There are a lot of angles I could take here about the proliferation of predominantly black protest movements on college campuses in places like Missouri and New Haven, perhaps too many. I could talk about the decline of freedom of speech in American society, I could talk about liberal iconoclasm against White symbols and spaces, or I could talk about the the zealotry of Diversity™ adherents, to name a few. The happening at the University of Missouri (and the broader politics of it) combines so many strains of what the alt-right has critiqued about non-white identity politics and leftist rent-seeking that it almost seems like a thought experiment we made up to illustrate a point. All of that stuff is evident and writing about it here would be more of the same. But more revealing, I think, are the racial implications of the #Mizzou movement for “allies” vis-à-vis their sobrave negroes. What makes them tick and why is joining these racially-aligned protests so appealing? These Whites, chiefly SWPLs, have sided with what are essentially black tribalists, who rather than seeking full independence from our society want both more gibs from Whites and for Whites to go away. Why do any White people support this? What ought to be generic ethnic competition for resources becomes more complicated when Tribe A claims moral authority and Tribe B won’t take its own side. Succinctly put, the demands of the protesters are as follows:
We’re going to ooga booga until white people in administrative positions are replaced with black people because microaggressions and racism. Black people need black-only spaces but also greater access to and authority over white spaces, which supposedly includes the university which admitted them in the first place. White people need to acknowledge their original sin of privilege and participate in the sacrament of cucking to be considered eligible for ally status. Failure to comply with our demands means you are racist.
As a normal White guy—or a cisgender heterosexual caucasian male in newspeak—I look at these events as a text and from reading it I am told that I am the root cause of these people’s problems. Blacks attending expensive colleges are oppressed by Whites, I am participating in this by not signaling against it, and I need to do something. But I can’t do too much to help because that’s also racist and it’s not my place to do so. Supposedly, because of my immense White male privilege, I wield the power to make blacks into kangz again, but only by deference, by acquiescence, by stepping down and agreeing to all of their demands. And if I don’t surrender, well that wouldn’t be very nice of me—I’d be one of those bad White people, a racist.
I was reading Jack Donovan’s A Sky Without Eagles the other day—I wouldn’t have picked it up if not for the SPLC’s recent manufactured controversy—and in one of his essays he argues that modern feminists have become arbiters of masculinity. In other words, the authority on what it means to be a man and what men are allowed to do has been usurped by people who do not like men. You need their consent for your expression, their signing off on your ambitions. You know, since otherwise you’re a sexist. Donovan thinks this is bad for men and for society, and in our upside-down world the most basic truths become profound. The #Mizzou protesters have done exactly the same thing with race. They want to arbitrate what White identity means in a way that exclusively serves their interests—a state of sinful White guilt where one can only reach salvation by genuflecting to the moral authority of sacred cows (of color) who by their title as a designated oppressed class are righteous in all their deeds, demands and political philosophy.
The White ally is not merely a cuck signaling sobravery, or being misguided in his tribal loyalties. He (and often she) isn’t just arbitrarily siding with black people—there is a framework. He is acolyte participating in a religion that has a hierarchy and a system of penance for making him feel better about himself, and which brings him closer to the god Equality. He can never join this hierarchy and become a leader, only serve it. To mitigate his privilege he must defer. Equality is only brought closer by thinning his own numbers and reducing the role and representation of Whites in society. Only then will oppression be over and kangz reign.
I feel the analogy of religion works particularly well because a devout faith is one that will not flicker in the face of opposition of any kind. For Whites who embrace #Mizzou or #BlackLivesMatter as allies of a tribe that resents them, it truly is religious. You can show them the hostility blacktivists have for Whites and they will justify it as The Right Side of History® and The Current Year®, going along with it to achieve signal nirvana. Their mystical belief in the racial authority of POC over Whites on any conflict of interest is remarkable and something that can only be sustained through a religious framework of good and evil, salvation and damnation, and community and social ostracism. Religion is not dead, merely changing. People long to be a part of something bigger than themselves that works to a achieve a larger-than-life end.
It goes without saying that I reject the authority implied by black tribalists to tell me what it means to be White and how to be a good White person. And really, you shouldn’t have to be a far-right shitposter to do this. It’s a blatant form of hypocrisy that we are ‘not allowed’ to speak for them or about them while they are not only allowed to do so about us, but also considered more authoritative than we are on the subject. I think there is great metapolitical potential in #Mizzou to trigger a reaction in our culture. Even among off-white friends and acquaintances of mine—albeit self-selected ones—there is healthy skepticism of shrieking black leftists pressuring school administrators to resign over anonymous racial incidents. Because they’re wrong. And when your enemy is wrong and doesn’t know it, what a time it is to be right.