He’s never ripped any politician, any body, like this. What’s going on?
LINK: On facebook and twitter Charles Murray has mounted a continual attack campaign against Donald Trump (and also on his presidential aspirations and its supporters–but, surprisingly, against Trump in an acerbically personal way more than anything else).
From Trump’s perspective, this is an ant-pissing-on-my-shoe scenario, of course. Another Establishment figure renouncing Trumpian populism is nothing new, nor is it anything that will hurt Trump’s candidacy. To the contrary, it’ll likely help it*.
It is, however, surprising to see someone who has been on the receiving end of a vicious, unrelenting Establishment assault so enthusiastically pick up stones stained with Murray’s own blood and throw them at the newest official object of hate.
There is no air of reservation or scholarly thoughtfulness present here, either. It’s embarrassingly sophomoric stuff. For instance, today Murray writes:
It could be the 1850s and the Know Nothings. Same fear, same rhetoric, same fascist tendencies. And I don’t use “fascist” loosely.
Yikes. Fascism is a distinctly 20th century European cultural-political movement. To label a distinct movement that occurred several decades previous to the existence of fascism as fascist is anachronistic and thus almost definitionally a very loose application of the term. It’s like saying the Jacobins were Marxists. This is something I’d expect from a talk show host, not from the author of Human Accomplishment.
The responses to Murray’s posts are about as fun to read as comment sections on NYT articles about the putative epidemic of white-on-black violence in the US are. For example, a particularly perspicacious one:
There is nothing more inherently conservative, in the most basic sense of the word, than restricting immigration. There is nothing more inherently transformative than mass immigration. This is not even a close call issue.
And one whose author reached for the scabbard under his cloak before posting:
Nice to see you utilizing the same tactics that marginalized you and sidelined your career. I suddenly feel much less sorry for you.
* While Murray may be a think-tank scholar, do you think he’s not jealous that scholars such as himself and his former colleague, Jason Richwine, get dragged over the coals when they write well-researched, factual articles that are less offensive than the statements Donald Trump is cheered for saying? The intellectual scholars receive the death penalty for merely pointing out that black/Latino IQs are lower than white IQs, yet Trump becomes a serious presidential candidate only after saying that many of our immigrants are rapists/murders/drug dealers. It’s similar to how a history professor watches a movie such as Braveheart and then throws a tantrum because Mel Gibson made millions from that movie in spite of its glaring historical errors.
* There is a documentary out there by an Israeli journalist who interviewed Murray about the 2008 election. The first words out of Murray’s mouth is how proud he is that the country elected a black man. Murray has always been basically a liberal. I was briefly a student of Allan Bloom’s in college and had the pleasure of meeting Murray at a neocon event. It was obvious that he (and Bloom) were basically small l liberals. Murray disliked my collegiate defense of Heidegger’s notion of being in the world because…Fascism, that Nazi. Consider that the obsession with IQ is really a rear attack on culture, class and any and all non-quantifiable criteria. I’ve never cared for the man – though he has a good speaking voice.
* Funny thing is, Murray’s Quakerism aside, he is still listed as an extremist of the White Nationalist type on the SPLC website.
That must hurt him with his Quaker friends (get it? I crack me up!). He sure is working hard to compensate.
* I think this has something to do with his Quakerism.
Here, in the WSJ.
“I am describing my own religious life from the time I went to Harvard until my late 40s. At that point, my wife, prompted by the birth of our first child, had found a religious tradition in which she was comfortable, Quakerism, and had been attending Quaker meetings for several years. I began keeping her company and started reading on religion. I still describe myself as an agnostic, but my unbelief is getting shaky. ”
The Quakers are 95% left wing activism and 5% religion.
Plus Murray is a libertarian and they are open borders nutters.
* There is a video on YouTube somewhere where Murray in a debate with Ralph Nadar backs H1Bs and forms of immigration that help corporations depress wages. Even in those comments from 9 years ago, Murray basically took a race-denialist position on immigration. He threw some dust at IQ trends but ultimately came down on the race doesn’t matter side. He also did a little status-whoring signalling about his preference for Asian communities to certain white ones.
IQ has some importance, but it’s not a basis for community. Murray’s brand of cognitive elitism effectively divides whites by class and intellectual ability, which is bad for white preservation.
I suspect one reason Jews and their allies and lackeys promote cognitive elitism is to sheer off the white cognitive elite from their natural constituents. That way, the white cognitive elite can be can be out-competed and marginalized by their more cohesive Asian and Jewish peers who are loyal to their natural constituencies.
* Murray’s in his dotage, and worried about his legacy, just like James Watson was. As if either of them will have any legacy at all if no Whites-who-were-once-men don’t renew their testicles and stand up against the dark tide swamping our civilization.
* I think Murray is just too old to accept that the political landscape has changed. He’s strictly a blue pill conservative; he thinks each election we all start from zero and a generic Republican has an equal chance against a generic Democrat. He doesn’t get that demographics have made the electoral college bad for Republicans and it will get worse with each election.
That’s why I don’t think, all things being equal, Republicans have a shot at the White House in my life time. Murray does, and so he wants a more ideologically conservative Republican, which Trump isn’t.
So he doesn’t get that if Republicans are going to have any shot, the establishment must crushed under the panzers of the Trumpenkreig. Trump is a hail mary, and a hail mary is the only shot Republicans have. Unfortunately Republicans are too stupid to realize it and Murray is too old to accept it.
* Charles Murray has always been an extreme corporate, free market and open borders libertarian, so his hostility to Trump makes sense from that standpoint. Murray has never had loyalty to anything but the almighty dollar and his Jewish paymasters. Murray is also an ID dork otherwise known as a cognitive elitist. The corporate libertarians and IQ elitists are often fellow travellers. Those of you reading who are interested in white preservation and need another reason to abandon free market cultism and libertardianism, including the reformulated versions peddled by that loon Hans Hoppe, here you go.
“4. Immigration reform must begin first with enforcement of existing immigration law. If it takes a wall, so be it.”
In his defense, this was written 9 years ago so he may have had a lot of age-related Testosterone decline since ago.
* Future White historians, if there are any, will write volumes attempting to explain how a the most successful and powerful race destroyed itself wilfully. Maybe Whites will learn, and maybe they won’t. In any case the die is cast.
* Eastern Europe is already showing the most resistance, Hungary in particular. These countries are the least infected by cultural marxism in the white world. Ironically, being under the yoke of economic marxism for so many years spared them from cultural marxism. Here’s hoping they hold strong and their example spreads.
* “What’s up with Charles Murray?” asks the hosts of the Chateau.
Incentives, misunderstanding, and a soft-spoken temperament.
1. The reaction of the lukewarm, such as small L libertarian Murray, to criticism of their views as extremist is to point further down the spectrum and proclaim that that is the extremist. Forever vilified for one chapter in “The Bell Curve”, Murray tries to redeem himself of accusations of racism by painting Trump as the villain for opposing 3rd world invasion. Dinesh D’Souza tried it with AmRen and got the first run of his book pulped for it.
2. Murray a White Knight in the Bill Bennett sense who urges men to “man up”. Like Bennett, Murray has no inkling of the sexual market forces that have driven men to abandon marriage. In “Coming Apart” Murray harangues us about the importance of men marrying and the evils of divorce. Enter Trump with three hot wives and a penchant for banging models and White Knight Murray is bound to hate him.
3. Murray is a soft spoken intellectual who doesn’t even like to debate, who’d be comfortable with a POTUS who sips his tea quietly every day at 4:00 whilst chatting quietly with the cabinet. Enter the swaggering Trump who says rude things, has domineering body language, and has kept his name in the papers for years by picking fights with celebrities and the meek, like Murray, inherit conniption fits.
4. Trump has been inconsistent over the years, which is bound to drive the pure crazy. So long as he keeps us out of brush wars, stops importing the 3rd world, makes our “allies” pay for their own defense, and protects our jobs WGAF?
Murray is an important social scientist and his work is worth reading, but calling Trump a fascist is ridiculous. Fascist how? Banning usury? Installing a dictator? For a guy who generally speaks with volumes of data, Murray is more than a bit short on evidence of fascism.