Race relations are difficult, sometimes agonizing

Race relations are difficult, sometimes agonizing. The harmony for which the country yearns is not at hand, and may never be achieved. Because whites are generally blamed for making race into such an enduring problem, white racism has become not just a moral failing but the worst moral failing. Our society forgives sexual misconduct, abuse of office, dishonesty, and incompetence far more readily than it does any action by whites that could be described as “racism.”
At the same time, promoting diversity is a way for whites to demonstrate virtue. Diversity policies benefit non-whites by encouraging their immigration, employment, promotion, or admission to university, and to support diversity is the most readily recognizable way of demonstrating opposition to racism. For whites, diversity therefore has moral rather than practical goals, and this is why it does not require justification in ordinary terms. Americans attribute unrealistic, exaggerated benefits to diversity because they support it for emotional rather than rational reasons. They call it “America’s greatest strength” not because they have weighed all of America’s strengths and come to a rational conclusion about which is greatest. They are expressing an emotional commitment to something they feel they must support in order to prove they are not racists.

Jared Taylor

11 thoughts on “Race relations are difficult, sometimes agonizing”

      • As it happens, Taylor actually is racist, (unlike many who get tarred with the label), but he’s not exactly well-known outside of certain circles. I’d barely heard of the guy.

        Despite the fact that his preferred policies would not lead to any kind of racial harmony whatsoever, the truth is that current leftist thought on the matter is also not going to produce racial harmony, and gives people like Taylor an opportunity to spread their nonsense. (Of course, people like Taylor give people like Ibrahim Kendi opportunities to spread their nonsense. Extremists always feed off their counterparts.)

        • I agree with your remark that Jared Taylor isn’t exactly well-known outside of certain circles, which makes me wonder exactly why this blog is quoting him.

          • Probably because he stumbled across the quote somewhere.

            And those certain circles include both racists and “antiracists.”

      • Whilst I can understand your annoyance at Karl descending to an ad hominem response (something normally to be deprecated), I think that your comment is a bit over the top. At least Karl is not obviously incorrect: if you google Jared Taylor the first thing you find is references to him as a white supremacist. If true, this does not invalidate the argument presented and, if this argument is erroneous, Karl needs to refute it rather than try to dismiss the message by name calling directed at the author. However, your calling Karl names in return really doesn’t help, especially if my supposition that you know nothing about Karl is correct. Unlike Mr. Taylor, google is no help in determining Karl’s views (assuming he is not a Resident Evil villain).

        Plus, reciprocal name calling has minimal information content and lowers the tone of PV.

        Of course, you do not have to believe that this description of Jared Taylor is correct. I think that white supremacy is currently too loosely defined and much overused – in much the same way as fascism was over and misused in the Trump era – and it doesn’t really fit too well someone who argues for the supremacy of Asians and is the reverse of anti-semitic (anti-semitism being one of the defining characteristics of the small number of true white supremacists in the USA). However, I find his race-realism wholly unconvincing and this disagreement means that I approach anything he writes with a sceptical mindset.

        • In what way is treatment based on genetics not odorous, whether it be the genocide of Uyghurs in the present day, the eugenics of a century ago, or slavery as practiced in the South of a century and a half ago?

          In re this troll: Not being able to reach out and rub the nose in their odoriferous mess as I would an unhousebroken puppy, there is not much to be done other than treat them as they treat others. This one certainly engages in race-baiting behavior, which is a common Marxist tactic – so I am, I believe, justified in calling the cards as I see them.

          In re Google (or any other search engine, for that matter): They are not “reliable sources” for anything much beyond the chemical formula for table salt – if that much. I am not a “fan” of Mr. Taylor, by any means, but the quote is quite accurate. As the saying goes, he may be a broken clock – but, in this case, he happens to be right.

          • I’m uncertain why you ask this question of me as neither my comment – nor anything else I’ve ever written – contains anything to indicate that I in any way approve of treating a person as anything other than a unique individual rather than on the basis of their skin colour or ethnic origin. But for the record I strongly disapprove of the current treatment the Uyghurs and equally, for example, of that of the Armenians during WW1. Further, though I noted that I have a sceptical approach to Jared Taylor’s writing I expressed no criticism of what he said in the OP.

            It’s worth remembering though that treating people as “the other” does not require a genetic difference, as the experience of the Kulaks in Stalin’s USSR or the “intellectuals” in Pol Pot’s Cambodia demonstrates.

    • Even Adolph Hitler liked dogs. Sorry, not sorry.

      Yes, the guy is not someone I’d invite to dinner. There again there’s a large number of people on both the left and right that fall into that category.

      Beside if I invited everyone in the world to dinner, where would we find for everyone to be able to eat at the same time and place. I know, I know… I speak in jest. Who has the time for dinner with friends.

Comments are closed.