HBD demands racism against Blacks (NSFW):

Steve Sailer and Charles Murray are Psychopaths

It has come to my attention that Steve Sailer and Charles Murray are still baffled that everyone (wrongly) believes them to be racists. Three decades of confusion are enough. Let me clear it up. Everyone believes Steve and Charles Murray to be racists, because normal human morality - combined with the facts they claim to believe, demand racism. Much like people with no inner monologue are confused by the existence of others with it, people with alternate moralities (some might call them psychopathic)… will find this surprising.

Here as a public service, is an intuition pump that might help create some mutual understanding. Then we’ll get specific.

First an Intuition Pump

Imagine if a Carthaginian psychopath named…uh… Stevio Sailus were one day to announce in the public square;

“Moloch isn’t real, there is no God who demands child sacrifice and by the way the evidence for this is really obvious.”

The crowd would obviously get a bit chippy.

While I’m sure a few people genuinely enjoy the screams of children rolled into ovens, the implication for anyone remotely normal is that either A) He is wrong (maybe malevolently so) or B) The Sacrifices must stop immediately and (maybe) C) Someone should hang for this obvious atrocity.

And since even those who believe A, expect that Stevio here is at least calling for B and probably C; if there was ever a case for repressing speech… this would be it. Now imagine that when the mob gathered angrily around him he screamed.

“What do you mean I want to stop the sacrifices? Obviously not. I may not believe in Moloch but they are a proud and beautiful Carthaginian tradition which is in our constitution. I do have some quibbles. The constitution demands far less sacrifice than we are currently conducting, and this amount of sacrifice really hurts our competitiveness with Rome. Plus, the excessive amount of child sacrifice encourages a backlash and creates radicals who believe there should be no child sacrifice.

This would be terrible fellow Carthaginians, wouldn’t it? For the sacrifices to stop?

I am offended by your insistence that if Moloch was fake we should stop sacrificing.

No I will stand here and proclaim that Moloch is fake, and the sacrifices while reduced, should continue!”

Would this work to get him off? - Maybe.

I think the crowd might get too befuddled to be angry. Who after-all would confess to this kind of sentiment, and not understand that people would react less than approvingly? Many true believers in sacrifice might conclude: “Moloch is fake but sacrifices should continue is such a ridiculously cucked platform that he’s not gonna lobby a critical mass of citizens to overthrow the system anytime soon - let’s leave him alone.”

Others however, would be terrified. He’s lying! He’s planning to end the sacrifices and bring upon us the rage of our God, to destroy our civilization. He must have something far more horrible than even we can envision in mind.

For the psychopath of course, feeling no instinctive revulsion to the screams of babies - public suspicion of his revolutionary motives is entirely bizarre. He has a fully worked out sense of moral principles based on following the norms he was taught as a child. That these norms might be based on factual principles, and that the disproving of these facts might lead one to change them; is entirely inconceivable to him.

---

Which brings us to the Black Question.

What’s the relationship between Whites and Blacks in America? Just kidding that’s not really the question. Everyone knows it’s answer. The presence of Blacks hurts Whites. This is why everyone of all political orientations pays insane amounts to avoid living around them. Of course, sacrificing the quality of life of whites (with a life or two occasionally thrown in for good measure) for the benefit of blacks is considered at least plausibly just and believed to advance good goals. This is why people feel like hypocrites about doing this, and why Wokes can shame them all into never ending concessions.

The real Black Question is - Why do Whites deserve to suffer to help blacks, for how long, and what will this achieve?

Wokes respond - “Because Whites hurt blacks historically and still do, and until blacks are made whole (ie. equal).”

Liberals might say the same, but be more cheery about how we might reach equality any day now and emphasize the Conservative in the White.

Conservatives at their best say the original debt is paid, and that Black dysfunction is really the fault of white liberals with their promotion of Black misbehavior. Normie whites don’t deserve to suffer (but those damn White Lib Women hypocrites!). Blacks, like other natural conservatives are waking up to their real enemies and soon we’ll sing kumbaya in a world where the presence of Blacks no longer hurts whites.

Enter Steve Sailer and Charles Murray:

Actually whites don’t deserve to suffer. They’ve made black life infinitely better than it would’ve otherwise been. Black dysfunction is the fault of their low IQ which is innate. This is not fixable anytime soon. Failing to recognize this may really reduce our competitiveness with China. So let’s hurt whites less by dropping affirmative action and anti-police policies (which hurt blacks a lot by the way, don’t we all care about black people?).

Stop hurting Whites all together though? Why would I support that?

No I’m not a racist. Blacks are citizens, it’s in the constitution!

At this point everyone turns and looks at them in confused horror. Liberals assume they must have some kind of final solution in the works. No one can quite believe that they could genuinely feel this way. This is because for normal people; It’s bad to hurt good people to help bad people, and even worse to commit to doing so for eternity.

BASIC MORALITY AND THE BLACK QUESTION

Most normies believe that if the facts described by Sailer were accurate it would mean that blacks are bad people. Why? well consider an otherwise well informed normie. He understands that:

1. Among those behaviors that make you a bad person are robbery and murder.

2. Also among these “Bad” character behaviors are… always siding with those who commit these heinous acts against those who try to stop them or their victims.

3. A supermajority of Blacks at all levels of intelligence do this for criminal blacks.

   2a) Ferguson polling:

   

   2b) OJ Simpson verdict representative response:

   

   
   3. Blacks are of course like this because unlike whites, but like most non-whites; race is central to their identity.

   

4. THIS IS ALREADY BAD ENOUGH! The Normie really is already on the tip of concluding that most blacks are bad people. One could make a case for racial discrimination already. Now add the HBD kill-shot to this picture.

5. STEVE SAILER AND MURRAY (paraphrased):

   “Black average IQ is so low that so blacks are guaranteed to be disproportionately represented in crime and to have almost no natural representation at the top of all the critical socially useful fields. Cofnas puts the post-affirmative action regime figure for Black enrollment in elite institutions at maybe 1%. We together with normie conservatives support ending affirmative action.’

   The questions these facts (if true) should immediately raise are:

   - Are Blacks gonna become less Identarian and stop celebrating criminals more after you take away their unfair sinecures, and all their positive role models in white institutions to boot? What if you merely wait till their children come around, and have them compete on fair terms. Are any parents gonna be okay with their kids falling so far below them and conclude that this was fair?

   - Given that Blacks can vote and “serve” in juries and public offices, have majority power in many critical local governments, have political protection when they riot to extract concessions from white society, and that if your regime temporarily holds a hardline (even a purely GOP govt would be likely to defect - see Trump calling Biden a racist for locking up criminals in the 90s) it won’t last more than a decade - how exactly do you plan on protecting race-blind fairness?

   It’s ridiculous on it’s face to think that this arrangement would hold. Every-time it breaks, and each break could be the final one - the cost would be borne by Whites. I do not believe Charles Murray and Sailer have failed to consider this. But the constitution, which is honored more in the breech by now anyway, says that Blacks are US citizens. A good citizen believes in the constitution. And whatever risks must be borne by Charles and Steve’s actual countrymen to preserve this state of affairs is clearly worth it to them.

   Charles and Steve are good citizens. But whether they are good people a lesser man would refuse to answer.

   So even though most normies, once aware of the facts Steve and Charles describe, become anti-Black, knowing that black-white relations will always be hostile and that this is the fault of Blacks — they being good citizens, continue to like all Americans equally.

   Even Real Legal Equality would be Anti-White

Let’s pull a Deus Ex Machina and imagine that we could really guarantee and safeguard full legal equality in an America with it’s current Black population. Would this be good for Whites? Compared to the alternative, sure. But it would still be terribly unfair.

Imagine that there were two schools, school 1 and 2. In school 1 no child has ever stabbed another, and kids like to use knives to carve wooden figurines, so knives are fully legal. In school 2 stabbings are a common occurrence. Would it be fair to suddenly set the same penalties for bringing a knife in both schools? Or to ban them in both schools?

Clearly not.

And if you merged the student bodies into the same school, any knife policy at all equally applied would be definitionally unfair.

To set it at a midpoint is unfair to both. To set it as high as needed for 2schoolers to stop stabbing their classmates (which now include) 1schoolers is to discriminate in favor of 2schoolers and against 1schoolers. To keep school policy as free for all students as it was for 1schoolers, is to discriminate against both.

Of course, there are white violent criminals… just far less of them but the general analogy holds. Imagine this phenomenon for every single area of public life, and you understand just how unfair even genuine legal equality is to whites. They must lock their doors even though none of their neighbors steal. Accompany their kids on trains, even though their kids know where to go. Or pay through the roof, to live somewhere without Blacks. All of this would continue to be true, even in a genuinely legal discrimination free society, instead of the anti-white society we have now and have had since the 1960s.

Read Scott Alexander for more details on our Legally Anti-White society.

Once again, legal equality does not exist. This form of ‘equality’ of course has not actually existed since 1948. But it would be anti-white even if it did.

Now, In normie morality it’s fine to hurt people to help others who, through no fault of their own are a burden. And most people think of being merely dumb as not being a moral flaw, similar to being stuck on a wheelchair.

You might not like this if you are a libertarian, but almost no one is.

For normies, It’s fine to tax everyone in the neighborhood so the guy in the wheelchair who can’t work, can eat and have a decent life.

But if every-time a wheelchair bound person recklessly drove over a normally abled person, the wheelchair-bound (most themselves not reckless drivers) collectively canonized him…

We would just hate Wheel-chaired people. Some wheelchairers might be different, but it would be their duty, not ours to make their true nature known; because most wheelchairers would be of bad character.

The norm would be anti-wheelchairism. This would be especially true if the children of wheel-chaired people were themselves wheelchair bound!

Charles Murray and Steve Sailer regularly go on and on about how IQ doesn’t determine moral worth. Whatever. Very few dislike blacks merely for being disproportionately low IQ. They dislike them because even the higher IQ ones consistently side with the worst behaved ones.

NO HBD-Non-Racist has as far as I can tell ever attempted to describe how they are going to get the presence of blacks to stop being bad for whites. At best they can describe how to minimize the damage. But no one has attempted to describe why we should feel an affinity for people who celebrate their worst members, simply because they come into conflict with whites.

The Real Solution:

Most Blacks are not very wealthy. Pay them to leave. Give them an ethno-state in the US and pay them to leave to it, or elsewhere. It’ll probably be a relatively successful Black state, operating at above Jamaica levels. Voluntarily buy out their citizenship. The small minority who reject this offer will probably be among the more white friendly ones, and we can get along better with them.

Call it the price of cheap cotton if you will.

Racism after all, at least of the Futurist Right sort, is when you judge people by the content of their character. It is similar to benevolent sexism in that way; except women unlike Blacks, have their uses so the benevolence is of the purely humanitarian sort.

“Price of Cheap Cotton”, a Futurist Right original classical Jazz piece will be dropping shortly to promote this vision.

High Quality Racism is not free. It takes a lot of work. In the last two weeks I’ve written The Mirror Neuron case for racism, proven the genetic nature of East Asian low fertility (Both original research articles with serious implications). I might even dare say they are some of the best right wing pieces published this year.

Will you be my Soros, Pretty Please?