Friday, January 5, 2018

Steven Pinker on the Alt Right

See Steven Pinker’s remarks here:



Pinker is right. Our society has become so insanely politically correct that asserting basic empirical truths is now hate crime, and many people do not even know these facts at all, and when confronted with them are shocked.

Take the issue of biological differences between men and women, especially differences in the distribution of female versus male IQ, as I have discussed here. These facts about IQ and the biologically-determined physical, cognitive and personality differences between men and women explain why women do not have much interest in the hard sciences, or any great presence in that field. Instead, the field is dominated by men, just as men dominate sectors of the economy where hard physical labour is required, and this is almost entirely explained by biological differences.

As Pinker says, the explosion of the popularity of the Alt Right is in part explained by the outrageous suppression of such basic empirical truths like these. But Pinker doesn’t go far enough. The rise of the identitarian right is also explained by the obvious catastrophe of mass Third World immigration and in particular mass Muslim immigration.

Pinker, however, seems to get the Alt Right wrong on economics. Perhaps the anarcho-capitalists had much greater influence in the past, but the Alt Right these days seems dominated by people who are comfortable with aspects of left-wing economics, or even supportive of a Bernie Sanders-style socialism, but for white people in a white ethno-state.

10 comments:

  1. Yes. The alt-right, such as anyone seems to accept the label, doesn’t seem attracted to anarchocapitalism but tribalism. Fascism was the same of course.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The historical decline in crime rates and general dysfunction among Irish Americans may largely owe to massive intermarriage with core Anglo-Germanic stock after the immigration tap was turned off in 1924. In fact, Irish immigration had already been falling from previous highs by then.

    On the other hand, we're still occasionally treated to news stories of fiscal/administrative chicanery and police union corruption attached to individuals with familiar surnames. Some folks are bound to be less ancestrally mixed than others.

    ReplyDelete
  3. When I got into all this back in 2011, most of the race-conscious right were either paleoconservative or various flavors of libertarian. Today the pragmatic and "spergy" elements of the Alt Right tend to retain small-government economic views (with a bit of protectionism thrown in) while the more romantic and illiberal thinkers often espouse a European take on Oriental Despotism.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What do you mean with "espouse a European take on Oriental Despotism"?

      Delete
  4. The popularity of the alt-right is overwhelmingly due to white people becoming (1) fed up with the corrosive effects of mass immigration and multiculturalism and (2) tired of the lies and distortions promoted by cosmopolitan globalists in both their 'left' (SJW) and 'right' (corporate one-worlders) forms.

    Because the alt-right represents right wing nationalism, it's to be expected that it will bear some of the features of the traditional right. A taste for patriarchy, sympathy for traditional Christianity and libertard economics for example.

    It's a pity that a communitarian nationalism of the left hasn't emerged more quickly. In my opinion, capitalism as practiced for the last 40 years has done far more damage to traditional white nations than 'the left' in any of its forms. The heroes of the Cold War right (Reagan, Thatcher, Howard) all encouraged mass immigration to satisfy their corporate supporters. Immigration laws were watered down across Western nations not because of a few pussy-hatted ferals chanting Welcome Refugees, but because corporate bosses want cheap labour, bigger markets and a growing GDP.

    .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Almost all of the major alt-right figures oppose libertarian economics and most aren't christian, some being very anti-christian from a Nietzschean perspective. The reason why the alt-right has grown is not primarily economic (though this is not insignificant), it is the meaningless of the modern world and the extreme assault on our nations coming from what should be our own institutions.

      Delete
  5. I have enjoyed reading and occasionally commenting on your blog in these last few years. Your criticisms of libertarianism was always right on the money and had the effect of pushing my economic views to the left. I have also found your drift to the right on national and social issues quite inspiring. Ultimately the true primordial right asserts that men are not equal and that man must conform to natures laws. The tyrannical influence of pc, spread by the usual suspects, as finally beginning to subside and truths are finding their way to the surface once again. We are all lucky to be born at this particular time, potentially the most heroic and interesting time in all of human history.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think the alt-right is something of a broad church on many of these matters. Counter Currents, a site which I generally have a lot of time for, has hosted material by Michael Walker which could easily be published on this site - but at the same time has posted articles from other authors with titles like 'The alt-right is the Spirit of Capitalism'. Many of the authors (Spencer Quinn as one example) continuously cite 'socialism' and 'communism' and even more commonly 'the left' as being the very essence of what they're not.

    None, to my knowledge, have ever explicitly come out and said that capitalism has been more damaging to white nations than any form or flavour of 'the left'.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm glad there's an explicitly nationalist form of the right wing in existence. But to imagine that these guys have a monopoly on white nationalism is both wrong and - ultimately - counterproductive, because their right wing baggage alienates potential nationalists whose economic and other social views are more closely aligned to socialism as it was practiced until the late 1960's.

    .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There's definitely a division between those who think free market capitalism is worse and those who think hardcore socialism is worse. Personally, I think the former is more destructive. We only have to look at Eastern Europe to see nations that managed to survive hardcore socialism but even relatively moderate capitalism (in libertarian terms) has wrecked social havoc in the West. Capitalism is the ultimate form of economic degeneracy, socialism has to preserve a degree of vigour and health in its populations to sustain itself. Capitalism is totally self-destructive. Still, no one can rationally deny that human beings are egoistic to a significant degree so some mixed system is the best for promoting national and individual success.

      Delete
  7. I agree. I favour a mixed market economy, coupling cooperative business and small enterprise with nationalisation of activity and infrastructure of national significance - eg banking/money creation, ports, road, rail, utilities. Nationalised entities should serve the nation, rather than act as profit centres for international corporations. This position is consistent with that of the Australian Labor Party up until about 1972.

    The ALP also supported restricted immigration and cultural independence until the late 1960’s, a fact demonstrated by a reading of Arthur Calwell’s biography, ‘Be Just and Fear Not.’

    ReplyDelete