Georgetown history professor Carroll Quigley (1910-1977):
“Conservatives now are telling us that we must curtail government, cut government spending, cut government powers, reduce government personnel for the sake of making individuals more free.
“Liberals, on the other hand, are still telling us, as they have for a long, long time, that in order to make individuals free, we must destroy communities. By communities I mean villages. Ghettos and cities. Ethnic groupings. Religious groupings. Anything which is segregated. We must destroy them. So that all individuals would be, if possible, identical. Including boys and girls.
“But the area of political action … in which you have government, individuals … three others: voluntary associations (which I’ll say no more about), corporations and communities. And if the liberals destroy communities for the sake of the individual, and the conservatives destroy the government for the sake of individuals, you’re going to have an area of political action in which irresponsible, immensely powerful corporations are engaged in opposition to individuals who are socially naked and defenseless.”
Comments to Steve Sailer:
* I like this quote. It shows the left and right wings are not diametrically apposed. They just force us to disrobe different clothes, with the ultimate result of having us naked on our hands and knees with our beneficent master behind us.
* There is an aspect of this that has intrigued me for years, and that is the Left’s need to define new ‘communities’ at the same time they are destroying the old ones. The ‘gay community’, the ‘trans community’, the ‘black community’, the ‘activist community’, etc.
I doubt this has a basis in Classic Marxist ideology. Perhaps it can be found in Cultural Marxist/Frankfurt/New School teachings. The theoretical need to oppose Hegemony on a group (ie ‘community’) basis, perhaps.
What I do know is that their clarion call is not Libertinism or Individualism per se. They preach alternative ‘communities’ … right up until one group of dissidents cannot live within the last alternative ‘community’ and splinters off to form another, e.g. the now-coalescing ‘trans community’ versus the ‘feminist community’.
Mind you, the end result is the same: complete individualism.
The ‘community’ concept is an almost completely left-centered notion. If you coopt their ‘community’ language from the right, they almost visibly gnash their teeth. Try talking about the ‘prison guard community’, the ‘pedophile community’, or the ‘gun community’ and listen to the reaction. For example: ‘As a member of the gun community, I am concerned that you …’
* Yes it is ONLY the White Normal areas that have to be broken up. No one says El Paso must be made more diverse. No one says Kenya needs a flood of White people.
But we are still having a hard time wrapping our head around the central truth of our time: These modern movements are anti-White. They are led by Whites who are anti-White.
For whatever reason, everyone runs from this obvious fact, I guess because they think it makes them Hitler to notice it.
* But things change. Viking warriors are now emasculated Swedes where the dad does exactly half the baby sitting. The Bundeswehr consists not of Teutonic warriors but of gay friendly oompah bands. Quiescent Hindoos run 1/2 of Silicon Valley. Putin doesn’t seem like a very docile Slav. Etc.
Ross reminds me of Walker, the president of MIT who wrote in the Atlantic in 1896 that we were making a big mistake letting in Italians, Jews, Hungarians, etc.:
“The entrance into our political, social, and industrial life of such vast masses of peasantry, degraded below our utmost conceptions, is a matter which no intelligent patriot can look upon without the gravest apprehension and alarm. These people have no history behind them which is of a nature to give encouragement. They have none of the inherited instincts and tendencies which made it comparatively easy to deal with the immigration of the olden time. They are beaten men from beaten races; representing the worst failures in the struggle for existence. Centuries are against them, as centuries were on the side of those who formerly came to us. They have none of the ideas and aptitudes which fit men to take up readily and easily the problem of self-care and self-government, such as belong to those who are descended from the tribes that met under the oak-trees of old Germany to make laws and choose chieftains.”
Boy, in the ’30s the Germans really showed a great flair for making laws and choosing chieftains.
The point is that “past performance is no guaranty of future results”. The same Hindoo who seems quiescent in his village may make a great tech executive once you clean him (or his grandchildren) up and get him an engineering degree. The Teutonic warrior may develop a taste for the settled life.
This is not to say that in the future Zulus and Quechas will fill the shoes of the former immigrants. It’s like dog breeding – all you can do is turn up traits that are already present but dormant. You can’t create new ones out of thin air. You can develop a dog that will retrieve ducks or dig for gophers but not one that will climb trees. There is no hidden pool of Mixtec geniuses waiting to be exploited like the shtetl talent that exploded in the 20th century (literally exploded – there would have been no Fat Man and no Little Boy without them).
But, once you put aside prejudice, you can see that, for example most Asians make great Americans and are no more incapable of integrating than the Italians and Jews who Walker thought unsuited for life in a democratic society.
* Northwest Europeans developed a way of co-operating on a large scale but at the cost of losing their ability to compete at the clannish scale – hence why their countries used to be so good (compared to most places).
Most other places are the opposite. They are good at the clannish scale but as a side effect they co-operate badly at a larger scale – hence why their countries suck.
If the two patterns are combined the clannish sub population(s) will pick a niche and very rapidly come to dominate that niche as they co-operate as extended families (clans) versus people competing as individuals or nuclear families. However too much / too many and the originally NW Euro type countries will simply collapse to the standard pattern (except with hundreds of different ethnic groups per region / country).
When Jews were the only high IQ relatively clannish (compared to NW Euros) sub population they had a unique advantage but increasingly they won’t.
(Although East Asians may figure out a third way as a result of watching the western collapse.)
* I go long, long stretches of time without thinking of Jews. There was another version of this country where they did very well at a number of things like business, entertainment, the sciences, and it wasn’t a secret or anything.
My biggest reaction would have been to grunt, and think “Good for them, whatever.” and forget about them for another long stretch of time.
But now, I really wonder how smart Jews are sometimes. Playing it my head I don’t think the changes that are coming to this country are going to be beneficial to them. Very much the opposite in fact.
Dunno, maybe I’m wrong and Jewish Central Command in Jerusalem knows exactly what it is doing. I kind of doubt it though, for a number of reasons to include Jewish Central Command existing.
I think it’s more a case of they’ve actually come to believe the BS. Maybe they always did.
