We Repeat: There is No Intelligent Opposition to White Nationalism
A review of The
New White Nationalism in America: Its Challenge to Integration by Carol Swain
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2002,
$30.00
by Douglas Wright
Black law professor Carol Swain has just published a book titled The
New White Nationalism in America: Its Challenge to Integration, which
right away lets you know where she's drawn her line: about 100 yards
inside the Semitically Correct zone. The reader hasn't even opened the
cover and already he's reminded that "integration" is a value not to be
questioned, and for the purposes of this book, won't be. Nowhere does
Swain explain why, as I must presume she believes, White Nationalism is
wrong or immoral. It just is, and that's that. Really, that's all you
need to know about the book: Despite a few bones tossed our way, Swain
doesn't budge from the great American hope that multiracial harmony is
just over the horizon, if only we'd all Try A Little Harder, and Give It
Some More Time.
You know the routine. Just a few more after-school specials and the sun
will break through. Here's one of Swain's big plans for multiracial
nirvana: Subsidized car loans for blacks. Seriously. It's policy
recommendation No. 12 on page 441. This is the caliber of intellect
we're up against. With the time I spend threshing out the issues of
White Nationalism in my own mind, I'm almost pissed that there wasn't
more of a battle to be had. Swain loses by forfeit. Her little black
brain just isn't up to the task.
I overcame caveat emptor and bought the book thinking that A) If
Professor Swain's actually got a chin-rubbing intellectual challenge to
White Nationalism, I'd like to hear it, so as to sharpen and strengthen
my own position, or B) If she doesn't, I'll be reassured that indeed,
There Is No Intelligent Opposition to White Nationalism. In any event,
maybe I'll pick up some new information about my own cause, albeit from
the enemy. I did learn, for instance, that Michael Levin, the Jewish
author of Why Race Matters, says that it's White IQs that drop when the
topic of Jews comes up. (Yes, Mike, with academic rigor of the highest
quality you've demonstrated that blacks are less intelligent than Whites,
but the second the microscope swings upward, you dismiss opposition to
Jewish influence with same "well, that's just nutty!" that racial
egalitarians use to dismiss the scholarship on racial difference.) It
appears, however, than Swain herself never actually interviewed any White
nationalists, leaving those tasks to graduate student researchers -- and
leaving me wondering just how hard Her Royal Negress worked on the
project. In my experience, black female "journalists," "academics" and
other professionals are almost as work-averse as their male counterparts,
yet more numerous in the office because the absence of black testosterone
makes them less objectionable to have around and more apt to sit calmly
at a desk for a longer period of time, thus creating the impression
they're actually doing something. Except when they're asleep at their
desks, of course.
Given the moderate heft of the tome and impressive Cambridge University
Press crest on the inside of the book, I was all set for some dense
reading, despite my bias that blacks are typically unable to pull off
heavy-duty scholarship. Not that I can myself, mind you, but trust me:
precious few blacks can, and Swain ain't in the club. Her book amounts
to a series of newspaper-and-Internet culled recitations on White
Nationalism that read like high school book reports, each chapter capped
with sections headed "Conclusion" or "Discussion" that contain such
earth-shattering insights as, "A number of issues affect churches,
synagogues and mosques in contemporary America, including the proper
treatment of poor people, homosexuals, and racial and ethnic minorities."
Wow, Carol. That's hitting 'em between the eyes. In cautioning
conservatives not to broach the topic of blacks' inherent criminality,
we're treated to this burst of erudition: "Don't go there!" You go,
girl.
If you're in the bookstore and looking for a quick example of what I'm
talking about, flip to the epilogue where she discusses September 11.
Swain helpfully informs us that the World Trade Center was destroyed by
Islamic militants, that a man named Tom Ridge is the new head of homeland
security, and that nasty ol' David Duke blamed it all on American support
of Israel. No refutation is offered. But the connection is made to the
National Alliance, which, we are told for the umpteenth time, is "an
organization that the FBI considers one of the most dangerous in
America." Oh boy. FBI! Dangerous! Why think when you can put those
two words together in a sentence? "In conclusion, I believe that America
is more vulnerable to heightened racial and ethnic tension stemming from
the aftermath of September 11 and its potential for exploitation by
sophisticated white nationalists who may use the events as proof that
governmental officials are not doing enough to protect American interests
here and abroad." Why Carol, you've covered it all. We thought of
"here." But you thought of "abroad." That Carol. What would we do
without her? But Carol, just for craziness' sake, could those
sophisticated White Nationalists be...right? If they're wrong, I'd like
to know why. In detail. Really. Let's debate it, break it down and
toss it around. Unless you don't have anything to say, which I suspect
you don't. Swain's book tracks the rest of our opposition perfectly:
These White nationalists are BAD PEOPLE, so we don't really have to
examine their ideas critically. Hands over ears, I can't hear you!
The book's critical failing, one that might even be pointed out by a
mainstream reviewer (but don't hold your breath), is its scrupulous
avoidance of the underlying beliefs of White Nationalists. I don't
expect Swain to say that she personally supports White Nationalism, but I
do expect a head-on, point-by-point confrontation with the fundamental
ideas of the movement. She doesn't deliver. Let this be a challenge to
a real intellectual who opposes us: step up to the plate. How about you,
Noam Chomsky? Got anything to say? Swain doesn't. Why the desire for a
White living space is morally wrong, Swain doesn't say. Why Whites
shouldn't determine their own racial destiny, Swain doesn't say. Why our
belief in racial difference isn't valid, she doesn't say. Take her
treatment of the racial IQ debates: "Is IQ really destiny, as most of
the white nationalists seem to believe?... The answer here... is an
unequivocal 'no!'" That's right, Carol. If you just punctuate with
exclamation marks, maybe the facts will go away. Just look at the
intelligence variations in the successful people around you, she insists.
I have looked around me, as it happens. And what I've seen is that
blacks are indeed unintelligent, disinclined to work, poorly spoken,
messy and likely to start screaming incoherently for no apparent reason.
I just got back from a run where I saw one defecating behind a tree, for
God's sake. They're a race of children. That some are well-behaved does
not mean they can all come in to the White house.
Swain's lame method throughout the book is to present a White Nationalist
idea, then tack on a substance-free conclusory dismissal loaded with
words like "disturbing," "threatening" and "alarming." Nowhere does she
lay out the analysis. In law school, they trained me to explain myself
by saying why something is so or isn't so, an exercise that forces you to
use the word "because." Despite her law professor status, Swain doesn't
give us the "because." Hey, no big deal. If you're black and up against
evil White Nationalists, we'll let you use your spears against their
firearms and politely applaud your native spirit.
Constantly, Swain trips over herself with contradictions. In one
sentence, she'll say that White nationalists' ideas should be given
respectful forums. But only, of course, to expose them for their idiocy.
Whites, she says, should be allowed to express their "deepest
convictions and concerns" about race. But discuss the inherent
criminality of blacks? Don't go there! In the introduction, in a
section titled "The Need for Honest Dialogue," Swain makes the
bewildering statement that White nationalists believe as they do because
they have "such little exposure to alternative viewpoints." Gee, Carol,
how about every channel on television, 24 hours a day, every news
magazine and newspaper in the country, every movie made, every commercial
shown, every class taught, every political speech given and every other
possible media save shortwave radio and the Internet?
Scrutinize the book closely and you'll see that mostly what Swain's doing
is championing the black cause: Her support of curtailing immigration,
for instance, would benefit blacks because it would leave more low-wage
job opportunities for them. Her opposition to affirmative action seems
to spring more from concern about the harm it does to blacks than the
harm it does to Whites, i.e., the benefits to be gained by blacks are
outweighed by the effects of the White backlash affirmative action
causes, including the potential for violence against blacks. Don't
worry, Carol: When the Big Eastern Daily wouldn't let me into their
minority internship program because I was White, my first reaction wasn't
to go out and smash blacks in the head with a brick. I just said I was a
member of the Black Student Association and applied to Vanderbilt Law
School. It was only when the dean flew out to my house by chartered jet
to meet me that the plan fell through. But in championing the black
cause, Swain can't even muster original ideas in support. Take this
objection to affirmative action: "Such policies carry a subliminal
message of doubt and uncertainty -- a message that says, in effect, that
you, as woman or a member of a minority group, are less capable than a
white male..." Stunning insight, Carol! Don't think I've ever heard
anyone make that observation before. But as a black authoress, Swain
need not be original. Just black. And voila, the book's published.
Wonder if the irony is lost on her.
One sucker-review on the jacket commends Carol for her "brave" book.
Nauseatingly, Swain presented herself to the Tennessee media as "willing
to die" for her "beliefs." Right. Mild criticism of affirmative action
is boldly going where no one's gone before, alright. And Carol's risking
life and limb standing up to those crazy neo-Nazis without a thought
about how it's bound to derail her academic career and stymie her social
life. "Carol, did I read that you think racism is a bad thing? Listen,
I'm afraid I'm going to have to cancel your invitation to our Vanderbilt
faculty garden party. I'm all for free speech, but I think you've
stepped over the line with this one." It's easy to see what's happened
here. Once again, a black "academic" with moderate intelligence but
nothing original to say is given a prominent forum and hailed as a
genius, all because Whites feel guilty and jews submerge their own
hyper-critical natures because they realize that the outcome will benefit
their race. It reminds me of how the great black "scholar" Cornel West,
a shameless shuck 'n' jive fool whose most profound proclamation to date
is that "we need more love in the world, y'all" finds himself courted by
Princeton and Harvard alike. Meanwhile, countless White academics far
more brilliant find no Ivy League institutions battling for them, and
will live out their lives in anonymity because our society deems the
Allen Iverson-with-a-suit-on antics of stupid niggers like West to be
worthy of front-page coverage in the New York Times. Oh, for the light
of day.
One of the stronger indicators of Swain's ignorance of racial reality is
her belief that the different races in America today get along just fine.
"This book is about the growing threats to peaceful and harmonious race
relations in America and the best ways of dealing with them," she says,
declaring elsewhere that our multiethnic society exists in "repose." I
don't know what planet Swain is living on to make this blissfully
uninformed statement, but it isn't the one I'm living on. Daily, I see
races NOT getting along, evidenced by violent street encounters and other
criminal behavior, voluntary segregation in high school cafeterias and on
college campuses, severe communication failures in the office, television
shows and radio stations exclusively for blacks, politicians who demand
attention to "black interests" and too many others to mention.
But the bigger point Swain misses is that White Nationalism is about
something much bigger than the issues of the day. White Nationalism
can't be reduced to a list of grievances about crime, immigration and
college admissions that can be addressed by multicultural symposia and
legal tinkering. White Nationalism is about the eternal bond of blood.
White Nationalism is about a people and its place in the universe. It's
about what's good, right and just under the sun and stars. White
Nationalism is indeed a "challenge" to integration. It is a challenge to
a sick society, to a perverted way of life, to the hateful, forced and
unnatural, to the murderous assaults on our people, to the mockery of our
people, and to the dispossession of our people. It is a challenge to the
use and abuse of a kind, noble and beautiful race by those who care
nothing for its future. Too few White people are convinced of their
racial peril, but that will change in time. In the meantime, laughable
books like Swain's can only help the cause.
DOUGLAS WRIGHT
|
