Race Realism and the Defense of the West: A Response to Little Green Footballs
By • 6/17/08Over the past week, I, as well as a number of other writers, have been the targets of a great deal of abuse from Charles Johnson, owner of the popular website Little Green Footballs, and his readers. In comment threads like this and this, I have been called a “fascist” by Johnson himself and a “neo-Nazi” by his readers. Johnson even suggested that readers put on a “Hazmat” suit before they came to Inverted World, so toxic does he deem my ideas. As if these unjustified slurs weren’t enough, LGF readers plumbed the depths of infantile triviality by mocking my penis size, an insult so stupid that I christened them the “kindergarten conservatives.”
This hostility is particularly disappointing as the missions of LGF and The Inverted World are, at bottom, very similar: both websites are dedicated to the defense of Western values, like individualism, pluralism, tolerance, and the rule of law. Like the LGF community, I believe America has been the world’s foremost defender of Western values, and I support our nation’s protection of Israel and campaigns against our enemies abroad. Also like the LGF community, I fear the Islamization of Europe, as Islamic values are contrary to Western ones.
I also share LGF’s bitterness towards the anti-American, anti-Israeli, anti-war left. While I am not a supporter of Pres. Bush because he is a liberal on matters of race and immigration, I recognize that he has been the victim of many unfair attacks from the “Bush lied, people died” crowd. I was always glad that blogs like LGF were around to call the left on its smears.
Finally, I share LGF’s contempt for anti-Semitism on the American right. In fact, I’ve been a vocal critic of anti-Semitism, and I even left my job at American Renaissance magazine because my former employer, Jared Taylor, would not denounce anti-Semitism among his followers. I opposed Ron Paul in the Republican primaries because of his belief that the Israeli and Palestinian sides are morally equivalent and because of the smears of Jews published in his name.
My public statements on these issues should put to rest any fears that I am a “neo-Nazi” or a “fascist.” I am a critic of neo-Nazism and a proponent of Western freedoms, not the totalitarianism that is an essential characteristic of fascist regimes.
The only philosophical difference between the LGF community and myself is that I think some differences in psychology and culture among the races are certainly or probably rooted in biological, genetic differences. This belief is what makes me a “race realist.” There is overwhelming evidence that the black/white IQ gap, whose nature and causes have been studied intensively by psychologists, is rooted in biology. For other differences among the races, the evidence is less clear. Nevertheless, I think the race realist theory is the only plausible explanation of the fact that, despite generations of intense efforts to bring about socioeconomic equality among the races, such substantial gaps still exist between American whites on one hand and blacks and Hispanics on the other across a wide range of socioeconomic indicators, including high-school and college graduation, crime, income, wealth, out-of-wedlock births, and so forth.
I am particularly interested in cultural differences in tolerance, perhaps the fundamental feature of Western society, which undergirds the value we place on freedom of speech. I see little evidence that non-whites share our respect for tolerance. Islam is the clearest example: a 2006 poll of British Muslims found that a full 68 percent do not think free speech for people who insult Islam should be legally protected. The recent campaign against Mark Steyn, which has been noted at LGF, is further evidence of Muslims’ lack of respect for free speech. Other non-white groups seem to feel the same. If anyone makes serious criticisms of blacks and Hispanics, these groups do not accept it in an understanding and broad-minded spirit. No, they tell the critic to shut up and call for punishment.
If I am right that cultural differences among the races are rooted in biology, the impending emergence of non-white majorities in Western nations is a threat to the values that all of us cherish. Our prosperity depends on the maintenance of a law-abiding, educated populace. Our freedoms depend on a broad-minded tolerance of dissent.
While I appreciate LGF’s defense of Western values, I do not think you appreciate the nature of the threat the West faces; consequently, I think your defense will prove ineffective. My position is that the only way to preserve Western values is to ensure that Western nations retain white majorities and commit themselves to the protection of our racial spirit. This is not an opinion I have arrived at lightly, and I hope you will spend some time reading the links above before you dismiss it.
It’s likely that my most mean-spirited detractors at LGF will not be convinced by this, and will continue droning on about fascists, neo-Nazis, and my penis. Nevertheless, I am sure that there are many LGF readers who are smarter and better than that, who are capable of reading and of giving unpopular ideas a fair hearing. If you are one of these people, I welcome you and look forward to your comments and your cooperation in preserving the West.
If you want this article to be exposed to a wide audience, take the time to recommend it at digg. Millions of readers traffic the site, and the more recommendations an article gets, the better its chance of being read. If you don't have digg account yet, registration is easy. Just click submit to get started. |
Click here to join the Inverted World mailing list. You'll get an e-mail notice whenever IW publishes new entries.
I have one question for you Ian, why do you care what Little Green Footballs thinks??? Like the old Rick Nelson song “Garden Party”, you can’t please everybody so just please yourself. Move on big guy! I guess we could ask those over at Little Green Footballs, just how is it they know about your penis size or think they know??? Maybe they know that yours is bigger than theirs and they are just jealous.
By on 6/18/08 at 12:42 am
Dutchman,
I don’t run this blog to fulfill my need for self-expression, but to build a political movement. And, if we’re going to build a movement, it matters what people think of us. If the people at LGF automatically associate race realism with fascism and neo-Nazism, probably so do a lot of other people. It’s worth taking the time to disentangle race realism from these harmful associations.
By on 6/18/08 at 8:17 am
Why does anyone take a site with an infantile name (Little Green Footballs) seriously?
OK, there may be some well-informed commentary over there - but a lot of people won’t bother to visit a website with a silly name.
By on 6/18/08 at 10:18 am
Ian, First of all I think you are a good person also I think you are a noble person anyone who picks up the banner to save his race, culture and homelands has taken up a mega task indeed, my hat is off to you and the group for this. There is one thing that will happen to any white person or group who wants to save his or their people, culture and homelands they will face the slings, arrows and labels of being called a “neo-Nazi” or a “fascist.” These labels were created by our enemies to silence us and to scare anyone who may agree with us away. So wear the labels with honor and continue on with the mission at hand of saving our kinsman from the abyss of extinction. Now in regards to you wanting to build a political movement, no movement has a 100% following, so knowing this I suggest that you write the folks at Little Green Footballs off and continue on with the mission at hand. You yourself have called them “kindergarten conservatives” and I agree. So what I am suggesting is to move on and let’s try to reach the adults of our movement and not worry about the little kiddies over at LGF. You know what little green footballs are don’t you? Their boogers and anyone playing with boogers should not be hanging around with us.
By on 6/18/08 at 2:34 pm
>These labels were created by our enemies to silence us and to scare anyone who may agree with us away.
Correction: these words are used in a fraudulent manner as a political silencing tool, but they do have real meaning. The meaning that their abuse trivilalizes, and this is one of the reasons it must be resisted, not embraced.
By on 6/18/08 at 5:03 pm
A sad irony of the situation is that CJ’s all-too-typical “no friends on the right” histrionics isn’t going to win him any friends on the left, either. For them, LGF are still (and forever) “little green fascists” — because of the strong support for Israel, the Islamo-criticism, the pro-war stance, the American patriotism.
It’s what Auster calls “the one-drop rule of conservatism” — since LGF happen to have some conservative positions, in the eyes of the mainstream, they’re irredeemably tainted.
By on 6/18/08 at 5:32 pm
Dutchman,
Thank you for your kind words about this site.
We should never write anyone off. The people who comment at a site often do not represent what the majority of the people there think. I’m sure there are plenty of grownups who read LGF. Also, we should do everything possible to make people understand our views.
By on 6/18/08 at 6:46 pm
Ian,
You’re a better man than me! I am sure there will be a special place for you in Nirvana and Odin will smile on you for your kindness toward the folks at LGF.
By on 6/19/08 at 12:38 am
Lawrence Auster posted a strange entry at VFR today, in which he says, “Neocons, along with other liberals, in all discussions about how American identity can be maintained in the face of Muslim and other non-Western immigration, have adopted a new ritualistic incantation: that America is defined by ‘the rule of law.’”
Auster states that Western traditions, including Christian morality, not “abstract phrases” define the West.
The entry is strange because it doesn’t reference any particular piece of writing in which this neocon/liberal perspective is revealed. There are no links at all in the piece. How are we to know who and what exactly he is so mad at?
He doesn’t reference me by name, but as the article above shows, the shoe fits.
I’ll gladly concede to Auster that our historical traditions, including the legacy of Christian morality, are part of the definition of the West. America would indeed not be America if we allowed polygamy.
But I don’t think, as I believe Auster does, that one needs to be Christian in order to be fully Western or to be a defender of the West, although one must not be unduly and irrationally hostile to the legacy of Christian morality.
I consider scientific realism, which encourages skepticism towards religious faith, to be a far more definitive and essential characteristic of the Western mindset than any kind of religious belief. Thus, I agree with John Derbyshire that Ben Stein’s Expelled was a “blood libel on Western civilization.”
A libel that seems to have fizzled and failed, by the way, which is a good thing. That nasty piece of snake-handling obscurantism was rejected by the public and a number of conservative commentators. For all my pessimism, it seems that America is improving in some respects. Auster’s triumphant glee when that movie appeared seems rather foolish now.
I concede then that our traditions define the West, but I also think openness to the truth and to beneficial novelties and changes does, as well. That is why I consider the intelligent design creationism that Auster espouses hostile to the spirit of the West.
By on 6/19/08 at 6:26 pm
The real problem with Auster’s post is that it denies that there are any abstract principles that define Western culture, only a higgledy-piggledy assortment of traditions, without any inherent logic to them. This position makes for a poor defense of the West indeed.
By on 6/19/08 at 10:54 pm
If L. Auster had referenced Judeo-Christian morality as a foundation of the west would his statement have been more palatable? We in the west benefit from a multi layered set of traditions. The bedrock is Jewish wisdom, monotheism, and pragmatism. Christianity added universal brotherhood, forgiveness, the notion that God is father-like, etc. (Although today’s Christianity is in danger of lapsing into a salvation cult—membership is all that is required—abandon all thinking after membership) The scientific enlightenment was possible because of Judeo-Christian traditions. It is difficult to imagine a true Islamic republic. (My understanding is that Attaturk was basically a benevolent dictator—please correct me if I’m wrong.)
By on 6/19/08 at 11:28 pm
Of course, the foundaton of the West = the people that constitute the West. In other words, whites, or Europeans. I find myself disagreeing with both Auster and Jobling here.
By on 6/20/08 at 3:22 am
I too believe that whites are the foundation of the West, as I make clear in my article What is the West?, which is based on scholarly attempts to define the essential traits of the West. I need a definition of the West that is more precise than something like Judeo-Christian morality and also not dependent on religion, as non-religious people like myself can be Westerners too. Also, as JRC points out, there are other influences on the West other than Judeo-Christianity.
By on 6/20/08 at 8:17 am
Have any of you tried clicking the links to LGF in the article recently? More kindergarten pranks.
By on 6/20/08 at 9:13 am
“Science was inherited from the Greek, not the Judaeo-Roman, tradition.”
I intended to say ‘Judaeo-Christian’, not ‘Judaeo-Roman’. (But it is also true that science and philosophy were not inherited from Rome. The greatest Roman natural philosopher was Lucretius, and there is scarcely anything in his doctines which is not derived from Greek sources. The Romans were architects, engineers, and administrators, not scientists or philosophers. They were practical men. They lacked the generalizing genius of the Greek mind. They only surpassed the Greeks in administration and law.)
By on 6/20/08 at 12:14 pm
Just because Charles Johnson hates Muslims and displays blind, unconditional, and hawkish support for Israel does not make him an ideological ally of yours. In Charles Johnson’s mind, if you acknowledge the reality of race or want to see America remain a majority white nation, you are a Nazi… period.
Charles Johnson fully subscribes to the notion of America as a propositional nation. This means that race, ethnicity, and culture are of no importance to the nation. The only thing that matters is that a few vague propositions (like democracy, freedom, individualism, etc.) are followed. In Johnson’s mind, those who do not agree with this are not simply wrong, but evil. Of course, he doesn’t view Israel as a propositional nation, only America and the other White nations of the West. All of this became obvious during the fallout he had with the Brussels Journal and Gates of Vienna.
Charles Johnson is also an obsessive compulsive egomaniac. He labels anyone who disagrees with him as a “troll” and summarily bans them. This has turned his website into a creepy echo-chamber that more closely resembles a cult than a place for honest political discussion. This also became apparent during the debacle between him and Gates of Vienna/Brussels Journal. If you didn’t realize these things after that incident, then I would seriously question your judgment.
Charles Johnson is a sick man.
By on 6/21/08 at 4:32 am
http://oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/2008/06/26/charles-johnson-lgf-admire-john-yoo/
Charles Johnson at LGF supports John Yoo who has made some extreme statements in support of torture. The above link has links to LGF posts in support of Yoo and some Yoo statements on torture that many people would say are definitely fascist.
Cassel: If the president deems that he’s got to torture somebody, including by crushing the testicles of the person’s child, there is no law that can stop him?
Yoo: No treaty.
Cassel: Also no law by Congress — that is what you wrote in the August 2002 memo…
Yoo: I think it depends on why the President thinks he needs to do that.
Charles Johnson from LGF:
“It’s a convergence of the hysterical “torture!” ninnies and the 9/11 Troofers.”
By on 6/27/08 at 8:58 pm
re: redirecting links.
I used to link to LGF on my blog and Johnson redirected the link to an inter-racial dating “service”. Apparently, he thought this would make the white nationalist seethe with rage. “That’ll show ‘em!” I was wondering if Johnson would come and engage in a debate with Ian and others on this post. I guess I have my answer.
By on 6/28/08 at 3:15 pm
“The only philosophical difference between the LGF community and myself is that I think some differences in psychology and culture among the races are certainly or probably rooted in biological, genetic differences.”
Charles Johnson and his followers are crazed misanthropes. I think there’s a bit more difference than you are admitting.
By on 6/29/08 at 1:48 am
I disagree with Dr. Jobling’s view of the centrality of tolerance and other liberal values in white civilization, but I share many other views he espouses and am a fan of this site.
It may be one thing to call him (or me) a “racist”, but it is completely indefensible to call him a Nazi, neo-Nazi, fascist, anti-Semite, or anything of the kind. Any fair-minded observer would realize with a minimum of reading and research that a top priority of I-W is to create a pro-white movement free of those tendencies.
By Irish on 6/17/08 at 11:19 pm