Reading over that list from Vox Day about what the main values of the Alt-Right are, as reported by John Derbyshire in yesterday’s post, “Whiteness” just sorta jumps off the page, doesn’t it? They try to surround it with lots of nice statements about no one being superior, and everyone having their own distinctive abilities, and supporting all nationalisms, but it’s pretty strange that it’s there at all. As Derb says, it’s not as if white people are in some sort of existential crisis where there won’t be any left if we don’t act now. We’re not exactly an endangered species – not even threatened. I don’t say that they don’t mean all these nice things about other groups. I imagine at least some of them do. It just seems like insisting repeatedly that your group is in favor of everyone being able to have a favorite flavor ice cream. “Horace? This ice cream thing just keeps showing up over and over and I just don’t get it. Ice cream seems to be unusually important to you.”
I know their examples, that on college campuses and in some places in the preferred media one does come under immediate attack for a whiteness that you don’t instantly apologize for. I suppose if you are living in one of those situations – a place where other groups can have ice cream but you are told you are not deserving, or people beat you up for asserting your right to ice cream – I could see at a distance how it comes up. But can’t you just take your game and your talents to Miami or something? You can just not read those newspapers, watch those shows. Go next door where they don’t yell at you and they have better manners. If you think you are surrounded by this constant assault on your right to exist, I’m thinking there’s a good chance that’s actually a molehill.
Here’s my prediction: if that stays as a key feature of being alt-right, it will eventually become the only feature. If it can be made optional, someone will give it a new name and start to market the ideology better. I’m betting it’s not optional. A lot of those decorations around point #14 seem to be lead-ins to it, not really separate values. Perhaps I over-interpret. I really do like that one about Western Civilisation. I don’t like the one about globalism, but I understand it. Neither of those is necessarily racist. But in this context, they seem to be ushers.
I don’t much care about whiteness, so I’m more than a little puzzled by people who do. If you brought me forward a hundred years I would certainly be first interested in any of my granddaughters who are still alive – though two of them are half-Filipina, so we’re already off the whiteness square a bit. I would want very much to first talk with them about what had happened and find out what they turned into. I would care about their children because they did, and might scan them for Wymanish or Walkerish traits. Their grandchildren? I’m not sure but what I’d start staring off into the distance as they told me about them. In telling their own stories, there might be some news about descendants of friends of ours, and that would be interesting for a bit. Look at the older people you know now – not much interested in their great-grandchildren.
And caring about what happened to all the other white people interests me not at all. I’d be interested in what happened to my own church, and the Christian church in general. Right now it looks like the center of gravity is moving out of North America as it from Europe to here in recent centuries. If the story is that white people mostly gave up the faith but black people held on to theirs better, or Koreans really stepped up and fill the pews now then those are the people I want to go see. Telling me that there are still all-white churches somewhere else in the country wouldn’t interest me.
I’ve got some genetic legacy, and I think that’s fine, but whiteness seems an unimportant part of that. My legacy is spiritual, cultural, even emotional.