Re: Spelunker

Editor’s Note: This is a response to Spelunker’s latest comment at Civil War Crossroads.

“As proof of how delusional Brad is, he refers to the South as a “Country”. LULZ!

When I said “other countries,” I was referring to any number of nations around the world where the United States has used military force to impose its own value system. The Confederacy was hardly alone in this respect. The “Civil War” must be seen in the wider context of America’s march toward world domination.

“No. Not equal. Try again. They are not attracted to those of the opposite sex. Brad is on here talking about “imposing” while telling Gays who they can and can’t marry? What the what? He did not even touch my point about how his marriage to Renee Baum was affected by two gay people marrying each other. It’s not. Period. Which is why he won’t touch it, because it’s an admission that he is wrong. No one forced Brad to marry a woman. No one forces a man to marry another man. People decide for themselves who they want to marry themselves. That is equality. The right and ability for two people who love each other, and are committed to each other to be able to enjoy the same legal rights that others enjoy. There is nothing wrong with that. I have never in my life met a straight couple who was denied marriage. I have met plenty of gay people who were denied that right.”

Homosexuals have the same rights that I have which is to marry an adult of the opposite sex. It is just as illegal for me, for example, to marry another man, to marry an animal or inanimate object like a bridge, to marry more than one person, to marry a close relative, or to marry someone who is underage. It’s true though, however, that Christian societies regulate sexuality and privilege married heterosexual monogamy as a social good in law and culture above other forms of deviant relationships.

Is this a slippery slope argument? Like I said at Crossroads, “equality” is an idea that is unable to coexist with any other idea, and our history bears this out. We have already traveled well down the slippery slope with devastating consequences. Thanks to the power of the US federal government, free love, miscegenation, and no-fault divorce are already in the rear view mirror. Christian marriage had already been fatally undermined since the Moynihan Report in 1965.

If relationships are to be held to the new US standard of “love,” “attraction” and “individual freedom,” what sense does it make to criminalize adultery? How is “love” reconciled with “individual freedom”? Is “love” even necessary between consenting adults? Why shouldn’t two heterosexual men who are best friends be prevented from getting married for the financial benefits of doing so?

Finally, I don’t agree with your assertion that my own Christian marriage is the equivalent of two or three or four butt banging homosexuals in a polygamous open relationship with a harem of underage boys. I agree, however, that is where the logic of “equal rights” will inevitably lead our culture, which is a destination that I oppose.

“Brad’s right, my bad. I wrote “inner cities”, what I should have said was “anywhere Black people live in the United States” to be more in line with Brad’s rationale. Sorry about that.”

We could expand that to just about anywhere black people live, period, whether it is the United States, the UK, Canada, Belgium, and France among the developed countries, or throughout the Caribbean and sub-Saharan Africa.

“Allow me to expand. By common sense, what I mean is that I have met tons and tons of very smart sounding, highly educated people with extensive backgrounds in all sorts of sciences and other fields that I’d never stand a chance of hoping of even coming close to holding a candle to their intelligence. Unfortunately, all of the book smarts in the world doesn’t matter if you can’t apply all of the knowledge in a meaningful way IRL. Brad has a website devoted to the “Intelligent Racist” approach, ala Jared Taylor, Richard Spencer, etc.. You read Occidental Dissent and it sounds like he’s sooooo intelligent. There are so many facts, and links, and charts, and graphs; how could he possibly be wrong?”

Common sense is not starting with “equality” as an a priori assumption. A sound judgement would be one that is based on the available evidence. Since there is no evidence of anything but racial inequality, a common sense conclusion would be that racial differences exist.

Well, it’s because for all of that information, Brad is biased. He is biased to find a pre-determined conclusion.

How is racial inequality a pre-determined conclusion? There’s no system of measurement known to man that can verify the existence of racial equality under experimental conditions. The theory of racial equality is tested every day in integrated school districts in the United States and other Western countries by ardent anti-racists – people who do not share my biases – who have spent billions of dollars trying to eliminate the existing racial gaps on the basis of their pre-determined assumption that equality exists.

“Occidental Dissent is the greatest proof there is to the already admitted truth that Brad is a racist and a White Supremacist.”

I don’t believe in racial equality because there is no evidence it exists. I can’t observe racial equality anymore than I can observe ghosts. I consider it a modern superstition on the same level as giving someone the “Evil Eye.”

As for “white supremacy,” I do not believe that Whites are “superior” to all other races, which is what you are implying. I’m a Southern Nationalist. An ethnonationalist is someone who believes that some given ethnic group has a supreme claim to a territory. Thus, I believe that White Southerners have a supreme claim to Dixie, which is our country, in much the same way that the Japanese are “supreme” in Japan, the Chinese are “supreme” in China, and the Mexicans are “supreme” in Mexico. In other words, this land belongs to us, not to others.

“Brad calls African Americans, “The Black Undertow”. I’d be willing to bet Brad does not have one Black friend IRL. So how can Brad be such an expert on what it’s like to be Black, or what causes problems in “the Black community”, wherever that might be (Suburb, Exurb, Inner City, Rural country).”

The Black Undertow is not synonymous with black people. It is a subdivision of the black community which is the opposite of the “Talented Tenth.”

No one has more experience with the Black Undertow than other black people. I will give you two recent examples. Back home, the grandson of an elderly black woman who I know was recently shot to death in a juke joint. As the story has been told to me, the ex-boyfriend of his sister had stormed into the place, there was a fist fight over how the sister had been physically abused, and when the ex-boyfriend lost, he went outside to retrieve his gun, came back inside the juke joint and opened fire.

In a separate incident, there is an old black man who I know who owns a gas station way out in the country. The old black man had been running his business for decades and saved enough money to pay for his grandchildren to go to college. He’s dead now, but not too long ago a black thug robbed his gas station and shot him in the face.

What’s the common denominator in both of these tragic stories? The Black Undertow.

“All communities have problems. White communities have problems too. I’m much more interested in discovering how to solve the problems of the global community, and by that I mean all of us living on this planet. Brad thinks about the world in terms of everything being a small community, whereas I think about the world in terms of all of us sharing this big ball. Since we are all sharing it, and none of us has any more right to live here than another, in my mind, your problems are my problems and vice-versa. We should be working together to solve all of our problems.”

That’s true.

Unlike you, I am primarily interested in the welfare of my own people in South, and I am sympathetic to the plight of White people elsewhere around the world. I’m not a crusading utopian busybody who wants to impose my value system on the entire world. I can tolerate the existence of other points of view whereas you cannot.

As a utopian universalist, you discount the history of group conflict within the human species, and you turn a blind eye to the disastrous consequences of the implementation of “equal rights.” When you look at contemporary South Africa, you see “progress” and “democracy,” while I see exactly the sort of violent Third World dystopia and retreat from civilization that I want to avoid in the South.

“In that respect, in my opinion, it’s pretty clear that even though Brad is probably far more educated than I am, I think he’s so wrong about all of his conclusions to problems he sees in the world. Now don’t misunderstand me, I’m not claiming to be an expert on what the causes of various problems in all of these different smaller communities of people are either. I do look at what Brad offers as “proof” and find a completely different conclusion.”

Undoubtedly true.

There’s no doubt that I am far more educated on the subject of the intersection of black people and equal rights than you are (I have spent years researching the topic), which is precisely why I am so bearish on the subject.

Maybe you are looking at Haiti and Jamaica, or the South under Reconstruction, or Liberia, Zimbabwe and sub-Saharan Africa since independence, or Detroit and other American cities after the triumph of the Civil Rights Movement and are seeing something that I am not. I guess you see “human rights” and “democracy” and “racial equality” while I see a catastrophic decline in the level civilization, which is a consequence of the above ideas, that has been bad for White people across the board.

“So who is right? Am I better than Brad? I don’t know. Only time will tell which of us is right.”

I’m sure we would quickly found out should you ever decide to enter the ring and argue for your point of view, but we both know that will never happen.

“But I’m not going to spend every waking hour of my day scrolling through You Tube looking for videos of Black or White people peeing on buses so that I can run around and say, “Look how uncivilized these people are”.

It takes less than 10 seconds to find such material on YouTube. Such videos are posted almost every day on World Star Hip Hop.

“That’s the entire reason why I posted two videos of what looks like two different White people doing the exact same thing as the example Brad posted of a Black person doing it, because, well, what’s your point? Apparently Brad’s point is that he has no point. Brad wants to run around sounding all Bell Curve and HBD, yelling about this groups IQ versus this groups IQ, but at the end of the day, what does that have to do with equality.Absolutely nothing.”

Absolutely false.

That’s the core issue in this debate: do all races have the exactly same capabilities? If they don’t have the same capabilities, we shouldn’t be troubled by the existence of racial gaps. If racial equality is not our guiding assumption, then remedial action would be unnecessary, and it wouldn’t be necessary to assign blame for “inequality.”

“Because Brad is purposely trying to muddle the argument with unimportant facts. Equality, as I stated before is the idea that different people are treated equally, not that they are physically equal.”

This is untrue on so many levels.

Where to start? From the beginning of the Civil Rights Movement, the assumption was that physical racial equality existed, and that observed racial disparities were due to “the legacy of slavery,” segregation, “underfunding” and racial discrimination. Now that segregation has been dismantled and racial discrimination has been outlawed in hundreds of ways, it is attributed to “white privilege” and “institutional racism.” The whole education system is based on the false assumption of racial equality, which is why it is geared toward achieving equal results between races.

“Equal treatment” has never been the goal of the Civil Rights Movement. A “civil right” is not even a “right” in the traditional negative sense of the word like the right to “free speech.” It is a restriction on the “rights” or freedom of others – say, the freedom to sell your house or rent an apartment to who you want to do business with – and a corresponding duty to engage with certain races.

“Equal treatment” wouldn’t require “positive discrimination” in the form of affirmative action or wealth redistribution. Above all else, “equal treatment” wouldn’t require criminalizing the speech of those who doubt the existence of physical racial equality, or arresting people, throwing them out of hotel rooms, or even throwing them in prison for the crime of doubting the existence of physical racial equality.

We’ve seen in Hungary this weekend where “equality” ultimately leads: because it is based on the vices of envy and wrath, it leads to repression and persecution by SJWs (Social Justice Warriors). It leads to criminalizing thought and restricting freedom. It leads to using the law to hold down some groups and redistribute their wealth. It leads to hobbling civilization to the lowest common denominator. It leads to demonizing the “oppressor” group which is blamed for inequality.

“(When Blacks were fighting against segregated bussing, they just wanted to be able to sit in the same darn seats that your ancestors sat in. Really, is that so dang horrible?)”

There was a reason that the buses used to be segregated: allowing the Black Undertow to ride the bus would discourage White people from using public transportation.

“Even though they are in a lot of ways physically equal as well. Admittedly we are not all the same physically either. But what does that prove in context to legal equality? Nothing. Equality under the law is what we’re working for Brad, we don’t mean that you can jump higher, or they can sing better. But Brad knows that. This purposeful deception is no mistake. Brad has no argument without it.”

Equality of result is what you are working for. “Social justice” requires holding down Whites and holding civilization hostage to the black standard. It means following “equal rights” to its logical conclusion which is Detroit.

“Finally, Brad is right again. Someone always does have to be the villain. I am the villain, and so are you. We’re all the villain, and that’s why we all need to work together to make the world a more loving, inclusive, and peaceful place for everyone.”

In a society that is based on the proposition that “all men are not created equal,” we could acknowledge the existence of inequalities without having to blame anyone else for our own shortcomings, whether it be aristocrats, the kulaks, or White people. It’s no one’s fault, for example, that my brother is taller than me, or that he is better at math and physics than I am, or that neither of us are really NBA material.

“I don’t harbor any ill will towards Brad or his family. I am not a perfect person and I don’t have all of the answers, but I am willing to improve our world and work towards making it a better place. We’re going to miss the mark much more often than we are going to hit it, but when we miss the mark it gives us a reason to keep trying to hit it.”

Sub-Saharan Africa was a far better place under white supremacy and colonialism than it is today after half a century of democracy and equal rights.

“I reject Brad’s thinking. I think Brad’s ideas are disgusting and reprehensible. I think Brad is a hollow, empty shell. I hope that one day Brad will learn what empathy is, what love is. Brad, I hope that one day you will have a change of heart, I really hope you do.

I reject your ideas. I think your silly ideas are naive, unfounded, and irresponsible and that when they have been put on trial in practice, the result has been Detroit and Haiti. I think ideas don’t have to be based on malice to be dangerous. Sometimes a firm hand is better than maudlin sympathy for the “oppressed.”

I think well meaning utopian dreamers have been responsible for unleashing some of the most destructive regimes in world history: the horrors of the French Revolution and The Terror, the Soviet Union, Mao’s China, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, to name a few. I will cite post-colonial sub-Saharan Africa as the ultimate example of the folly of trying to impose European norms on unsuitable African populations.

The well meaning fools who created modern South Africa and Zimbabwe didn’t intend to create those dystopias. The bleeding heart liberals who allowed millions of Muslims to settle in the UK didn’t intend for Rotherham to happen. The fools who undermined Christian marriage two generations ago had no idea that it would lead to the Lord of the Flies-style existence of the Black Undertow in cities like Memphis.

Jacob, I hope that one day you will learn something from history and experience, and that you get your head on straight one day and realize that our actions often have terrible unintended consequences, I really do.