Being Nice versus Being Right
by David Sims
TRUTH AND HATE are not opposites. Truth and niceness are not synonymous, and sometimes the nice answer is the wrong answer. (ILLUSTRATION: Poussin; The Conquest of Jerusalem by Titus)
To illustrate, I’ll point out the fact that some of the people who answered my intentionally provocative posts blamed the white race, that group of people toward whom my highest loyalty is given, for a disproportionate amount of conquest, oppression, and slavery. But the people who assign blame in that manner do so because they are ignorant of any history except what was taught them by politically correct teachers in educational institutions controlled by a government, which is, in turn, controlled by the largest banks. Many of the bankers are Jews who have an interest in distressing and confusing white people about their own past and inner worth.
Nearly all races have gone on conquering binges. If the white race has been more successful than some, then it is because the white race is more competent in a general way, with regard to any sort of enterprise you can imagine, than most other races would be. The main reason for that is our intelligence and our extroverted, creative psychology: the “Faustian” spirit that the Asians (the other intelligent race on Earth) mostly lack.
Nonetheless, other races have done, to the limit of their ability for doing them, the same sins that the white race is far more stridently blamed for doing, and the reason for the difference in the sinning and the blaming is political in nature and is mostly Jewish in origin. When you agree that the white race has a special degree of blame for conquest, oppression, or slavery, you are actually blaming that general competence that the white race has, rather than any special moral defect in the character of white people.
I’ll use slavery to make my point.
What got the white man into trouble wasn’t his oppression, but his charity. Lots of other races have done their share of oppressing without incurring anywhere near the blowback that the white race is now having to put up with. That’s because other races oppressed far more thoroughly than whites did.
The Arabs made sure that their black slaves did not reproduce and did not live long enough to rebel. The whites, on the other hand, got all morally wussified and turned their slaves loose. In Haiti, that got all the white people in the country murdered within a few weeks. In Zimbabwe and in South Africa, the extermination of whites is going on now, but at a slower pace.
It isn’t oppression that causes problems for an oppressor. It’s relenting from oppression that does. All history, both political and natural, teaches — repeatedly — that you must never, never give up the decisive control that comes from a position of dominance.
“The concept of envy — the hatred of the superior — has dropped out of our moral vocabulary. The idea that white Christian civilization is hated more for its virtues than its sins doesn’t occur to us, because it’s not a nice idea. Western man towers over the rest of the world in ways so large as to be almost inexpressible. It’s Western exploration, science, and conquest that have revealed the world to itself. Other races feel like subjects of western power long after colonialism, imperialism and slavery have disappeared. The charge of racism puzzles whites who feel not hostility, but only baffled good will, because they don’t grasp what it really means: humiliation. The white man presents an image of superiority even when he isn’t conscious of it. Superiority excites envy. Destroying white civilization is the inmost desire of the league of designated victims we call ‘minorities.'” — Joseph Sobran, April 1997.
When was the last time you heard about someone getting beaten up or murdered by a gang of Australopithecus robustus? You haven’t heard of such a thing because there aren’t any A. robustus left in the world. Our own ancestors, H. erectus, killed the last of them a million years ago. Do you suppose there ever was any bad karma from that? No. Instead, the genus Homo basically owns the world and the genus Australopithecus is dead, dead, dead. We have no regrets. We have experienced no adverse consequences. Quite the contrary.
So, really, the best thing to do with a rival race is exterminate it. People used to understand that quite well. It’s why most of the early (pre-political correctness) science fiction stories in which aliens from another star system came to our planet did not come in peace. They came to exterminate us, or to eat us, or to exploit us in one way or another, and to take possession of the Earth.
Because that is how nature really works. That’s why the only good books in Orson Scott Card’s Ender Wiggin Saga are Ender’s Game and the books treating the First Formic War (e.g. Earth Afire). The later stories in the series are corrupted by moral wussiness.
But the best SF along these lines is Robert Heinlein’s Starship Troopers. Read chapter 12 of that book for a rather concise philosophical treatise embedded within a very well-told science fiction story.
The biggest flaw in the character of white people is their reluctance to satisfy this natural condition for continued existence: seize the dominant position while you can and hold it forever. Rather than ever give it up, exterminate any rival for possession. Other races have a better understanding of this truth than most white people do. They just don’t have as much general competence as the white race has for getting the job done. While most races have used slavery, the white race was the first to abolish it legally, and it is likely that if the white race had not set the precedent for abolition, slavery would still be in use by every culture on Earth.
And it isn’t as if white peoples have never been slaves. Both Asians and Arabs have enslaved whites by the millions. Whites have enslaved other whites. But, once released from bondage, the former white slaves and their descendants quickly reestablish themselves in prosperous industry; they bounce back fast. They don’t spend whole generations bemoaning some insubstantial legacy of slavery that keeps them from rising to greatness once more.
The races are different from each other. Not just in the skin color, but also in the kind of behavior that they are naturally evolved to show. Because of this, the laws that are best for one race may be less than best — in fact, may be less than good — for other races.
Governments must treat all peoples alike with the laws, or else there will be discontent and rebellion by people excluded from legal favoritism.
But if the government does treat everyone with strict equality, the race whose behavior is most in tune with the laws will have better outcomes, better fortunes, than the other races. Once again, you might have a rebellion for the different reason of social envy.
So, ideally, a country should have as citizens only people who are very similar to each other in behavior, in abilities, and in spirit. That means that they should be all of the same race. Or mostly so.
It is true, of course, that there are some members from even the most violent and vulgar races who are good people — good enough that you would not care if they were your neighbors. However, the race of such good people still matters, because they are statistical rarities. It is likely that their children and grandchildren will be more typical examples of their race, and therefore accepting even good racial aliens now can lead to a dangerous threat to your descendants a hundred years later.
* * *