In The Burden of the 20th Century, I identified the building blocks of our present dystopia, which came together and have been institutionalized in the post-World War II era. Many of these key ideas like neoliberalism, antiracism, cosmopolitanism and modernism had been gestating in the decades before 1945, but it wasn’t until after World War II that they became hegemonic. Clearly, anti-fascism or anti-totalitarianism which led to totalitarian liberalism did not exist before the war.
It is easier to explain what we are against than to articulate what we are for although the two are really inseparable. In condemning all of these things which millions of people believe and saying that they should be discarded, I am approaching them from a perspective and making value judgments. What is this perspective? Why do I think about these things this way? What is the way life should be?
This will be a more introspective article.
First, I do not believe that many of these ideas are true, which is why I don’t find them compelling. This is the most important reason. I do not agree with liberals and leftists on the subject of equality.
While I agree that all people are created in the image of God and therefore are entitled to a certain level of dignity and respect, I do not believe in equality in any other sense. Once we move past the equality of souls in God’s eyes in the purely spiritual sense, we see nothing but differences. We see vast ineradicable differences in intelligence, personality, strength, accomplishment and so forth. The fact is, we don’t observe human equality. Quite the opposite. We only observe human differences, not only between the races and sexes, but within them as well and even within the same families. When two ordinary siblings raised in the same household differ in countless ways, what can be said for the doctrine of human equality?
The liberal or leftist will try to explain these differences in terms of prejudice, culture, oppression or lack of education. They assume that human nature is infinitely plastic and is completely detached from biology. The most compelling argument though against antiracism is that all of its herculean efforts over the course of 80 years have come to naught. Something like over 20 trillion dollars has been squandered since the 1960s in the United States alone on trying to eradicate poverty and racial inequality. It is the greatest and most expensive monumental project in human history and it has been a total failure.
So, to begin with I believe that human nature – whether we are talking about race, sex or gender – is ultimately grounded in and limited by human biology. I believe there are shades of difference in a wide range of traits which naturally produces inequality between human beings. I also believe we are born with instincts and innate ideas like other species. I believe that liberals and leftists reject the limits of nature. Reality is an affront to liberals and leftists because it stubbornly refuses to conform to their beliefs. Basically, I believe that many of their core beliefs and values are just a load of bollocks.
Second, I do not believe that many of these ideas are any good, which is why I also do not find them compelling. I do not believe that the laundry list of -isms and -phobias which have been popularized since World War II have any moral content whatsoever. There is ultimately nothing behind these ideas except for the force which they have been injected by liberal elites into our cultural bloodstream. The -isms and -phobias are just critiques and therapies which ultimately trace back through history to the Frankfurt School and which at the earliest did not begin to gain traction in Western culture until the 1920s and 1930s. For some reason, Western civilization was blissfully ignorant of these compelling moral concepts until the post-World War II era and had gotten by for thousands of years without them.
My moral views have been shaped by the classics, Protestantism, Western philosophy and my Southern cultural inheritance all of which were ignorant of the -isms and -phobias until the post-World War II era. I think of morality in terms of virtue, vice, sin and duty. A brave man is better than a coward. An honest man is better than a liar. A temperate man is better than an intemperate man. The chaste woman is better than the lustful woman. Integrity, fortitude and loyalty are moral qualities which should be cultivated while “anti-racism” is not. Morality is separate from political ideology. The good man is the one who cheerfully shoulders and fulfills his obligations whether it is to his family or to his community or to his nation or to God. The bad man is the one who rejects his obligations to others. Ultimately, it is also up to God to judge us for our sins. The idea of “journalists” sitting in judgment of us and damning us for “sins” that were simply made up less than a century ago is preposterous.
In my view, there is nothing about the behavior of Woke people which leads me to believe that they are morally superior to anyone else. Just the opposite is true. They have been raised to believe that the critiques and therapies are morality which is why they are behaving in ways that are shockingly immoral. They have been detached from their roots and immersed in all of this garbage. The whole thrust of the post-World War II era from Critical Theory to antiracism to modernism to cosmopolitanism to postmodernism to anti-fascism/anti-totalitarianism has been to detach, deracinate and alienate future generations and to poison the roots of Western civilization. Nothing good has come from this. We are not morally better than our ancestors. There has been a retrogression in morality and culture.
Third, I believe that there is a perspective and a will to power behind many of these ideas which are explicitly anti-White and anti-Western. The Critical Theory tradition, for example, which led to all the -isms and -phobias was created for the explicit purpose of undermining Western culture which was perceived to be an obstacle to a Marxist revolution. Many of these ideas were motivated by resentment and were always meant to be an attack on Western culture. They are an attack on our identity, beliefs, values and traditions. The whole point of the attack was to weaken and delegitimize our civilization. In perceiving the attack and striking back against our enemies, we are reasserting our own identity, perspective and will to power. We are being attacked for being White, Western and male. We’re not going to be passive. We are taking our own side in this conflict which has always been taboo in the post-World War II era.
Fourth, I believe that cultures are ultimately the deposit of history, which have flowed down to us from many sources across time. The cultural sediment that has been building up in the West in the post-World War II era has grown particularly toxic. The soil of Western civilization has been severely eroded by it. At virtually every level of society, the deck has been explicitly stacked against the White, Western male. It is a shocking affront to elite liberal sensibilities to broach the idea that White, Western men have any interests at all. Only BIPOC people have legitimate interests and our place in the new order of things is to sit content on the stool of eternal racial repentance while our entire civilization is flushed down the drain. Everything from politics to law to economics to culture must be reconstructed to serve them.
What about our children and grandchildren who were born in the 21st century? We’re being told that the only way to atone and correct the racial injustices of the past to BIPOC people is to sign up for inflicting future injustices – which will be legitimized by the Orwellian Trinity “diversity, equity and inclusion” – on our own White, Western children and grandchildren and our own people.
What are you ultimately loyal to? Are you loyal to toxic ideas and foolish abstractions? Are you loyal to Social Justice discourse? Are you loyal to those things to the point where it supersedes your loyalty to other people? What are you attached to in life? I would rather be loyal to my own children and grandchildren and my own people. No other earthly loyalty comes anywhere close to entering my mind. In sum, I believe these ideas are false, bad, malicious and ultimately only the nonsense of one era.
Having said all of this, it should be clear that I reject liberalism in its entirety down to its bedrock assumptions and see it as an error that has been progressively working itself out across time and screwing up the world in the process. At the most basic level, it is based on the Sovereignty of the Individual and the metaphor of thinking about human societies as if they were like machines which can be picked apart into their components like a clock and explained in terms of universal abstract principles. Human societies can be distilled into an abstract schematic that is universally true in all times and places.
Man is a flesh and blood being that is part of the natural world and is embedded in history. Humans are a social and gregarious, not a solitary and individualistic species. We are tribal and territorial beings who live in complex societies. Government, authority and order are not created by rational individuals who exit a “State of Nature” and come together to create a social contract for mutually beneficial ends, but naturally and spontaneously arises everywhere from human inequality. Humans are born into societies and imbued with culture by their parents and peers which is transmitted across generations. Society is as natural to man as a herd is to deer or a school is to fish or a hive is to bees. The two are inseparable.
Human beings are organisms with a natural life cycle. Human societies also exhibit organic, not inorganic, properties: birth, growth, reproduction, decline and death. This point needs to be emphasized because it has been lost on liberals. Human societies are more like herds of deer or forests than machines. We have organic needs. Man isn’t reducible to any particular quality whether it be reason, emotion or will. Treating man as a bloodless abstraction like this and building up abstract systems upon distortions like the rational and selfish individual only obscures the whole. Individuals are not autonomous but are related by organic bonds both biological and cultural to other individuals. The very idea of the “individual” is a peculiar and novel creation of Western thought at a particular point in its historical development.
Just as all men are not equal except in the spiritual sense of their souls being equal before God, all cultures are not equal either nor can they be equal. Every culture on earth is the unique accretion and deposit of its own historical development. Chinese history and English history have produced different cultures on opposite sides of the planet. These different cultures have created different social orders. The English oak of constitutional liberty simply does not translate into Chinese bamboo which is adapted to its own environment. It is nothing but arrogance to believe that we are uniquely special on earth and that all other cultures should evolve to be like our own and conform to our own standards.
There is nothing universal about the claims of liberalism. It just goes about smashing up other nations and cultures and forcing its abstract, misbegotten and malfunctioning model upon them. Ultimately, this impulse can be traced back to a sense of chosenness and a missionary attitude which is derived from Christianity. It only says something peculiar about the impulses of our own culture.
At the end of the day, it is our culture. We have allowed it to degenerate into this state by not taking the time to prune bad ideas. All of these bad ideas have flowed down through time to us. They are currently hegemonic due to the neglect of the last two generations but that hasn’t always been the case. The current system was only born during World War II. Liberalism has allowed the garden that is our culture to be overrun by weeds which are choking the life out of our people. We don’t owe these weeds anything and least of all our loyalty. We owe our loyalties to our own natural descendants and kin and it is our duty to clear the rubbish out from our culture so that they will have the room to grow and flourish.