How Nations Live and Die
by David Sims
IN CHAPTER five of his book, The Inequality of Human Races, Arthur de Gobineau begins with an interesting statement in regard to actual racial superiority, as opposed to a superiority that is merely perceived or asserted.
States are created by races. Usually, though not always, the state is created by a people to further their own interests in the world at large. Most of the exceptions are states created by one race to control, and possibly to enslave, another race — much as a rancher builds a corral to confine a herd of horses.
If the population in a corral-state are particularly dull, it may be convenient for the rancher-race to propagandize the false notion that the herd-race created the state themselves and to promote an incorrect belief that the corral-state furthers the herd-race’s interests in the world at large. You might be surprised at how often this works.
But, to return to Gobineau: Most states, historically, were created by the people who dwell under their laws. In the beginning, Gobineau says, the people of any state entertain a belief, based on prejudice, that they are better than the people of other states. Their culture is higher. Their abilities are greater. And so on.
The laws of a state, early in its existence, reflect these beliefs in the superiority of its creator race, and this is the basis of systems of caste and nobility, and even citizenship — at first.
But over time neighboring states begin to diffuse into each other demographically, and the sense that “those people over there are aliens” dissipates. This leads, for a while, to a degree of civilization, since the different groups find one another useful.
But after that intermingling has gone on for a while, the real truth of racial superiority is observed by the different peoples within the mix. The belief is no longer based on pride and prejudice, but on experience and provable facts. The inferior races and the superior races begin to resent each other: The former resents the latter for being superior, and the latter resents the former for being parasites.
Thus, racial diversity, the mixing of races within the same state, under the same government, is a bad idea. Beyond simple prejudice, the fact is the races aren’t equal, and some of them are more suited to live in advanced civilization than are others. The ones less suited will burden the ones that are more suited, and hostility will be the inevitable result of race-mixing.
But by the time this truth emerges from experience, a good many people living within the state will have acquired interests in favor of increasing “diversity.” Some of them will have become economically dependent on it, as, for example, on cheap labor. Others will have married persons of other races, or be descended from such marriages. These interests will conflict with any honest effort to act in accord with the truth about racial differences, and from this conflict a political Left will be born, whose partisans will relentlessly deny racial truth on every front and oppose its recognition by any means necessary.
And so the state will die. Inevitably. Just as every other state that has allowed racial diversity has died.
Arthur de Gobineau was a French writer of the mid-19th century who wrote as his experience informed him. He’d heard about the unspeakable evils of the French Revolution and the genocidal disaster that it led to in the former French colony of San Domingue, alias Haiti.
Today, the political Left in the United States (and that of Europe) has many things to say about Gobineau. They call him names. They emphasize the possibility that he might have been a homosexual. They hint that his writing “inspired the Nazis.” And so on. But what they don’t do, what they can’t do, is prove that he was wrong.
And that’s typical of leftist demagoguery. It isn’t so much debate as it is vilification, smear, and deception.
* * *