1963. Black pastor Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. delivers his “I Have a Dream” speech, famously proclaiming that he wants a country where people “will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”
1964. The Civil Rights Act clears the Senate by 73–27 and is signed by President Lyndon B. Johnson, a White Democrat from Texas. Almost every form of discrimination “on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin” is banned in most areas of public and commercial American life.
A transformative era unfolds. What was once unthinkable in a society that practiced legal racial discrimination since its foundation becomes holy writ. From the top-down, the elite institutions of the United States begin to morph, losing their historical character as enforcers of European culture in a European society to guarantors of the integration and uplifting of people of color, even if it means bringing them in from outside of the country. Affirmative action becomes widely practiced as a means of arbitrarily increasing the status and power of non-Whites, and “diversity” becomes as much of a value as “freedom” or “democracy.” American civic culture adopts an attitude of non-discrimination, treating all people as interchangeable, vowing not to judge anyone by their physical traits. Colorblind society becomes the ideal, and affirmative action ensures there is always a token minority who can be pointed to in a position of success or power to prove racists wrong. America’s consensus becomes the myth of universalistic meritocracy, and the march of social progress inevitable.
2008. The United States elects its first non-White president, the half-Kenyan Barack Hussein Obama, and the public hails the end of racism in the highest office of the country, fulfilling the promise of the original civil rights era.
2012. A mestizo shoots and kills a black teenager in Florida. The media identifies the shooter as White and blames White racism for the shooting. If Obama “had a son,” he’d be Trayvon Martin. A jury finds the shooter not guilty.
2014. The entire world watches as two waves of looting and riots rock Ferguson, Missouri after a violent black criminal is killed by a White police officer, and he is acquitted by a grand jury. This spurs the creation of a second black civil rights movement, the new and media-savvy #BlackLivesMatter. People tweet in solidarity from as far away as the Gaza strip.
2015. A White terrorist kills nine people in Charleston because he hated black people. The Confederate flag, seen by many as a racist protest against civil rights, comes down from flagpoles across the American South and is blamed for the violence. In an unrelated event, Baltimore sees two days of race riots and looting after the burial of a black suspect who died in police custody from a severed spinal cord.
2016. A black terrorist kills seven people in Dallas because he hated White people and was inspired by the #BlackLivesMatter movement. Donald J. Trump, whom the Huffington Post describes as “a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther” that “regularly incites political violence,” is the presumptive Republican nominee for president.
Something has happened. Something has come undone in the way race relations are handled in the United States. Something has emboldened extremist identity politics to the point where rhetoric has become violence. Whatever happened to consensus, when Americans only disagreed in degree on issues? Can’t we all come together and unite as a nation? We need to have a conver—
Here’s the deal. The so-called anti-racist left had a really good thing going in this country for their agenda. Colorblindness and White guilt worked. The carrot-and-stick of salvation through social justice and being the scapegoat for all racial problems appealed brilliantly to a nation founded on Anglo-Protestant sensibilities. The left had a White public that would go along with whatever they wanted done regarding racial issues so long as it was done gradually and constitutionally, because to challenge it would be racist or divisive, and risking social status. Overturning “separate but equal” (1954), abolishing discrimination (1964), lifting eurocentric immigration restrictions (((1965))), providing amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants (1986), expanding immigration quotas/visas and scrapping English proficiency requirements (1990), etc., all furthered the minoritization of the White population, which will ultimately break its political power at the national level and ensure a permanent leftist Democratic majority.
They could have had it all if they had only been more patient and polite about boiling the frog. Instead, the left became increasingly emboldened as it rose in influence over a society which had never fully embraced its most radical dogma. The idea of an integrated multiracial utopian society seems increasingly to be in tatters, from a combination of inherent dysfunction and left-wing agitation. A generation of college graduates were taught racial resentment, and that race had replaced class as the object of progressive reform. Endorsing the race riots of Ferguson and Baltimore as social justice alienated many Whites, just as the riots of 1967 and 1968 did. Some liberals even began to countersignal this so-called “regressive” left for its excesses. Saint Dr. MLK Jr. stopped being their idol—apparently his message of colorblindness actually contributes to 'systemic racism' and White supremacy. Rather than us all being equal, the message became that Whites possess quasi-demonic properties like 'implicit racism' and 'White privilege' that explain the deleterious effects the presence of Whites in society has on oppressed people of color.
These explanations had to be devised all because inequality had failed to disappear, and the answer couldn’t be bio-cultural differences between the races—which of course don’t exist, by the way, except for the purpose of motivating political behavior against Whites. Race don’t real, but Black lives matter and Whites have inborn racial privilege. Judge a person explicitly by the color of their skin according to one liberal Supreme Court justice; the content of their character derives from it.
On the alt-right, we are not bothered by this. We know that identity matters in politics for all ethnic groups involved, not just the favored classes. We know that the inevitable result of diversity plus proximity is conflict, whether in Ferguson, Dallas, Paris, Baghdad, or Brussels. We agree with the (((cultural marxist))) left for the wrong reasons, insofar as we see colorblindness as a stupid mentality to have when our enemies are so overly anti-White and europhobic. We welcome the death of America’s consensus, which was only hamfistedly implemented in the late 20th century as a means of plastering over the festering racial fault lines of American society. These boiling tensions have only become more inflamed as a result of mass immigration and left-wing agitprop against the dying White majority.
The colorblind consensus was murdered. It was abandoned by politicians looking to capitalize on identity politics. It was deconstructed in the college classroom by professors. It was dragged through the mud by the press. It was assassinated in streets when it tried to reign in its organized opposition. It cannot be brought back to life, because no one cares enough about it other than the cuckservative right, still hung over on last century’s liberalism as being the end of history.
The right declared victory when the Soviet Union fell, while the left sent its metapolitical soldiers over the trenches. Who is reaping the rewards today of continuing the ideological struggle? Has right made any substantial progress in this country since the 1990s? Did we really win the Cold War against “communism” if left-wing third-worldist decolonization is the dominant ideology in our universities and is being applied to our own society? One of the two major parties in this country has abolishing the historical American nation as its implicit platform, while the other offers only token resistance.
But the past belongs to the past. We must dredge victory from the wreck of defeat, not merely ponder it with bitter regret. Today, Americans encounter wildly different visions of the future being floated around a polarized America, from the state-sanctioned Clintonian third-worldist model—where the government is nothing more than a left-wing coalition of racial, sexual, and gender minority interests carving up the patrimony bequeathed to us from the golden age of unchecked Anglo-American world hegemony (1890 to 1960)—to the Trumpist civic nationalism-natvism—viewing the coalition of the fringes with hostility and wanting to straighten out the country long enough to fulfill the atavistic desires of an aging red-state America.
Ultimately neither of these will result in a lasting resolution to America’s racial problems. Demographics will continue to worsen as tides of color clash. The strain on the government to provide more and more gibs to the growing third world population to keep it happy will increase. Their grievances against society will mount as it inevitably fails to make them equal to the diminished but still salient historic American nation. The resentment felt by White America will rise as it finds it can’t balance economic satisfaction with avoiding the diverse vibrancy of our lost cities. A Clinton administration would issue apologia for race riots. A Trump administration would incite them by trying to enforce the law. And each year these conflagrations would become more and more likely as densely populated areas came to resemble the Congo and the government an inept and foreign Belgium.
As Guillaume Faye wrote, a multiracial society is a multiracist one. The solution is not to diversify law enforcement or the civil service—cops are still going to shoot violent resistors and third-worldist leftists will still identify the state as an agent of White supremacy, even after the last White officer has turned in his badge—because more diversity only leads to more conflict. The solution is not to tell one group that they just need to accept their diminished status and inevitable racial destruction while encouraging the others to be as aggressive and cavalier as possible. The solution is nationalism. The solution is to dissolve the empire. Does anyone outside of the government or academia honestly want this ridiculous political science experiment to continue destroying its own people(s)?
Certainly, there is nothing left in it for White people beyond nostalgia. If the Founding Fathers had lived in the 21st century, they would think Washington was the greatest tyranny since Babylon. If Union soldiers knew they were fighting so that the great industrial cities of the North could become colonies of Africa, Latin America, and Judaea they would have stayed home. If the men who landed in Normandy knew they were fighting to end White rule over the United States as the terminus of global decolonization, they’d have defected to Germany. Whatever it was, the United States is no longer.