by JLH
Here’s a genteel white university professor from Vermont who came to racial awareness rather late in life and now devotes himself to promoting the cause. Robert S. Griffin foregoes argument but directs his appeal directly to whites. “It is the author’s conviction that all too many racially concerned whites are mere spectators, focused too much on the big racial picture and too little on their own roles.” His call is for whites to take control of their own lives: “health both physical and mental, personal strength, honor, love, family, friendship, home, vocation, accomplishment, pride and joy and sorrow, and mortality.” Next the good professor “urges the everyday (but not ordinary) exercise of self-discipline, persistence, and purpose for instilling such practiced values as ‘racial integrity,’ ‘courage and toughness,’ ‘physical and mental health,’ ‘positive mental attitude,’ ‘efficacy,’ and ‘personal happiness.’”
Since I have been writing about race and have become somewhat of a public figure in this area, I have found it increasingly remarkable that advocates for white people, and even people who simply speak of whites without denigrating them, are viewed by other whites as illicit, and even more, scary. It would be one thing if non-whites were put in a dither by the expression of white racial concern or advocacy. What fascinates me is how white people have been conditioned to reject out of hand, and even attack, anyone among them who says, let’s talk about how white people are doing. How this state of affairs came to be is one of the major stories of our time, I believe.
According to the writer of the article, Griffin believes that “too many white parents (and not just nationalists) still believe that it suffices to remove their offspring from minority milieus, neglecting the tentacles of the education industry and the entertainment media.” True. We need to develop a positive awareness of our own virtues as a people, along with a sensible understanding of where we have gone wrong. Griffin is also commendable for “his sensible appreciation of the sort of practical eugenics implicit in the communal life of whites until a century or so ago, when most had fair knowledge of not only their prospective mate but an ample range of that mate’s relatives across two or more generations.”
A study by a Hoover Institution neo-con on how blacks who “act white” are treated by other blacks exemplifies the tortured logic that results from thinking of race as a social construct rather than race as biological reality. According to the findings, the smarter a white kid is, the more popularity he has with other whites. Bright blacks are popular with other blacks up to a point, but the 4.0 black student is much less popular with his peers than the 4.0 white student, who ranks at the top of the popularity ladder.
The stigma against high-performing blacks is twice as high in racially integrated settings. The author mentions that in the Cleveland suburb of Shaker Heights, “integrated for generations,” racial disparities in academic performance and large and persistent.
The author’s explanation is that blacks can’t risk losing their most talented fellows to white society or society at large, and so they persecute them. This is a terrific argument for segregation: If blacks couldn’t “escape” to the white world they would have to remain in their own communities – and improve them. Another explanation that gets batted around in these discussions is the “oppositional culture” concept. Because blacks define themselves as being in opposition to whites, anything that resembles conformity to white norms sets off an almost allergic reaction within the black social body. “Real niggers” just don’t act white. A couple of points implicit in all this, but carefully left out of the analysis, is that high-IQ negroes simply don’t fit in with other negroes because being a negro is all about feeling, reaction and flo, not thinking. The most important conclusion to derive from all this is that when blacks are in proximity to whites they are on their worst behavior, mainly to distinguish themselves from whites to preserve their identity and to mask their inadequacies by essentially “dissing” white norms, that only a tiny fraction of their people can hope to emulate.
A far worse problem for our people is what to do with white children who want to emulate black norms. Here’s a somewhat bizarre but frank discussion.
An island of good sense in New York.
Skip the idiotic part about whites being imitators of black culture because we’ve never created anything and check out a white woman who proudly admits that her “biracial” children are black. “I have been with my black husband for 33 years and I have never “ACTED BLACK” because I am not and it would be disrespectful to my husband, my black children and the black community at large if I did.”
A black guy tries to act sensibly and gets flak from fellow blacks. And all along I thought it was racist white people who are holding the brutha man down.
A Majority Rights commenter brainstorms about ways to reintroduce social censure to white women who go with black men.
Leave a Reply