Questions For Greg Johnson (Editor of Counter-Currents)

Greg Johnson has a new book — You Asked For It: Selected Interviews. He has previously written In Defense of Prejudice, New Right vs Old Right, Truth, Justice and a Nice White Country, Confessions of a Reluctant Hater, and Trevor Lynch’s White Nationalist Guide to the Movies.

Today’s interview:

Previous interview, May 7, 2017:

* New Yorker: The French Origins of “You Will Not Replace Us” – The European thinkers behind the white-nationalist rallying cry

The United States is not Western Europe. Not only is America full of immigrants; they are seen as part of what makes America American. Unlike France, the United States has only ever been a nation in the legal sense, even if immigration was long restricted to Europeans, and even if the Founding Fathers organized their country along the bloody basis of what we now tend to understand as white supremacy. The fact remains that, unless you are Native American, it is ludicrous for a resident of the United States to talk about “blood and soil.” And yet the country has nonetheless arrived at a moment when once unmentionable ideas have gone mainstream, and the most important political division is no longer between left and right but between globalist and nationalist.

* Steve Sailer writes: “There’s a saying in Brazil, “White women for marriage, black women for work, and mulata women for [fornication].”

I’m guessing that as a collateral royal, Prince Harry is prioritizing getting royally served. I wish the royal couple all happiness in their coupling.”

* New York Times: “A Voice of Hate in America’s Heartland”

When the media profiles white nationalists and other crime thinkers, their main focus tends to be — how did they get this way? But they won’t trace the person’s intellectual journey with care. No, they want to find discrediting personal details. The MSM can’t match up against the Alt Right in the world of ideas so they have to descend to personal attacks. (Steve Sailer More More)

* New Yorker profile of Mike Enoch: “But Mike E.’s conversion was more quotidian than that, and therefore more unsettling; somehow, over time, he had fallen into a particularly dark rabbit hole, where some of the most disturbing and discredited ideas in modern history were repackaged as the solution to twenty-first-century malaise.”

“Then, in January, 2015, Enoch read “The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements,” by Kevin MacDonald, a former psychology professor at California State University, Long Beach. The book—published in 1998, heavily footnoted, and roundly debunked by mainstream social scientists—is a touchstone of contemporary intellectualized anti-Semitism.”

* The Atlantic: The Making of an American Nazi: How did Andrew Anglin go from being an antiracist vegan to the alt-right’s most vicious troll and propagandist—and how might he be stopped?

The Atlantic podcast:

Andrew Anglin spent his formative years flirting with hippie progressivism, then tried his hand at becoming a tribal hunter-gatherer. But he only achieved notoriety after he founded the Daily Stormer, the world’s biggest website for neo-Nazis. Anglin and his mob of followers have terrorized people around the world, and their influence has been cited by the perpetrators of fatal violence.

What lessons should be learned from Anglin’s radicalization? And what is society’s best response to his ideas? Luke O’Brien and Rosie Gray join Jeff and Matt to discuss these questions, and how far-right extremism is evolving.

In the podcast, Luke says that rejection is what made Anglin a Nazi. Luke says Anglin lacked critical thinking skills.

The podcast says that people who join the Alt Right are looking for a tribe.

What do you make of the MSM’s constant use of “extremist” for the Alt Right?

* Richard Spencer on Greg Johnson: “I really don’t like him at all as a person. I think he’s a bad person. He is a divisive person who thrives on creating internecine disputes. He has an extreme resentment against me. The kind of things he has done behind my back that are not public that are far more poisonous than anything he’s written. He falls into a problem that intellectuals need to to avoid — to use someone as a reverse compass. He seems to desire to take the opposite perspective from me even when he’s clearly wrong. This whole pan-European vs nationalism debate, he tried to create this as an either-or situation. I’ve never claimed this is a black and white issue. It’s deeply complicated. He tries to turn it into a polemic. I think it is ultimately about creating divisions and not about having a productive dialogue. I think I’ve been rather polite in what I’ve had to say about him. I don’t think people like that are good for any movement. They thrive on division. I don’t think any movement is going to be successful when we have people like that operating like that amongst us. We all need to be friendly and diplomatic.” (Greg Johnson responds.)

* I had a Jewish friend who in graduate school was assigned a couple of weeks of anti-semitic literature and after a few days, he became anti-semitic, he started seeing the world through the lens of what he was reading, and he was greatly relieved to end the experiment.
* Is diversity — racial, religious, — always a weakness? I’m thinking about Protestantism where the variety of sects seems to have been a strength.
* Was Hitler wrong about anything?
* Was Hitler unsound in his attitude to Jews or did he get it right?
* Are drugs and alcohol a problem in the Alt Right? If so, does that indicate a sickness at the soul of white nationalism?
* What is the source of morality?
* Is physiognomy destiny?
* As part of the Hope Not Hate undercover operation against the Alt Right, the New York Times published your picture. What was that like for you?
* Are the term “nazi” and “neo-nazi” useful in an American context?
* What’s been your relationship to Christianity?

* Will Trump complete German idealism?
* What’s your read on Trump’s attitude to Jews? Does it matter that the new Fed chief is a gentile for the first time in many decades?
* What’s going on when Americans parade around like Nazis and say Heil Hitler and wear Nazi regalia and make knowing references to Seig Heil by saying Hail victory, and wearing fashy 1930s haircuts etc? How should a normie react?
* I assume the post Charlottesville reaction against the Alt Right has taken a tremendous toll on you? Your writing productivity seems way down the past few months?
* So how does having a precarious livelihood affect your worldview? And how does it affect the way you conduct yourself as a WN activist? How does it affect your empathy for all the WNs who lost their jobs after Charlottesville?
* Unlike a Kevin MacDonald who seems to have completely avoided feuds within the WN movement, you’ve been in some feuds. Why?
* Jews are simultaneously the most powerful people on the planet and also among its most vulnerable.
* Philosophy prof: “I’d be interested to know whether or how his training in philosophy led him to white nationalism. Also whether he was open about his views in philosophy and whether this got him in trouble. (Did he not get a job because people knew he was a ‘racist’?) But maybe he wouldn’t want to answer that second question. Third question: You’d think that analytic philosophers, being so obsessed with logic and clarity and coherence, wouldn’t be able to stomach all the PC stuff in the universities; and yet almost all of them go along with it or even promote it. I wonder if he has any thoughts about that.”

* Is Christianity a deadly folly just a tad better than communism? (Your 2005 essay)

* Do I detect in some of your statements that you regret being so openly fascist in the past?

* I notice WNs are very sensitive to being perceived as insufficiently strong on the JQ. The same way Jews might get flack from other Jews for being insufficiently pro-Israel.

Where is America today in relation to the matters most important to you as opposed to 10, 20 years ago?

* How much success do you feel you are having?

* Do you see any enemies within the white nationalist movement?

* How do you see Israel? As an inspiring example of an ethno-state or what?

* When groups are competing, they naturally tend to think ill of their competitors. When groups are not competing, other groups are less of a threat (eg the Amish).

There are no permanent enemies and alliances between groups. Jews and Nazis are not necessarily eternal enemies. It all depends on time and place and circumstance. Sometimes Jews and Christians have common interests, sometimes they have contrary interests.

It is not necessary for any gentile group to be anti-Semitic to be
authentic, but to automatically rule out anti-Jewish attitudes neuters that group identity when they have to compete with Jews. If it is fine for Jews to have anti-gentile attitudes but not fine for Christians to have anti-Jewish attitudes, well, I will tell you who will win that competition.

Anti-Jewish attitudes are largely irrelevant to strong Japanese and
Chinese identity because of time and place and circumstance, but when these groups have serious conflicting interests with Jews, it would be self-destructive of them not to have some anti-Jewish attitudes. If you deny your group sanction to hate its enemies, you are weakened.

We can all get along in certain times and places and circumstances
when there are not deadly conflicts of interest.

* Gutter nazism. The Right Stuff. It all depends on who you read. Most of the stuff on The Occidental Observer, Counter-Currents, Amren, Steve Sailer, Radix Journal is on a high level.

Every POV has a gutter, be it race realist, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc.

It is not reasonable to expect people who are waking up to the Jewish question to be moderate and rational. That’s not how most people work. They wake up, get mad, and they hate.

I am sure you have said and done ugly things… Every group has an ugly side…

There will never be a side without a dark side and without the possibility of genocide.

* “Greg Johnson may not say things like ‘Gas the kikes’, but does he criticize people for saying it? (A real question.) My impression is that he has no problem with genocidal Nazis, and may well be one himself, but he doesn’t think it’s tactically wise to admit that. I don’t think it’s healthy or normal or acceptable for someone here and now to speak seriously (or jokingly) about gassing large numbers of ordinary decent people because of their race — including children, I assume. This doesn’t seem worrisome to you? I allow that there could be circumstances where that kind of talk would be normal and even moral. It depends. But then, I don’t think it’s healthy or normal to believe that we’re currently in that kind of situation right now. Whites in the US are not living through the siege of Stalingrad or whatever.

“And I’m guessing that the people who are into the Alt Right at this stage are probably a lot more intelligent and better educated than the majority of the white population in the west. What might happen when the masses begin to turn on to some of these ideas? If the result might well be a mass resurgence of the most stupid, destructive and indiscriminate white racism, I would probably prefer the (very bad) leftist regime we have now. And I really do hate this regime we have now.”

* You don’t fire up your soldiers by explaining the humanity of their opponents… All groups are competing and slaughtering your opponents is a normal thing to do. So yes, this hate is worrying to me…but I don’t expect Alt Right leaders to condemn it, except as a bad tactic.

* Maybe it is either Hitler or trannies in the bathroom…

* For any group, slaughtering your enemies is sometimes the most rational and practical thing…and at other times, other options make more sense. Right? It’s all time and place and circumstance.

* “I’m aware that he [Gregory Hood] has this view that race or racial development alone can serve as an ideal. I haven’t read the book, but that seems pretty far-fetched to me. Ironically, alt rightists like Hood claim to be dealing with human nature, harsh facts about how we really are — unlike the leftist or conservative ideologues. But it just doesn’t seem to be natural for people to organize their societies around something like ‘the development of the race’. Of course, race may be seen as a means to something else, as in Judaism; but the idea that it’s the highest principle just doesn’t seem to have much appeal to humans. Most people find it unnatural to think that the purpose of their lives or societies is the development of the human species, or the development of mammalian life or life on Earth. Why should we care about the development of a sub-species, unless that’s taken to play a role in some more transcendental meaning or purpose?”

* It is out of love of one’s people that healthy religion and transcendent purpose spring, according to Hood.

Love of one’s people is a primal force. Seems like a reasonable basis for a nation-state.

* “As far as I know, there aren’t any examples of societies based only on an ideal of ‘development of the race’ or love of one’s _racial_ people, except maybe Nazi Germany.”

* Hood says: “Race is the key building block of any real community and the farthest meaningful grouping to which we can give our loyalty.”

“Isn’t this just false, unless the appeal to “real community” is begging the question? Christians and Muslims and Jews have strong and durable communities that aren’t based on this ‘key building block of any real community’. I guess he could say that the Ashkenazics and Sephardics never constitute any one ‘real community’. But then is ‘real community’ here just being defined (question beggingly) as ‘a community based on race’? It also seems false that race is the farthest meaningful object of loyalty. Some people just do seem to have deep loyalty to fellow Christians or Americans or veterans or southerners regardless of race, or to other human beings just because they are human, and so on. If that’s never ‘meaningful’ loyalty does ‘meaningful loyalty’ here just mean ‘racial loyalty’?”

Questions submitted to me for Richard Spencer that I might mine:

* What do you think about all the shiksas targeting holy Jews such as Harvey Weinstein, James Toback, Brett Ratner, Leon Wieseltier, Mark Halperin, with sexual assault allegations? Has the goy finally gone too far?
* Unlike Kevin MacDonald, Steve Sailer, Jared Taylor, you don’t seem particularly interested in the scientific method. Why?
* What’s the story with you and David Duke? I don’t recall you guys doing anything together. Why not?
* How did you become the face of the Alt Right?
* Are Jews European? Some Jews have majority European DNA and identify more with their country of citizenship than with being Jewish.
* Was the alt right always funny or did it become funny in 2015?
* You don’t troll much. Why?
* What are you working on lately?
* When Jews ask me what’s the Alt Right, I say it is white Zionism aka Judaism for goyim.
* Trump lobbed a few harmless missiles into syria on one occasion and you and the alt right exploded. I thought at the time — this is purely symbolic. It is to satisfy part of his political coalition. It means nothing. Yet the Alt Right went nuts about it. Why?
* The Alt Right’s hysterical denunciations of Trump seem absurd. Going into his presidency, a sane person realized he would do more than nothing to fulfill his campaign promises and far less than everything he promised, which is exactly what has happened.
* Tell us about the Andrew Anglin you know? How would you describe Mike Enoch? Did you read their profiles in The New Yorker and The Atlantic? How would you describe the Daily Stormer to normies? The Daily Shoah to normies?
* I thought The New Yorker profile of Enoch was the most sympathetic yet of the Alt Right. Do you believe Enoch when he says he hasn’t read all of it?
* I don’t hear you joke about gassing Jews but you make common cause with people who do such as Mike Enoch and Andrew Anglin. Why?
* What have you learned from doing so many interviews? Who do you think understood you most clearly?
* You do so many interviews, it’s amazing you don’t say more stupid things. Do you regret anything you’ve said publicly?
* Do Greg Johnson’s criticisms make you want to be a better man? What’s the history between you two?
* What do you think of George Hawley’s work, particularly his new book on the alt right?
* You do so many things, what do you do best and what do you do not so well, perhaps paperwork keeping up non-profit status etc. Do you have non-profit status currently? Perhaps you are not a great administrator?
* What’s good for the goys?
* Is the alt right more or less likely to be genocidal than other ideologies? For example, history suggests that communism is more likely to be genocidal than almost any other ideology.
* Should the alt right disavow Nazism? How do you understand Alt Righters who want to dress like Nazis?
* Is the Alt Right any more hateful than any other ideology? I can’t think of any definition of “hate speech” that would exclude the Bible.

From my friend:

1. Why is it so hard to redpill Christians?

2. Isn’t the white diaspora like a divorced couple (one in Berlin or Portland, Oregon, and the other in Poland or Hungary) — meaning, can we really get back together? Aren’t we already “out of love?”

3. Identity seems very often forged in suffering — Jews, blacks — and it’s impossible to “talk people into” voluntary suffering. So we have to sort of let it happen, don’t we? Aren’t you like a Jewish prophet warning of the destruction of Israel?–and nobody listens?

4. I loved your famous answer to the rabbi — but what if Jews are wrong? What if they’re like the most screwed up example of human culture? What if we shouldn’t emulate them?

5. Is the white ethnostate going to be as isolated and closed off as North Korea?

6. Do you think the internet has a way of breaking apart what were intact cultures? — too much contact with “others” leads to a sense of the arbitrariness of my own ways?

7. College professors and students seem like the vanguard (remember Moldbug’s example of Stanford being 40 years ahead) — and the consensus there is near total. Is it your hope to “argue them” out of their consensus? Isn’t such an idea fantastical? It seems to me like we need to “take it.”

8. Is accelerationism by way of chaos a good strategy, or do we need to work within the framework of democratic institutions?

9. Why don’t we work on convincing Hungary and Poland to accept “white diaspora” immigrants as refugees from multicultural societies?

10. A bit of advice: make the memes 3-dimensional. Print them off, post them in public places. Consider even printing small 3D “idols,” of Kek or something, and leaving them around town — make it a game.

11. A quick look at demographics makes it appear that whites are headed for either destruction or a real monster of a war of expunging non-whites… a cataclysm one way or another. And because of the way demographics are shifting, it seems the odds are most in our favor the *sooner* we arrive at this cataclysm… no?

12. Honestly, as the father of two daughters, I am unable to imagine ever saying anything tribal to them about the person they fall in love with… if it’s a Chinese man or even an exceptional black man, I may have my concerns, but I wouldn’t be able to disown my daughters… yet, isn’t this what we need, sort of?

Jews:

1. I’ve noticed that alt-right has taken some pro-palestinian positions, but Richard has generally avoided doing so. Does he think the “pro-palestinian” stuff in the alt-right devolves into the same kind of anti-colonizer rhetoric that the Left uses when talking about native americans?

2. What is the fate of diaspora Jews if someone like Richard comes to power? Should they be scared of deportation? Does an ethnostate mean Jewish expulsion from the whole land?

I’m interested to get a read on his views on the Israel-Palestine debate since he’s been historically more nuanced. I’m also interested in the degree to which he buys into the Kevin Macdonald type antisemitism that’s become popular on the alt-right. What’s the right “amount” of naming the Jew?

* It’s clear that has an understanding of the complexity of Jewish identity, when compared to the average alt-righter. However, he has never delved deeply into this topic before in a discussion, to my knowledge. Try to get him to talk about the extent to which Jews do have a connection with Europe. Also, ask him about his opinion of Stephen Miller.

* Is there a carrot to be offered to Jews who abhor anti-white Jewish organizational policy for tribal and moral reasons but see no point in fighting?

* How does Paul Gottfried deal with your turn to WN?

* Would Spencer consider a portion of a white homeland where jews could live without political rights or power?

* Middle class and moderate NYC Jews successfully revolted against liberalism and black nationalism with Koch and support for Rudy. How do you understand that historical phenomenon?

* If Jews understand that America faltering endangers Israel existentially, will their right-wing move to neutralize the globalist Jews?

* Ask why the goyim are as dumb as rocks when defending their group interests. Also suggest that he use his influence to get the alt right to call itself a “white zionist” movement. Hijinks will ensue.

* Philosophy prof: “I’d be interested to know whether or how his training in philosophy led him to white nationalism. Also whether he was open about his views in philosophy and whether this got him in trouble. (Did he not get a job because people knew he was a ‘racist’?) But maybe he wouldn’t want to answer that second question. Third question: You’d think that analytic philosophers, being so obsessed with logic and clarity and coherence, wouldn’t be able to stomach all the PC stuff in the universities; and yet almost all of them go along with it or even promote it. I wonder if he has any thoughts about that.”

* David Duke: “Do you have any ideas on how to trigger that ethnic identification?”

Phil Rushton in 2006: “Joseph Goebbels had complete control of the media in Germany and the German birth rate shot up and German nationalism shot up and ethnic solidarity increased and out-group hatred increased. The reason was because of the images displayed. If you saw today on television, which I am sure you will not, lots and lots of nice blue-eyed blonde babies being born and women who had lots of these babies being happy having babies and wanting to stay at home and not to work, then you would increase the number of women who would want to have babies and stay at home. If the media showed attractive people standing up to drive the drug dealers out of their neighborhood and to not care what race they were, then I think many more people in suburban neighborhoods would rally together to drive out the alien drug dealers. And so what you see on TV portrayed by role models who look like you… Advertisers know this. Politicians know this. If you are running for Congress, you get black workers to go knock on black neighborhoods. You get Hispanic voters to knock on Hispanic doors… We know the ethnic person you are interacting helps sell the product. People trust someone who looks like their cousin more than someone who looks different, on average.”

* Joe Biden: “I believe what affects the movements in America, what affects our attitudes in America are as much the culture and the arts as anything else,” he said. That’s why he spoke out on gay marriage “apparently a little ahead of time.”
“It wasn’t anything we legislatively did. It was ‘Will and Grace,’ it was the social media. Literally. That’s what changed peoples’ attitudes. That’s why I was so certain that the vast majority of people would embrace and rapidly embrace” gay marriage,” Biden said.
“Think behind of all that, I bet you 85 percent of those changes, whether it’s in Hollywood or social media are a consequence of Jewish leaders in the industry. The influence is immense, the influence is immense. And, I might add, it is all to the good,” he said.

* Is Christianity a deadly folly just a tad better than communism? (Your 2005 essay)

* Do I detect in some of your statements that you regret being so openly fascist in the past?

* You have no problem noting Jews who have influenced you… You say more positive things about Paul Gottfried, for instance. You acknowledge a debt to Leo Strauss. You praise the director of Defamation. You have more criticisms of Gilad Atzmon’s Wandering Who than praise, you have more admiration for a Herzl than an Atzmon. Do you get flack for being too Jew-friendly?

* How much of a problem is purity spiraling and virtue signaling among WNs.

* Alex Linder. Who is he and what is his role in WN?

* I read Kevin MacDonald’s book Culture of Critique and thought — this goy has cracked our code. We’re screwed. We have to make a deal.

* How does an individual prepare for the public obliquy that comes with being outed as a WN?

* Where is America today in relation to the matters most important to you as opposed to 10, 20 years ago?

* How much success do you feel you are having?

* How do you think whites can get out of the mess they are in?

* If you were made the ruler of the United States, what would be the role for the Jews?

* Do you see any enemies within the white nationalist movement?

* How do you see Israel? As an inspiring example of an ethno-state or what?

* When groups are competing, they naturally tend to think ill of their competitors. When groups are not competing, other groups are less of a threat (eg the Amish).

There are no permanent enemies and alliances between groups. Jews and Nazis are not necessarily eternal enemies. It all depends on time and place and circumstance. Sometimes Jews and Christians have common interests, sometimes they have contrary interests.

It is not necessary for any gentile group to be anti-Semitic to be
authentic, but to automatically rule out anti-Jewish attitudes neuters that group identity when they have to compete with Jews. If it is fine for Jews to have anti-gentile attitudes but not fine for Christians to have anti-Jewish attitudes, well, I will tell you who will win that competition.

Anti-Jewish attitudes are largely irrelevant to strong Japanese and
Chinese identity because of time and place and circumstance, but when these groups have serious conflicting interests with Jews, it would be self-destructive of them not to have some anti-Jewish attitudes. If you deny your group sanction to hate its enemies, you are weakened.

We can all get along in certain times and places and circumstances
when there are not deadly conflicts of interest.

* Gutter nazism. The Right Stuff. It all depends on who you read. Most of the stuff on The Occidental Observer, Counter-Currents, Amren, Steve Sailer, Radix Journal is on a high level.

Every POV has a gutter, be it race realist, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc.

It is not reasonable to expect people who are waking up to the Jewish question to be moderate and rational. That’s not how most people work. They wake up, get mad, and they hate.

I am sure you have said and done ugly things… Every group has an ugly side…

There will never be a side without a dark side and without the possibility of genocide.

* “Greg Johnson may not say things like ‘Gas the kikes’, but does he criticize people for saying it? (A real question.) My impression is that he has no problem with genocidal Nazis, and may well be one himself, but he doesn’t think it’s tactically wise to admit that. I don’t think it’s healthy or normal or acceptable for someone here and now to speak seriously (or jokingly) about gassing large numbers of ordinary decent people because of their race — including children, I assume. This doesn’t seem worrisome to you? I allow that there could be circumstances where that kind of talk would be normal and even moral. It depends. But then, I don’t think it’s healthy or normal to believe that we’re currently in that kind of situation right now. Whites in the US are not living through the siege of Stalingrad or whatever.

“And I’m guessing that the people who are into the Alt Right at this stage are probably a lot more intelligent and better educated than the majority of the white population in the west. What might happen when the masses begin to turn on to some of these ideas? If the result might well be a mass resurgence of the most stupid, destructive and indiscriminate white racism, I would probably prefer the (very bad) leftist regime we have now. And I really do hate this regime we have now.”

* You don’t fire up your soldiers by explaining the humanity of their opponents… All groups are competing and slaughtering your opponents is a normal thing to do. So yes, this hate is worrying to me…but I don’t expect Alt Right leaders to condemn it, except as a bad tactic.

* Maybe it is either Hitler or trannies in the bathroom…

* For any group, slaughtering your enemies is sometimes the most rational and practical thing…and at other times, other options make more sense. Right? It’s all time and place and circumstance.

* “I’m aware that he [Gregory Hood] has this view that race or racial development alone can serve as an ideal. I haven’t read the book, but that seems pretty far-fetched to me. Ironically, alt rightists like Hood claim to be dealing with human nature, harsh facts about how we really are — unlike the leftist or conservative ideologues. But it just doesn’t seem to be natural for people to organize their societies around something like ‘the development of the race’. Of course, race may be seen as a means to something else, as in Judaism; but the idea that it’s the highest principle just doesn’t seem to have much appeal to humans. Most people find it unnatural to think that the purpose of their lives or societies is the development of the human species, or the development of mammalian life or life on Earth. Why should we care about the development of a sub-species, unless that’s taken to play a role in some more transcendental meaning or purpose?”

* It is out of love of one’s people that healthy religion and transcendent purpose spring, according to Hood.

Love of one’s people is a primal force. Seems like a reasonable basis for a nation-state.

* “As far as I know, there aren’t any examples of societies based only on an ideal of ‘development of the race’ or love of one’s _racial_ people, except maybe Nazi Germany.”

* Hood says: “Race is the key building block of any real community and the farthest meaningful grouping to which we can give our loyalty.”

“Isn’t this just false, unless the appeal to “real community” is begging the question? Christians and Muslims and Jews have strong and durable communities that aren’t based on this ‘key building block of any real community’. I guess he could say that the Ashkenazics and Sephardics never constitute any one ‘real community’. But then is ‘real community’ here just being defined (question beggingly) as ‘a community based on race’? It also seems false that race is the farthest meaningful object of loyalty. Some people just do seem to have deep loyalty to fellow Christians or Americans or veterans or southerners regardless of race, or to other human beings just because they are human, and so on. If that’s never ‘meaningful’ loyalty does ‘meaningful loyalty’ here just mean ‘racial loyalty’?”

About Luke Ford

I’ve written five books (see Amazon.com). My work has been followed by the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and 60 Minutes. I teach Alexander Technique in Beverly Hills (Alexander90210.com).

This entry was posted in Greg Johnson. Bookmark the permalink.