On race relations in the United States

Jared Taylor, current editor of the American Renaissance, denies the term "white nationalist" and explains why he is not a "white supremacist." But, what this established journalist claims, is that he is a "race realist." Taylor's views have become an important piece of the race relations puzzle, and can often be found in studies, essays, newspapers (including the Washington Post) and books. Taylor has been called everything from a racist to a "true paragon of tolerance." He takes a few moments to discuss with Jamie Hines what is a "race realist," why there is no need for the civil rights battle, and what he thinks of President Barack Obama.

JH: I've read that you describe yourself as a "race realist." What is a "race realist?"
JT: Race realism is rejection of the agreeable fantasies about race that have become orthodoxy since the 1960s. First, it is obvious that most people prefer the company of others of their own race. Forced integration therefore causes tension and resentment.

Second, race is an important element in individual and group identity, which means it is impossible to build a society in which race does not matter.

Third, people of different races build different societies. Blacks—wherever they are found in large numbers—establish communities with certain characteristics, and whites and others do the same.

Fourth, the combination of the first three factors means that racial diversity is a source of constant conflict. This is blindingly obvious, yet one of the requirements of respectability in this country is to pretend—and to repeat loudly at every opportunity—that diversity is a strength.

Fifth, the evidence is overwhelming that there is a substantial genetic contribution to well-established racial differences in average IQ. North East Asians living in America have higher incomes, better test scores, and more education than whites because they are, on average, smarter. Whites are smarter than Hispanics, who are smarter than blacks. It is vital to recognize this because otherwise “society” (meaning whites) is blamed for the failures of blacks and Hispanics.

Finally, race realism recognizes that whites have legitimate group interests just like everyone else.

JH: What are the legitimate group interests of whites?
JT: It is vital to eliminate the stark racial double standard that denies white even have legitimate interests as a group. White pride or racial consciousness is considered “bigotry” or “hatred,” while any other kind of racial consciousness is considered to be a healthy form of ethnic self-esteem. This means every group in the country—except whites—is constantly pushing its collective interests, while whites are not allowed even to have interests as a group, much less work for them.

Some of the interests of whites are obvious. The first is not to be reduced to a minority. Most whites don’t want this but they dare not say so for fear of being accused of “hate.” Hispanics, on the other hand, are constantly rejoicing in their increased numbers and influence, and it is considered natural for them to look forward to eventually become a majority. Their gain is our loss, so why are they allowed to be happy about their gain but we are not allowed to resist our loss?

Whites have every right to prefer the kind of society that they create and to resist demographic shifts that are already changing their country in profound ways. Jews have a right to a Jewish state, and they keep it Jewish through selective immigration. Japanese have a right to a Japanese state and they keep it that way through restrictive immigration. Whites also, whether in North America or Europe, have the right to live in nations that reflect their culture and heritage.

Second, what is known as “affirmative action” is really discrimination against whites. If the kinds of preferences shown to blacks or Hispanics were shown to whites it would be a nation scandal, but because the victims are whites (and sometimes Asians) it is of no consequence. Whites must work to eliminate this while it is still possible to do so. When non-whites become majorities, they are likely to push for even more extensive racial preferences than the ones they enjoy today.

JH: Do you consider yourself a White Nationalist and/or a White Supremacist? Why or Why not?
JT: No. I don’t know what the term white nationalist is supposed to mean. White supremacists presumably want to rule other races, and race realists have no such desire. I believe people of every race should be free to pursue their own destinies, and this is impossible in societies in which they become minorities.

It should not be necessary to add that a concern for one’s own interests implies no hostility to others. Race realists understand that people of all races have the same rights: to preserve their culture and identity against any force that would dilute or replace it. One’s race is one’s extended family. Putting the interests of family before the interests of strangers is not hostility to strangers. One can become good friends with strangers but family comes first.

JH: After doing some research, I've found that your parents were "conventional liberals" who were missionaries in Japan. At what point, and why, did your views shift from what you seen at a younger age?
JT: I, too, was a conventional liberal until I was in my 30s. I preferred being a liberal. Liberals are happy to consider themselves morally superior to conservatives (and certainly to anyone who could be called a “racist,” whatever that means). Also, liberalism is the driving, majority ethos of the United States, and it is more comfortable to agree with the majority. I clung desperately to liberalism. It was the study of history and economics as well as extensive travel in Europe and Africa that finally ground away my liberal illusions.

JH: How do you feel about the election of the first black President?
JT: It was bound to happen eventually, given the collapse of the white majority. Until 1965, we had an immigration policy designed to keep the country majority white. Since that time, the white percentage has declined from about 88 percent to perhaps 62 percent. Do not forget: 55 percent of whites voted for Mr. Obama’s opponent. Twenty years ago, any candidate who got 55 percent of the white vote became president. Now, a majority of whites can vote for a candidate but his opponent may win. In this sense, because of demographic change, you could say that whites did not get the president they wanted. Why should whites encourage that kind of change?

As for Mr. Obama, he encourages the population shifts that are displacing whites. He has sued a state that simply wants to enforce the duly established immigration laws that the federal government refuses to enforce. He wants to give amnesty to 12 million illegal immigrants, most of whom are non-white. In these respects, he is probably not much different from his main Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton. However, even she would not have ordered the Justice Department to drop its voter-intimidation case against the New Black Panthers. This sort of thing is alienating whites.

JH: Describe the current state of race relations in America.
JT: Race is, and always will be, a serious social fault line in this country. Relative peace is maintained because whites tolerate “affirmative action” and massive non-white immigration. They do this because they are browbeaten and bamboozled into thinking it is wrong for whites to act in their own interests. This will not always be the case, and race relations will get worse as more and more whites begin to resist dispossession.

JH: What are your thoughts about people who say, "race doesn't matter?"
JT: They are fools. Race obviously matters. Ninety percent of the churches in the United States are at least 80 percent one race. Is that an accident? Residential segregation is not much different from patterns in the 1950s. Why is that? The NAACP, the Urban League, the Congressional Black Congress, the National Council of La Raza, the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), and literally thousands of other groups and associations are based deliberately and specifically on race. Try telling their members race doesn’t matter.

It is almost exclusively white people who say race doesn’t matter, and this is because they are the only people who are required at least to pretend that it doesn’t matter. This, in turn, is because they are not allowed to have explicit racial interests of their own, and must deliberately close their eyes to the racial chauvinism of others lest they acknowledge this anti-white double standard.

JH: Do you believe that there is a need to fight for civil rights in America?
JT: What do you mean by “civil rights”? People of all races have the same legal rights in the United States, so the “civil rights” struggle was won long ago. Many blacks and Hispanics seem to think racial preferences for themselves are “civil rights” but they are actually a power grab at the expense of whites.



Continue reading on Examiner.com Race realist Jared Taylor declares the "civil rights struggle was won long ago" - Washington DC Civil Rights | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/civil-right...ights-struggle-was-won-long-ago#ixzz1SoGRf8vT

 

"It is impossible to..."

Sounds like a 19th century skeptic, "Man will never fly".

 

Truth. Deny it or accept it, but it is there.

 

Well, we've been trying for a much longer time to have prosperous and peaceful diverse/multicultural societies than we have been trying to fly. We also have spent far more money in trying to create these utopian societies in which race does not matter than we have trying to fly. The funny thing is, we've had far more success in our aviation endeavors.

So, you admit that we haven't been able to create a society in which race doesn't matter. Perhaps you can point me to a place where such a society DOES exist?

 

Or you could look at and judge people as individuals.

 

Of course, which our laws (mostly) do. However, the fact is people are tribal by nature and people generally prefer to associate with and surround themselves (mostly) with members of their own group. Hence, in any "diverse" or "multicultural" society, group identity politics are unavoidable and will emerge. It's just a fact of life. Race is a natural fault line in society. You can not wish it out of existence. The communists couldn't wish greed (self interest) out of existence, and we can't legislate race out of existence.

Of course this doesn't mean we will naturally have hate towards other groups, but most people have continued to prefer to live among, associate with, and surround themselves with others like themselves for the most part. People simply identify with, share most in common with, and feel most comfortable with members of their own group. That's why despite all the forced integration measures people still self segregate for the most part, when they are able to; in schools, in housing, in social circles. It's just a fact.

 

The US is a free country.There are many areas that are nearly all white and any white person is free to move to that area or they can move to another country that is nearly all white.Problem solved for whites that have a problem with other races

 

Yes, and it's perfectly reasonable for white communities to have to uproot and be displaced, and force the white flight further and further out into the boon docks, so that other groups can invade, overrun, and wreck the communities which they built, because of these "discrimination" laws. Laws which make it perfectly legal to discriminate against Caucasians, but not the other way around.

Of course, only cities and counties which are "too white" are getting threatened with dissolution for having an "incorrect" ethnic makeup. No one has dared to claim that Detroit or South Atlanta is "too black", or that East LA is "too hispanic". No, you can't get too many of them. No matter if they already 90%, more non whites = "more diversity". Yet, if a community is "too white", then that's a violation of federal law. Never mind the fact that whites have to continually flee the communities which they built over the course of generations, only to see them wrecked from a distance and be displaced from them. Yep, that's "social justice".

 

If you dont want to be around other races then move AD.Its about time you accept the fact that that is your only option. You should know by now minorities aren't going anywhere and their population in the US will only get bigger

Thats reality AD and no amount of bitching about it on the internet is going to change it

 

It's not that I don't want to be around them. It's just that generally am more comfortable with, and identify more with my own group, as is perfectly natural. That doesn't mean I hate other groups.

The US population getting 'bigger' is the single biggest threat to standard of living and environmental sustainability.