Loading
Cathy YoungCathy YoungApr 18, 2016

The Alt-Right: They're creepy and they're kooky, and not in the cute Addams Family way

My Federalist article taking on the Allum Bokhari/Milo Yiannopoulos defense of the "alternative right" at Breitbart.com (developed from my earlier post here at Allthink) has drawn some responses along predictable lines: Cathy Young is a Jew (true), a "Marxist" ex-Soviet immigrant (here's a tip: people who emigrated from the Soviet Union generally did so because they didn't like Marxism), a militant feminist (quick, someone tell Amanda Marcotte!), and a well-paid shill for the Koch brothers (yes, I get that from leftists too; FYI, my position as a research fellow at the Cato Institute is unpaid, and my annual income is below the average for writers and journalists).

Amidst all this drollery, a couple of responses warrant a reply: a string of tweets by a user who goes by "Pale Primate" purporting to be a detailed rebuttal of my piece, and a blogpost by one Luke Ford.

First, both of them point out a genuine error: I referred to VDARE as Steve Sailer's site when, in fact, it's Peter Brimelow's site. This came from a misreading of a line in the Breitbart article which referred to "nodes like Steve Sailer's blog, VDARE and American Renaissance." I should have checked the information better. The Federalist has now made a correction at my quest.

On to more substantive things. "Pale Primate" defends the RadixJournal column which argues against a pro-life position on the ground that legal abortion reduces breeding by stupid and irresponsible women who are mostly black, Hispanic and poor by claiming that it's not really any worse than a controversial 2001 article by legal scholar John Donohue and economist Steven Levitt (of "Freakonomics" fame) which argued that legalized abortion was partly responsible for the drop in violent crime. By the same logic, the rantings of certain radical feminists who think the number of males should be reduced to 10 percent of the human population because men wreak too much havoc on the world are not really any worse than a discussion of statistics showing that men commit the vast majority of violent crimes.

Donohue and Levitt stress that their conclusions are descriptive, not prescriptive. They also don't proudly declare their rejection of the principles of human rights and equality, or sling derogatory epithets at people who adopt African children.

I'm not going to get into a detailed discussion of race, intelligence and genetics. I freely admit that I'm not an expert on the subject; I've followed, for instance, some of the debate on Nicholas Wade's The Troublesome Inheritance, which deals with innate differences between human population groups, and I see persuasive arguments on both sides. The basic point I'd make is this: If we, as citizens of a multiracial and multiethnic society, want to have a more open discussion of issues of racial differences, it is imperative, as Steven Pinker wrote in 2006, to do so in a framework of "commitment to universal human rights, and to policies that treat people as individuals rather than as representatives of groups." (Group differences, as Pinker notes, "pertain to averages, not to individual men and women.") The Alt-Right wants the opposite.

"Pale Primate" takes issue with my statement that VDARE chronicles crimes by blacks, Hispanics and Muslims in a "gleeful" tone. I'll leave it to others to interpret the tone of headlines that refer to "murderous blacks hopped up on crack." He also defends a VDARE item that criticized an Associated Press article for downplaying the Nigerian background of a Texas couple arrested for enslaving and abusing a Nigerian nanny, asking why the headline referred to the nanny as "Nigerian" but the couple's background was buried inside the story. But there's a good reason for that. The nanny, who was here illegally, was a Nigerian national. The accused perpetrators, legal immigrants from Nigeria, were U.S. citizens.

I've said before, in this and other articles, that progressive and liberal writing on race and crime tends to descend into denialism of higher crime rates among blacks and "white supremacy" clich├ęs. I've written repeatedly about this. In fact, my last Newsday column was a defense of Bill Clinton's remarks defending the 1994 crime bill. Miraculously, I managed to make my point without once referring to "murderous blacks hopped up on crack." Granted, that would not have gotten into Newsday, but I'm reasonably sure I would not have used that language even if writing for my own blog. I don't think our only options are denialism or VDARE-style "racialism" that constantly stresses the ethnic, racial or religious identity of perpetrators and always presuming it relevant to the crime. Incidentally, if a "social justice" website decided to highlight violent crimes by white people in order to counteract racial stereotypes, and started covering such crimes in the same way that VDARE covers crime by blacks, Latinos and Muslims, I would consider that racist and repulsive.

"Pale Primate" accuses me of "tone policing" - a phrase that comes, by the way, straight from the lexicon of "social justice warriors," who insist that "people of color" and women who want to talk about racism or sexism should never be criticized for expressing their frustration in such phrases as "white people suck" or "kill all men."

Yes, I think tone matters. I believe that when we discuss differences between population groups, we should be careful not to do it in a way that dehumanizes people or demeans them on the basis of identity, imputes collective guilt, or justifies relegating a group to inferior status (especially a group with a very real history of oppression and dehumanization). If that's "tone policing," guilty as charged. I call it basic human decency. (And yes, I'm well aware that progressives sometimes pretend that the "SJW" version of political correctness is nothing more than basic and civility toward women and minorities. As we all know, that's nonsense. But just because the SocJus crowd uses decency as a shield doesn't make decency a bad thing.)

By the way, when I said that the tone at VDARE "reeks of hostility and contempt toward the presumed losers in the 'biodiversity' lottery," I didn't mean criminals, as "Pale Primate" suggests. I meant mainly blacks and Hispanics.

And then we get to the Jews.

"Pale Primate" tries to exonerate retired psychology professor Kevin MacDonald of the charge of anti-Semitism, claiming that MacDonald is merely interested in "document[ing] Jewish intellectual and political movements." Since the alt-rightists apparently appreciate bluntness, I'll be blunt: don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining. I invite anyone to read MacDonald's articles for themselves and to peruse his website, The Occidental Observer (dedicated to "white identity, interests, and culture"), where some 40 of the 136 topic tags refer to Jews - from "Israel Lobby" and "Holocaust Industry" to "Jewish aggressiveness," "Jewish influence," "Jewish wealth," "Jews as a hostile elite," and "Historical anti-Jewish writings."

"Pale Primate" also defends MacDonald's view that "Jews played a major role in destroying Russia via Bolshevism," since "Jews were a massively disproportionate share of upper level positions in every commissariat" in the Soviet Union in the 1920s and '30s, including the secret police. Well, let's see. This 1920 photo of the presidium of the 9th Congress of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks) has 13 people identified by name. Two (Mikhail Lashevich and Lev Kamenev) are Jews. Obviously, 15% is disproportionate given that Jews made up only 2% of Russia's population at the time. But that hardly equals "Jewish-dominated." As for the secret police, according to Yuri Slezkine, the author cited by "Pale Primate," 4.3 percent of Cheka (secret police) commissars and 8 to 9 percent of senior officials in 1918-1920 were Jewish. The real overrepresented minority in the Cheka were Latvians, who made up less than 0.1% of Russia's population at the time but over 50% of Cheka commissars and senior officials. In 1922, the "collegium" of the Cheka's successor, the GPU, was made up of eight people, two of whom were Jews, one Latvian, one Ukrainian, and four (including its head, Felix Dzerzhinsky) were ethnic Poles.

Let's hear about how the Poles and the Latvians destroyed Russia, shall we?

But never mind MacDonald on the subject of the Jews. Here's Steve Sailer (at VDARE and on his own blog), reviewing the Amy Chua/Jeb Rubenfeld book on successful minorities in America. After quoting their assertion that members of these groups tend to be afflicted with insecurity and "to instill it in their children," Sailer adds: "Or in the case of the wealthiest, most powerful group, they use their influence over the media to instill it in their children and to depress, demoralize, and divide other groups` children."

That link? It leads to an article about a book commemorating the Holocaust.

I really don't think any further comment is needed.

(I do appreciate "Pale Primate's" tweets, which led me to do a bit more digging and find this gem.)

Luke Ford's blogpost, which speculates on whether or not I'm a "neocon," contains a tidbit that led me to another interesting discovery. As an aside, Ford takes a jab at me for having written two Reason.com columns on the University of Virginia/Rolling Stone rape hoax "without mentioning Steve [Sailer] or Richard Bradley": "Hard to say if she is just lazy or ignores the work of writers she doesn't like." Actually, both of those columns were reprints from RealClearPolitics.com; earlier, I had written two other RCP columns on the subject which did mention Bradley, a blogger and former magazine editor, and credit him for being first to raise questions about the credibility of the alleged fraternity gang rape victim, Jackie.

I'm not really sure why I should have credited Steve Sailer, who posted about the case on his Unz Review blog and then wrote about it for Taki Magazine but added nothing original. (In the magazine piece, Sailer claims that his November 29 blogpost drew attention to Bradley's post, which had languished unnoticed since November 24. Reason's Robby Soave wrote about it on December 1. I don't know if he was tipped off to Bradley's post by Sailer or one of Sailer's readers, but I can say that Robby and I were among several journalists privately discussing the problems with the Rolling Stone story by November 25.)

However! Ford's mention of Sailer's commentary on the UVA story reminded me of something I had forgotten: the Sailer acolytes in Bradley's blog comments who tried to argue that Rolling Stone author Sabrina Rubin Erdely's piece about rape culture at UVA, centered around Jackie's story, had something to do with Erdely being Jewish. Apparently, she had some kind of Jewish agenda to destroy UVA because it's too white, Christian, pretty and conservative, or something. (When another commenter pointed out that many of the journalists who helped debunk the hoax were also Jewish, the conspiracy nuts were undeterred: Of course the Jews will do that when their mischief is caught out!)

Okay, so these are just random commenters. But a December 3, 2014 post at VDARE by one of their prolific bloggers, Eugene Gant, highlighting Sailer's Taki Magazine article, referred to Erdely as "militantly Jewish" (linking to an article about a Jewish day camp that briefly referenced Erdely as one of the parents) and "a hit thing for the Christophobic left" (because she had previously written a story, also of dubious veracity, about a boy's sexual abuse by priests). The Occidental Observer ran a longer piece depicting the rape-hoax story as "ethnic warfare" born from Erdely's "anti-White animus" (in the Alt-Right taxonomy, Jews are, of course, not "white") and noting that some of her staunchest defenders were "Jewish female journalists." Oh, and Luke Ford did a blogpost that referred to Erdely as an "proud Jew and anti-white fabulist" (with a headline calling her a "left-wing Jew with a history of Christian-bashing).

As for Sailer? Well, he didn't exactly peddle this slimy nuttery himself, but he sure did pander to it. Check out this April 7, 2015 Sailer blogpost at VDARE titled "Sabrina Rubin Erdely's Kristallnacht on Campus." Its actual subject is the theme of broken glass in Erdely's story (such as the glass table shattering during Jackie's alleged rape) and actual broken glass at the fraternity named in the rape allegations, which was attacked by vandals throwing bottles and bricks through the windows in December 2014, shortly after the story's publication.

If it weren't for the obsession with Erdely's Jewishness in certain quarters, I would have assumed that "Kristallnacht" was just a fancy metaphor. But was it actually a not-so-subtle reversal of an infamous attack on Jews in which a "militant Jew" becomes the perpetrator inflicting a Kristallnacht on gentiles? You decide.

I suppose "Pale Primate" will tell me that I'm not actually disputing any of this, just "tone policing." Right-o. I'm also not in the habit of disputing the arguments of people who think rape is a male conspiracy to keep women in their place.

"Pale Primate" thinks my attack on the Alt-Right was "poorly researched." Well, it's better researched now, and the Alt-Right looks like an even more odious collection of kooky bigots.

Some people who are cautiously sympathetic to the Alt-Right because they believe large-scale immigration endangers America's cultural values keep trying to prove otherwise. For instance, the other night on Twitter, user Steven Falco offered this partial defense:

https://twitter.com/nunzioni/status/721509127164465152

"Pale Primate," who is an alt-right moderate, did agree, arguing that the real issue is bringing in "people that don't fit well into Western societies."

But here are the other two responses Falco got:

https://twitter.com/marylovefreedom/status/721510004138840064

https://twitter.com/skiguru/status/721511128342347776

Incidentally, I do think that large-scale immigration of people who find Western cultural norms alien and don't want to assimilate poses real problems. I absolutely agree that we need to confront those issues. But the Alt-Right is not helping such a discussion; on the contrary, it's making it easier to dismiss all such concerns as racist.

26 Replies3 Likes↻ Reply
What do you think? Reply to Cathy Young.
dholland662dholland662Apr 18, 2016286 views
The Alt-Right: They're creepy and they're kooky, and not in the cute Addams Family way My Federalist article taking on the Allum Bokhari/Milo Yiannopoulos defense of the "alternative right" at Breitbart.com (developed from my earlier post here at Allthink) has drawn some responses along

@1183501 Well at least you admitted you're not disputing anything. You still don't explain why it's wrong for whites to play the game as it is played by everyone else.

You just appeal to a morality that no other side agrees to. Certainly not zionists such as yourself.

And yes pointing out that you don't apply what you preach consistently is a fine argument when our argument is that nobody else is affected by these moralisms.

◇ View3 Likes↻ Reply
sanitycomplexsanitycomplexApr 18, 2016388 views
The Alt-Right: They're creepy and they're kooky, and not in the cute Addams Family way My Federalist article taking on the Allum Bokhari/Milo Yiannopoulos defense of the "alternative right" at Breitbart.com (developed from my earlier post here at Allthink) has drawn some responses along

@1183501 "I'm not going to get into a detailed discussion of race, intelligence and genetics. I freely admit that I'm not an expert on the subject"

Here's where there's going to be a real issue when it comes to understanding alt-right views. People on the alt-right are already intimately familiar with the the gene based heritability for traits including intelligence, time preference (your ability to delay gratification and plan for the future), and the big 5 personality traits. We don't try to dismiss or weasel around such things because the evidence for them is damning.

That's why for us, respectability doesn't matter. We're not here for respectability. The right wing has tried that for decades while the left aggressively took cultural control. Maybe its time to reevaluate the whole "let's try our hardest to seem even handed in the face of people who think men in dresses should be allowed to go into women's bathrooms" idea.

1 Reply2 Likes↻ Reply
sanitycomplexsanitycomplexApr 18, 2016273 views
The Alt-Right: They're creepy and they're kooky, and not in the cute Addams Family way My Federalist article taking on the Allum Bokhari/Milo Yiannopoulos defense of the "alternative right" at Breitbart.com (developed from my earlier post here at Allthink) has drawn some responses along

@1185783 If you want to get to the bottom of why the alt-right has an issue with Jews, read a summary of MacDonald's findings in the Culture of Critique.

Even easier, find more than 5 Jews with any public profile at all who agree with any of the major tenants of the alt-right. Good luck.

◇ View2 Likes↻ Reply
grayscaleplaidgrayscaleplaidApr 18, 2016313 views
The Alt-Right: They're creepy and they're kooky, and not in the cute Addams Family way My Federalist article taking on the Allum Bokhari/Milo Yiannopoulos defense of the "alternative right" at Breitbart.com (developed from my earlier post here at Allthink) has drawn some responses along
@1183501 Do you at any point intend to address the fact that 1) you're an obvious hypocrite for advocating ethnonationalism for Jews and no one else and 2) your "let's be nice to the people who are torching careers and reputations in the hopes that they'll repent of their hugely successful strategies, fighting back is verboten" plan has an unbroken track record of failure? A simple yes or no will suffice.
20 Replies2 Likes↻ Reply
Cathy YoungCathy YoungApr 18, 2016311 views
The Alt-Right: They're creepy and they're kooky, and not in the cute Addams Family way My Federalist article taking on the Allum Bokhari/Milo Yiannopoulos defense of the "alternative right" at Breitbart.com (developed from my earlier post here at Allthink) has drawn some responses along
@1183857 "advocating ethnonationalism for the Jews and no one else" [/citation needed]

my "let's be nice to the people who are torching careers and reputations in the hopes that they'll repent of their hugely successful strategies, fighting back is verboten" plan [/citation needed]

"fighting back" = making up demented shit about Jewish conspiracies?

19 Replies2 Likes↻ Reply
grayscaleplaidgrayscaleplaidApr 18, 2016355 views
The Alt-Right: They're creepy and they're kooky, and not in the cute Addams Family way My Federalist article taking on the Allum Bokhari/Milo Yiannopoulos defense of the "alternative right" at Breitbart.com (developed from my earlier post here at Allthink) has drawn some responses along
@1184378 1) Are you a Zionist? 2) There's no other reasonable interpretation of this "muh respectability" pearl-clutching. Attacking the alt-right for not conforming to SJW mores is actively undermining the only serious attempt to break the far left's monopoly on the Overton window. Tell me, what is the track record of the Buckleyite "let's purge everyone to the right of us in our quest for respectability" strategy? "Fighting back," in context, is actively embracing the terms in Social Justice's codex malidictum for the expressed purpose of stripping them of their power- and to do that, you need to be willing to step on a lot of people's toes. Jewish conspiracy theories are a part of that, since Hitler-as-secular-Antichrist (or crypto-religious-Antichrist, if Moldbug is to be believed) is central to the leftist Narrative about how the "far right" is somehow uniquely evil and therefor worthy of suppression. While I have my doubts about the tactic, it is at least part of a strategy for advancing their agenda- contrast writing milquetoast editorials in zines that nobody reads.
6 Replies2 Likes↻ Reply
Cathy YoungCathy YoungApr 18, 2016417 views
The Alt-Right: They're creepy and they're kooky, and not in the cute Addams Family way My Federalist article taking on the Allum Bokhari/Milo Yiannopoulos defense of the "alternative right" at Breitbart.com (developed from my earlier post here at Allthink) has drawn some responses along
@1184445 I'm a Zionist. I also applaud the fact that 25% of Israeli citizens are not Jewish and strongly oppose moves to clamp down on immigration by non-Jews. Actually, Israeli law and German law are very similar in that both give automatic citizenship to immigrants from the dominant ethnic group.

Also: nice job of boosting the SJW claim that political correctness is simply about treating minorities with respect and decency. Honestly, the idea that you can break the left's near-monopoly on culture by spouting racist and anti-Semitic crap because it defies PC is mind-bogglingly dumb. All it will do is push decent people into the arms of the left and give cover to actual bigots.
5 Replies2 Likes↻ Reply
grayscaleplaidgrayscaleplaidApr 18, 2016394 views
The Alt-Right: They're creepy and they're kooky, and not in the cute Addams Family way My Federalist article taking on the Allum Bokhari/Milo Yiannopoulos defense of the "alternative right" at Breitbart.com (developed from my earlier post here at Allthink) has drawn some responses along
@1184634 So, if Jews can have a homeland where they can write their own rules for admission, what exactly is the problem with WNs?

Define "respect" and "decency" (and "bigotry," while we're on the topic.) Remember, those terms are defined by the left as, basically, "anything I don't like," and they have their yuge propaganda machine to signal-boost every bit of outrage they can gin up over the most ridiculous garbage. You're playing into their hands by saying "[x] is unacceptable," while ignoring the fact that narrative control means that the left gets to define [x]. Since they can move the goalposts whenever/wherever they like, the ultimate result of your concession of the frame has been to give them a plug number that they use to concern-troll you into condemning any right-winger that rustles their jimmies. It's impressive, the level of pwned-ness that you've managed to achieve: you're their useful idiot, and think you're clever for being so.

Your clever maneuver of ceding the frame to them has accomplished/will accomplish... what, exactly? What have decades of "respectable" (HA!) conservative/libertarian line-toeing and hand-wringing produced in terms of tangible policy results? And, frankly, why should anyone have any interest in the opinions of thoroughly pwned chronic failures?
4 Replies2 Likes↻ Reply
Cathy YoungCathy YoungApr 18, 2016275 views
The Alt-Right: They're creepy and they're kooky, and not in the cute Addams Family way My Federalist article taking on the Allum Bokhari/Milo Yiannopoulos defense of the "alternative right" at Breitbart.com (developed from my earlier post here at Allthink) has drawn some responses along
@1184708 (1) I said in my Federalist piece that the SJW-driven creeping definition of racism to include "anything we don't like" makes it very difficult to oppose real bigotry. I'm not wasting my time arguing semantics.

(2) I'm not opposed to any nation having immigration laws. However, America is not an ethno-state.

3 Replies2 Likes↻ Reply
grayscaleplaidgrayscaleplaidApr 18, 2016331 views
The Alt-Right: They're creepy and they're kooky, and not in the cute Addams Family way My Federalist article taking on the Allum Bokhari/Milo Yiannopoulos defense of the "alternative right" at Breitbart.com (developed from my earlier post here at Allthink) has drawn some responses along
@1184859 1) "Very difficult?" Try "impossible." "Bigotry" has no fixed meaning, and is constantly redefined on the fly to suit the political whims of the left. You can say that it oughtn't be so, and I would agree, but that doesn't change the fact that it is. You, and I, and everyone on not toeing the line with The Current Year will always be defined as a "bigot," because that's what's in the interest of the people controlling the definitions. Playing the "bigotry" game is a trap by design. The alt-right's plan to escape it is to break out of the trap by rejecting the premise. Do you have a better strategy?

2) Here we agree: America is not an ethnostate. Of course, WNs agree with us too: that's why they want a white American ethnostate, and are trying to get one (either by reorganizing the existing state or breaking it up.) Yes, it's all very LARPy, but that's beside the point; here an ethnostate is goal, not the existing regime.

3) You may not be interested in sociopolitical gas warfare, but sociopolitical gas warfare is interested in you, and me, and all of us. I don't like these tactics, but I can't deny their proven effectiveness. So if we're trapped in a race to the bottom (signs point to "yes,") the correct move isn't to tut-tut about how races to the bottom suck and we shouldn't be trapped in one- both of those statements are true, but irrelevant to the situation at hand. So if you're going to claim that I'm like an SJW in that I believe that "cultural appropriation" is a thing, you're wrong. If you're going to claim that I'm like an SJW in that I believe in using effective tactics that do work instead of idealized tactics that "should" work but don't, I'll own that one in a heartbeat.
◇ View1 Like↻ Reply
joshjoshApr 19, 2016343 views
The Alt-Right: They're creepy and they're kooky, and not in the cute Addams Family way My Federalist article taking on the Allum Bokhari/Milo Yiannopoulos defense of the "alternative right" at Breitbart.com (developed from my earlier post here at Allthink) has drawn some responses along
@1188110 Cathy, your detractor appears to be using the arguments I presented in this article:
therightstuff.biz/2016/04/03/how-to-argue-with-...

In regards to Germany, Germany's right of return is based on whether one's ancestors lived in Germany, not on one's race, so you cannot compare Germany's right of reutrn with Israel's. You pushed back by quoting a book that says"Germany grants citizenship to anyone of ethnic German descent."

"Ethnnic German descent" is a speical case of one's ancestors living in Germany, so in fact it is about where one's ancestors lived and not about race. But in Israel, it's about race, not where one's ancsestors lived, as the following point will prove:

Descendants of palestinians who lived in israel before 1948 are not granted the right of return under Israeli law, but under german law they would be as Germany's law is based on where one's ancestors lived.

4 Replies1 Like↻ Reply
Cathy YoungCathy YoungApr 19, 2016282 views
The Alt-Right: They're creepy and they're kooky, and not in the cute Addams Family way My Federalist article taking on the Allum Bokhari/Milo Yiannopoulos defense of the "alternative right" at Breitbart.com (developed from my earlier post here at Allthink) has drawn some responses along
@1188332 I checked out at "Semitic mutterings." Good Lord, you people are a bunch of creeps. (Oh, and by the way... the so-called "racial" component of being Jewish is an ethnicity, not a race. "Whiteness" is not an ethnicity. And Israel recognizes black Ethiopian Jews as Jewish.
3 Replies1 Like↻ Reply
joshjoshApr 19, 2016320 views
The Alt-Right: They're creepy and they're kooky, and not in the cute Addams Family way My Federalist article taking on the Allum Bokhari/Milo Yiannopoulos defense of the "alternative right" at Breitbart.com (developed from my earlier post here at Allthink) has drawn some responses along

@1188434 Yes, you are correct. I wasn't precise enough: technically "Jewishness" is not a race. Jewishness, whatever it is, nevertheless encompasses various races, such as the Ashkenazim. Israel's law of return gives preferential treatment to people who are of one of these jewish races, so fundamentally the law is based on race. I was wrong to say that the law's racial basis was at the level of jew. It's not. It's at the level of Ashkanzism or "ethiopian jew".

Btw, you show the unsophisticated thinking on race that is so common of people who consider themselves "sophisticated".

Technically race has nothing to do with skin colour (though skin colour is a decent proxy). Ethiopians are actually more similar, genetically, to caucasians than they are to sub-saharan africans.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC139378/

2 Replies1 Like↻ Reply
Cathy YoungCathy YoungApr 19, 2016276 views
The Alt-Right: They're creepy and they're kooky, and not in the cute Addams Family way My Federalist article taking on the Allum Bokhari/Milo Yiannopoulos defense of the "alternative right" at Breitbart.com (developed from my earlier post here at Allthink) has drawn some responses along
@1188728 Sooo, just like the SJWs have invented their own definition of "racism," you've invented your own definition of "race." By your definition, isn't "German" also a race? You said the German policy is different since it's based on the fact that ethnic Germans are descended from people who once lived in Germany. But the reason Israel is the Jewish state is that modern-day Jews are descended from people who once lived there.
1 Reply1 Like↻ Reply
joshjoshApr 19, 2016325 views
The Alt-Right: They're creepy and they're kooky, and not in the cute Addams Family way My Federalist article taking on the Allum Bokhari/Milo Yiannopoulos defense of the "alternative right" at Breitbart.com (developed from my earlier post here at Allthink) has drawn some responses along
@1188929 In regards to your last point, the counter is this: under Germany's law of return, the descendants of palestinians who lived in Israel before 1948 would be granted the right of return.

In regards to your first point:

Race is a natural phenomenon whereby there is a correlation between genetic similarity and where one's ancestors come from. In other words, people whose ancestors came from the same place tend to be , genetically, more similar to one another than to another group of people whose ancestors came from a different place.

So to the degree that modern day Germans have ancestors who came from the same place, modern day germans are more similar to one another than to, say, people whose ancestors came from Britain. Hence it does make sense to think of a German race and an English race, but also of a white race and a black race, and also of a human race and a chimpanzee race. Where one chooses to draw the line is dependent on what one wants to do, but the line can be drawn at finer and finder levels, all the way down to the identical twin level.


This is uncontroversial. Even Critics of Wade acknowledged this:
" Genetic data do indicate that human populations are genetically variable (unsurprisingly), and that populations that are geographically nearby each other are more similar to each other than populations of people that live on opposite sides of the world (also unsurprising). "

nothinginbiology.org/2014/07/01/a-guide-to-the-...
◇ View1 Like↻ Reply
grayscaleplaidgrayscaleplaidApr 19, 2016330 views
The Alt-Right: They're creepy and they're kooky, and not in the cute Addams Family way My Federalist article taking on the Allum Bokhari/Milo Yiannopoulos defense of the "alternative right" at Breitbart.com (developed from my earlier post here at Allthink) has drawn some responses along
@1188877 Because that's totally how "self-determination of peoples" works. Or are you against free association?

I mean, by the standard of "[American] white is not an ethnicity," you can say that "English" is not an ethnicity either: after all, they're an aggregate of Celts, Angles, Saxons, Romans, Normans, and their royal family is the Hanoverian line (and that's just off the top of my head.) This is a game you can play with basically any extant ethnicity, which is why principles like "self-determination of peoples" exist to cut through the morass.

Or, consider how ridiculous the claim "American Indian is not an ethnicity" is. By this metric, it's technically true- there's no "Indian," just Sioux, Blackfoot, Pawnee, etc. However, American Indian is a perfectly good stand-in for the larger genetic/cultural group- if it's not an "ethnicity," it's something so close as makes no difference.
◇ View2 Likes↻ Reply
Quick Sign Up
Allthink is a community of free thinkers. It's fun and free.
Email
(private, SPAM-free)
Username
(use A-Z and 0-9 characters only)
Password
(8+ characters long)
Allthink is a social media platform for free speech. Sign up now.