenberg have no force upon you except to fill you with hatred and revulsion toward someone who would so openly call for your genocide as she is doing in respect to Caucasian people. It is only when you adopt a Caucasian-centric moral model that you can see and understand the viciousness of such people and their arguments. I can answer her arguments in a couple of lines:

1) I am dedicated to the maintenance and furthurance of my Caucasian race of people; this is my standard of value in respect to life,

2) Thus, fairness is that which benefits my Caucasian people and any social outcome which favors my people is by definition Just.

The underlying point here is that I care first and foremost for my own racial affiliation and this is essentially axiomatic in the moral sense because my morality derives from this. It is a religious commandment in my religion that we are never to justify to anyone this fundamental allegiance. In other words, we don’t have to justify this to someone like rothenberg when she, even implicitly, demands and answer to the question: What gives you the right to look at yourselves and your race as the rightful sole beneficiaries of your actions and concerns? My answer? WE DON’T EVER HAVE TO GIVE ANY JUSTIFICATION FOR OUR OWN EXISTENCE OR OUR RIGHTFUL CONCERN OVER OUR OWN INTERESTS AND SURVIVAL.

When you truly think and feel this, then such nonsense as rothenberg’s just never holds any weight or significance in your thinking. Look people, there is a certain amount of belligerance needed to sustain your race and its interests. That’s all there is to it. You are going to have to be able to tell your enemies at some point that your interests require no justification and if they are losing the eternal struggle for dominance and success, that is their problem. Now, essentially the manner that we must employ to deal with the violence that these failed competitors are employing against us is to do the following:

1) Demand a greater reliance upon incredibly severe punishments for any violation of our people,

2) Work tirelessly for a complete separation of these murderers from our people. This is to be done at any cost. This is non-negotiable.

Here are a couple of commandments from the religion of which I am a part:

“You are never to ask permission of anyone to pursure the interests of our race.”

“Your enemy always seeks to destroy you and your people. However, before they can do so physically, their first tactic will be to flood your living space with other peoples not of your own; They will then try to convince you that you are not a distinct people or race so that you do not assert yourselves as a unified people. You are me and, thus, you do not need to justify yourselves to any people, for I do not require justification or a reason for being. You will always have enemies who wish to degrade and destroy you. you must not let others violate you, or our people… ...You must remain seperate from these other peoples.”

Now, this is far superior to the garbage that Christianity has tried to cram down our throats for 2000 years like the ‘turn the other cheek’ or ‘love thy enemy’ nonsense.

Contrast this Christian nonsense with another commandment from my religion:

“When your lands are invaded by any of the other ‘peoples’ of the world, you are to seperate yourselves from them at all costs or they will take your seed away from you and you will in turn be bred out of existences.”

This God that I present here is for us and us alone. We have turned our back on his for 2000 years, yet he still awaits our return with open arms. For us to win this battle and stop our own extermination, we are going to need this great God and his advice. We need to turn our backs on the the judeo-christian god and return to our native God if we are to survive.

I hope this helps

God Bless

Posted by Søren Renner on March 01, 2010, 08:51 PM | #

Make it so.

Posted by danielj on March 01, 2010, 09:14 PM | #

How do you quantify this enough to say whether humans are primarily competitive? It seems we may be primarily cooperative, and secondarily competitive?

Indeed. Sometimes competition is actually a form of cooperation. There is no clearly demarcated line or even a nice smooth spectrum.

Posted by Matt Nuenke on March 01, 2010, 10:20 PM | #

Dave, thanks for clarifying so eloquently my purpose in “trying” to expose the tactics of our enemies. The post was not meant to discuss the relationship of “genetic engineering” to any particular program like eugenics or transhumanism, nor was it to open the very complicated debate about whether humans are individualists, collectivists, and to what “types” of groups they often become affiliated with. Not even Salter has been able to clarify these human behaviors outside of pure genetic interests.

Posted by Steven E. Romer on March 02, 2010, 04:40 AM | #

Excellent article on the absurdity of Jewish writing. I first began to notice something was wrong when I was reading the original writings of Jewish “psychologists” as an undergrad. Later I found out that these writings I found so absurd and inscrutible were written by Jewish people with different worldviews, values, and motives than me (or my people in inventing science). Be careful reading Jewish writings—they will mess you up…

Certainly every group pursues their own best interests. However the “fairness” thing really bugs me… A Jew talking about “fairness”? Pleeeease. They could care less about such moral universals and principles as fairness. Their #1 motive gleaned from studying centuries of Jewish behavior shows quite clearly that they could care less about such caucasian limits on pursuit of interests. One of THEIR primary motives actually seems to be unfairness!

However, lets see the record on whites around the world, shall we? They invented objective science and objective justice based on empirical truth. No other race even comes close to our moral universal practices of justice and fairness. We invented freedom. Everywhere we go, we raise the standard of living and bring medicine, order, and infrastructure—to name a few.

Compared to every other race, and especially Jews, we are justifiable in being “priviledged”. If you look at the whole process of evolution as information-based, we are without question at the pinnacle as the #1 truth-seeking race—reflecting the basic upward process of evolution directly in our cultures and civilization. We are without question, and quite objectively (from what we know of science) the best race on Earth. We deserve priviledge. We worked for it. It should be ours. Just because you have a mouth that can speak and eat, and you can breed, does not mean you deserve priviledge.

Look at Haiti—they used to be the most prosperous country in the hemisphere until they killed the white colonists by the 10’s of thousands and drove out the rest. Now they are the most unstable country in the western hemisphere—partly because they are so massively corrupt. They are also one of, if not THE poorest country. They are not known for their science, just their voodoo and the Santeria religion they made out of European Catholicism.

The white race IS fairness—as much as you will ever find in one place! We DESERVE to be in power and priviledge—ESPECIALLY IN OUR OWN COUNTRIES!! How dare this insane Jew try to swindle us into giving up our power and control and very lives? That is the best argument in itself for why the Jews should NOT have the priviledge they currently enjoy—fairness and truth have nothing to do with them.

Posted by Dave on March 02, 2010, 06:23 AM | #

Steven you sound like an unusually intelligent gentleman so please don’t take what I say here in a negative manner. I agree with you that we are the race that manifests all that is good in virtually every area of human endeavor. We have created the world and then demonstrated it to its various races…and have been scorned for it. The mistake you all make is believing that they would appreciate our gifts to all of them, they don’t and never will. That’s all there is to it. Moreover, so many of our people believe that if we just try hard enough to explain to these others how they should appreciate us and our accomplishments more, they will come around to our way of thinking, another mistake.

They are not us; they cannot ever be us; they will never accept our justifications as to why we are us. This is the fundamental truth. That is why the God of our religion commands that we are never to offer to those not of our own any justification for our existence, continued survival, or success as a distinct people. It is understood that they will never accept our reasoning because it is simply in their nature to oppose us and it always will be. Thus, we are told never to waste our time and energy trying to convince those not of our own of the necessity of our survival and furtherance.

Your main argument seems to be that because we have manifested all of these great things that we should, therefore, be allowed to reign over our own destiny. Our God has a different perspective on this matter: He says that we are inherently and by definition great and simply that he wants us to survive and succeed as a distinct people. This is the inherent justification for our existence; We need no other. Now, simply because of our nature, we will manifest great things and accomplishments to be sure, but these are not our justification for continuing or succeeding. In other words, we do NOT have to reference our great contributions to ‘humanity’ to appeal to the good graces of other’s permission for our survival. That is literally a form of begging for one’s life, in our case, our race’s life. No. We appeal to the commandments of our God and the fact that he created us literally from himself for us and us only. We are Him in physical form. Hence, we are the ‘race of God.’ We were created as it were as an original act of racial discrimination and commanded to maintain our people. This, therefore, requires that we maintain and further our own race.

I know there are those who claim to be God’s chosen people, however, they forget that they are only THEIR god’s chosen people, not our God’s chosen people. Let them be chosen by their silly god. He is clearly not our god . This other god or whatever he is, serves those other peoples; moreover, he is a much lower god than ours, that much is clear.

At any rate I have gone too long here. I hope I have not offended you in any way Steven. You are clearly a very intelligent fellow and I would not presume to be superior to you in insight or comprehension of the matters at hand, however, all of us really do need the different perspectives of each other as we help our comrades deprogram from the current judeo/christian hegemony and it deletarious affects upon the psyches of our people.

Posted by ShayneGuy T. on March 04, 2011, 03:37 AM | #

Race insecurity? The U.S. Census has revealed a lot of new information about the United States. For instance, “non-Hispanic white” individuals can be considered the minority. Here is the proof: Texas white men scholarship offers $500 to Caucasian students A group of pupils in TX calling itself the Former Majority Association for Equality is responding to this by offering scholarships. The scholarship gives $500 to candidates who are at least 25 percent non-Hispanic White.

Next entry: Cameron on Griffin and the MultiCult

Previous entry: Was It Real For You?

Existential Issues

White Genocide Project

Of note

General News

Science News

Science Categories

All Categories

The Writers

Each author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages.

Links

Endorsement not implied.

Controlled Opposition

Crime

General

Immigration

Islam

Jews

Nationalist Political Parties

Science

Whites in Africa