What Is Our End Game?

We’ve made the big time, folks! And by “we”, I don’t mean “me”, specifically, but rather the reactosphere as a nebulous organization has made the big time! The New York Times, the Washington Post, and other esteemed publications are talking about the alt-right, the manosphere, neoreaction, paleoconservatism, and all of the various permutations of intellectual louts that give the powers that be a nervous twinge.

And yet, of all the articles by “proper thinkers” on us, I was most affected by an article on Cracked.com

You remember Cracked, don’t you? That website that used to have light humor and occasionally thought provoking articles, before Jason “David Wong” Pargin (I won’t address the cultural appropriation) went down the social justice rabbit hole and turned his website into a low(er) rent version of Salon, much to the dismay of his former fans?

A few months ago they had an article titled “Some Brief Friendly Advice About Racism“, in which Mr. “Wong” attempted to analyze the reactosphere in an objective way and prove us wrong. While I found much to disagree with, there was one serious question it raised in me:

The 6th bit of advice was “Always Ask About the Endgame”, and then went to ask “Even if these numbers are true, what do you want to do about it?”

Obviously, the implication is that  the “hate facts” we learn about will inevitably lead to genocide and minorities being herded into box cars to go to concentration camps. And having been in association with a fair amount of the movers and shakers of the New/Alt Right, I can safely say that most of us do NOT, in fact, want to aggress against anybody, and most of us (At least in theory) do not want genocide. I’ve certainly argued against imperialism many times specifically for the pragmatic reason that it leaves blood on your hands and a guilt complex that your children will bear—just take a look around you for five minutes to see examples of that happening.

But the question kept nagging me. What, exactly, IS our “end game”? What DO we want as the end result of our revolution?

Just ballparking it, I can tell you what I think would be a good “end game” for all of this:

1) The first things first is, we have to have the legitimacy of “hate facts” established. The statistics on crime and IQ, anthropological research suggesting that multiculturalism and multiracialism are at best ENORMOUS difficulties, the legitimacy of traditional gender roles (up to a certain point), truthful “no punches pulled” looks at all cultures INCLUDING ourselves, and lastly but certainly not least the idea that white people have legitimate group interests, a legitimate culture and deserve the right to merely exist (and yes, all of that IS in dispute!), all of these are just a few common threads I see, and without establishing the truthfulness of things of this nature, no other things are possible

2) In acknowledging that “good fences make for good neighbors”, and that dysfunction and tribalism only INCREASE in multicultural/racial scenarios, let us cease the demands for open borders and forced multiculturalism. All nations,  no matter what race or color they are,  have a right to decide what they want to do, and should countries decide to close their borders and retain their founding stock, let them do so! Acknowledge that while immigration is not always bad, in some cases it is not good either, it’s up to the discretion of the people of the nation. Japan, South Korea, Hungary, and Poland aren’t perfect, but they seem to be getting along alright with incredibly strict immigration policies, so can we at least acknowledge that not having immigration is not inherently a kiss of death to a country?

3) In reading #2, realize of course that nations like the USA, Canada, and Australia are already multiracial and multicultural. You can argue whether or not that’s good or bad (frankly, I’ve always said that America is the closest the world has ever come since the Roman Empire to a true multicultural country and you should be very disturbed by that fact), but it is what it is, multiracialism is the cross that those countries bear, and there’s no getting around that without attempting to act upon the lunatic “gas the kikes race war now” fantasies that Andrew Anglin and his ilk feed to impressionable 14 year old losers (disingenuously of course, I highly doubt that Mr. Andy “The Only Sex I’ve Ever Had Was With Filipino Hookers” truly believes in his racial demagoguery).

The question remains: are these multicultural/racial countries doomed to have ethnic albatrosses around their necks for all eternity? I don’t necessarily think so.

A common argument used by immigration boosters is “…Well, the Irish were discriminated against and weren’t seen as white and then they assimilated and became seen as ‘regular Americans'”. Ignoring that that’s…not exactly true, there is still some truth to it in that: yes, the Irish were discriminated against, and were seen as being inferior to Anglo-Saxon people.

Of course, what they don’t tell you is that when the first wave of the Irish diaspora came to the United States…they didn’t exactly ingratiate themselves to their new neighbors. \

And while the implication the immigration boosters always promote is that once tolerance and doing something were done, the Irish magically became accepted in American Society, what they leave is out that tolerance and acceptance only came about after a long and deliberate effort by leaders of the Irish-American community to, in essence, get their constituents to stop acting like complete jackasses.

So why couldn’t a similar thing be done to problem communities today? This is where the hate facts come in, make the statistics known to everybody that some groups commit more crime than others, some groups do worse on standardized testing than others, give just a hint of “motivational shame” (which I advocate here and here), and maybe they’ll seek to improve themselves.

It can’t be any worse than having guilty white liberals constantly run interference for them. I’m under no false impressions that white people are somehow immune to sloth, apathy, and vice—if the social justice industry were around in the 19th century, who’s to say there wouldn’t still be a dysfunctional Hibernian community in America today, making up elaborate faux-Gaelic names for themselves and constantly cursing Anglo perfidy?

4) And assuming that #3 doesn’t work, and those communities remain problematic, we can always just apply the rule in #2 to smaller states, municipalities, and various housing constructs. And if that’s sounds like de facto segregation to you…that’s basically what the talk of “safe spaces” and “de-Europeanization” is leading up to, isn’t it?

Some metrics show that black people have in fact lost net worth as a whole in the United States since segregation ended. And of course, this all reiterates that, again, people generally like to be with their own kind.

If there is apparently such a demand for segregation, at the very least let us compromise by not demanding forced integration that ultimately doesn’t seem to make either party happy.

Hate facts, encouraging groups to clean up their act, and generally leaving people alone. I think that’s a pretty solid end game, yes?