I have had this post (or at least the idea for it) in my mind for a while now. It seems that due to my procrastination, I have been trumped by The Daily Caller’s latest reporter. In a recent post (and some earlier ones) Chuck Rudd (GL Piggy) expresses his distaste for White-nationalists and “anti-Semites” sparking a discussion on those terms. I figured if I did not start the parade, at least I can join it, so here is my two (fiat currency) cents worth. [at least give me credit for cramming so many clichés into one sentence.]
My primary reason, despite being both White and nationalist, for not proclaiming myself White nationalist, is that Black Americans are part of the nation. We can talk about higher criminality and lower scholastics, but African Americans (those of African descent whose forbearers were brought here as slaves) are most assuredly American. They have been part of the American fabric since its founding and are not going anywhere.
Such acceptance of Black’s nationality does not imply acceptance of poor behavior. I do not believe it oppressive to expect White levels of behavior from Black citizens. I do not believe White feelings of guilt over past slavery should excuse Blacks of guilt for current transgressions. It also does not mean that I support large-scale immigration from African nations: about zero sounds good to me. It certainly does not mean I favor forced integration. Indeed some amount of living separately probably allows us live together.
I certainly do not want a race war. A race war is still a war, and war is generally unpleasant. We would not fight a race war on cable TV; we would fight a race war in your neighborhood. I would be happy to see fighting words, though, when Black activists threaten “escalation” if things do not go their way. We cannot excuse such threats or bounties (however silly they sound) just because those threatening are Black. Acquiescence, as much as aggression causes wars. If one side believes there will be no reprisals, it makes sense them to strike first. I guess that makes me a White-neo-conservative; I believe in a muscular defense of White and Western values and behaviors at home.
I do not believe, in and of itself, it is hostile to point out the disproportionate influence of Jews in American life. Such influence is to be expected in a free and broadly meritocratic society (at least if you believe in higher average Jewish IQ). There is no conflict in believing in the merit of a small and distinct group and wondering whether their influence is good for society as a whole.
Smart people will often rise to the top, smart and connected people are even more likely to rise to the top. Acknowledging Jewish talents does not invalidate concerns about Jewish influence.
Regarding the “are Jews White?” question, I see it as similar to the “are Catholics Christian?” question. While Catholicism is obviously Christian (indeed was once the only Christian church), they are also distinct in many ways; politicians and demographers are probably wise to consider them separate groups despite them both being Christian.
Jewish identity is as much (perhaps more) about ethnicity than religion. I suspect that many Jews do not see themselves as part of the same (White) group that populates much of America. I suspect that Jews, in their hearts at least, might be as divided on that question as others.
Chuck’s user name at The Daily Caller is rather unfortunate (crudd). I guess he should be happy his name was not Rapp … or Untz.