Red Pill 101: Race
To have an open and honest conversation about race, you must pretend to talk about something else.
by Gaius Marcius
Welcome to Fash the Nation’s exclusive introduction to the Alt Right! If you were recently disillusioned by Gavin McInnes and his pals, if you are fed up that your MAGA hat provokes verbal (or physical) confrontations in public, or if you just wonder why there are so many smirking green frogs on social media these days, this is the place for you. Red Pill 101 is an ongoing essay series that explains the difference between Alt Right ideas and conservative GOP rhetoric. If you already know why Republicans constantly lose important battles to the Left, share this series with friends and loved ones who don’t want to be trapped in the CNN thought prison anymore.
Red Pill #2: RACE
Are you a racist? I hate to get personal so quickly, but if anyone finds out that you dabble in Alt Right political commentary you will eventually have to face this awkward question. In all probability your first instinct is to assert your innocence. If you are a long time fan of talk radio or conservative politics you probably have a whole series of well reasoned arguments for why your opinions about minorities are not racist. If so, thou doth protest too much. Conservatives who assert, “It’s not racist to notice X” are the modern embodiment of the colorblind hypocrisy skewered in P.J. O’Rourke’s essay In Whitest Africa:
“The world is built on discrimination of the most horrible kind. The problem with South Africans is they admit it. They don’t say, like the French, “Algerians have a legal right to live in the sixteenth arrondissement, but they can’t afford to.” They don’t say, like the Israelis, “Arabs have a legal right to live in West Jerusalem, but they’re afraid to.” They don’t say, like the Americans, “Indians have a legal right to live in Ohio, but oops, we killed them all.” The South Africans just say, “Fuck you.” I believe it’s right there in their constitution: “Article IV: Fuck you. We’re bigots.” We hate them for this. And we’re going to hold indignant demonstrations…until the South Africans learn to stand up and lie like white men.” Holidays in Hell
Racism is a stumbling block that prevents many from exploring their interest in the Alt Right, so let’s not talk about it. Let’s talk about something pleasant and innocuous until everyone is relaxed and then come back to the controversial topic later.
Isn’t this a cute picture?
The endearing beagle above is called Miss P, and she is the 2015 Westminster Kennel Club winner of Best in Show. Miss P resides in Canada, but 19th century breeders would have been surprised to learn how much North Americans love beagles. Beagles originated in Great Britain and were specifically bred for hunting the English countryside. Comparing the climate and hunting conditions of Western Canada with England, the beagle might seem out of place among the wolves, coyotes and huskies that have long formed the native population. Within a certain limited range, however, a breed can adapt to less than ideal conditions. Bringing a beagle to Canada is not nearly as absurd as moving, for instance, a desert sighthound from North Africa to wintery Finland. Such a dog would be so ill suited to the climate and culture that it would have a hard time fitting in to the unfamiliar community and surroundings.
The global nature of modern dog breeding and showing makes the Westminster Kennel Club ripe for scandal and controversy. Westminster is overwhelmingly Eurocentric, with only 7% non-European winners since 1907. Wire Fox Terriers alone have won Best in Show twice as many times as all non-European breeds combined, despite being unrepresentative of canine diversity. Proponents of this system of judging assert that the unique capabilities of these dogs in intelligence, agility, and tenacity lead to their wins. This is the same bigoted old argument used to justify the dearth of Central American breeds like Chihuahuas and Mexican hairless dogs on American police forces. In every type of high intensity, demanding field like law enforcement, the Teutonic breeds are vastly overrepresented; as if obedience, intelligence, physical prowess, and love of order were somehow innate in German Shepherds, Dobermans, and Bloodhounds.
Speaking of work, there is a philosophical divide about how to determine the ‘best’ dogs. American Kennel Club rules concentrate on form, shape, and symmetry as seen in the show ring. Some organizations insist on a practical test to determine top ranked dogs. Breeders of the Pudelpointer, a German hunting dog, have avoided AKC recognition out of fear that the hardworking stock they have produced will be judged by the color of its fur rather than the content of its character.
Rather than simply isolate packs of dogs in widely varied environments and allow genetics and time to take their course, human breeders have reduced the time needed to develop highly specialized traits by applying reason to the breeding process. Individual dogs with undesirable traits are prevented from reproducing, while talented, fit specimens command high fees for breeding rights. Of course, a few lapses in vigilance and the carefully refined traits can disappear in a few generations, a concept known to geneticists as reversion to the mutt.
If at this point you have any idea what I am talking about you are certainly a racist. Conservatives have made quite an industry of accusing the Left of all kinds of racism, which is known in Alt Right circles as DR3, “Democrats are the Real Racists.” These criticisms used to be limited to Planned Parenthood and segregation, but now your principles are questionable if you notice the difference between a Spaniel and a Wolfhound. Lest anyone think this too absurd a charge to level at conservatives, read Jonah Goldberg’s musings on Westminster. How many paragraphs before Margaret Sanger and eugenics pop up in this article about a dog show? Goldberg critiques the method of judging dogs, but can’t deny the existence of real differences between breeds. If the law of averages can be combined with a test of ability to determine which dog breeds excel at specific tasks, couldn’t similar methods predict human achievement? If two human groups have different aptitudes, what happens when they live in one society governed by one set of laws? These questions have conservatives falling back on platitudes about equal opportunity and American Exceptionalism and ignoring the observable consequences of race differences.
The Alt Right believes that race is real, and that race is a fundamental and inescapable part of every person’s identity. Race is a subcategory of genetics and as such it is one of the biological parameters that limit human potential. Language, religion, culture, and history are other limiting factors that influence the development of personal identity. Two children who love football equally may both fail to become professional athletes, one because his family prizes academic achievement above football, the other because he is physically unequal to the sport. We feel sorry for the latter because we view race as deterministic and culture as elective, but kids don’t get to choose their religion, native language or national history any more than they choose their family history. Ideally, in a homogeneous society, all of the limiting factors work together symbiotically to guide individual choices toward personal fulfillment and joy. Generations of poetic indoctrination have taught that America can defy the logic of human limitations. If a Chihuahua, a bulldog, and a Labrador move to Alaska they can all become sled dogs. Americans believed in the dubious melting pot as long as they could, and believed in the pathetic salad bowl after that. But now racial tension is reaching levels that cannot be ignored, and the feeling of impending disaster is palpable. When races of vastly different potentialities are brought into close proximity, false hopes, unachievable dreams, and bitter disappointments inevitably follow. Our next installment will examine the folly and discontent that attend multiculturalism.