Race Traitor: Behold a Pale Horse

By John "Birdman" Bryant


Behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. --The Revelations of St John the Divine 6:8

The well-known Hans Christian Andersen story "The Emperor's New Clothes" is a parable about the operation of the human mind whose major lesson is that we often do not see the obvious because of the blindness imposed upon us by our preconceptions -- in this case, the preconception that whatever authority says is true. The magazine Race Traitor, which has been published since 1992 and has a web site with a gaggle of articles and other rants taken from the magazine, is written by two white men, Noel Ignatiev and John Garvey, whose liberal/leftist preconceptions render them not only blind, but deaf, dumb and stupid as well. These two purely- academic Harvard men, who exemplify Mark Twain's observation that some things are so ridiculous that only an academic can believe them, express the belief that there is no significant biological difference between races, which apparently means that they not only cannot believe their eyes, but cannot comprehend such government statistics as that blacks are nine times more likely to engage in criminal behavior than whites, that most interracial crime is black-on-white, and that the yearly total of interracial rapes consist of fewer than 100 white-on-black but some 20,000 black-on-white -- and that is with blacks making up only about 12 percent of the population. But in spite of Race Traitor's inability to see the difference between black and white, its entire program is based -- as liberal/left programs usually are -- on a hypersensitivity to race, in which its editors' racial myopia seeks to promote a racial dystopia in which whiteness will be "abolished". What they mean by this -- or at least what they say they mean -- is that it is white privilege, and not white people, that should be abolished; but the message which comes thru from between the lines is a sort of pennywhistle me-tooing of campy Jewish leftist Susan Sontag's notorious remark that the white race is the "cancer of history".

Race Traitor's apparent rationale for the destruction of "whiteness" is to increase human freedom. But since most people prefer to be with their own kind, the "destruction of whiteness" can only mean the destruction of this preference in whites, rather than allowing them the freedom to pursue their preferences. The Race Traitor editors, then, like all good lefties, wish to deconstruct the population in order to recreate them in the image of the New Soviet-American Man, an entity who can be allowed his freedom because the desire to do anything contrary to the State has been extinguished. Beyond this, however, it should be realized that the Left has always possessed a different concept of freedom than the Right. In particular, for the Left, freedom is freedom from "oppression", for which the free market ("capitalism") is usually said to be responsible, and a powerful (socialist) state the remedy; tho in the last 40 years or so the Left has come to identify the white race as another source of "oppression". The Right, on the other hand, has usually identified the State as inimical to freedom, and the free market as the key to freedom's preservation. In a sense, of course, the Left and Right are both correct: power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely; and thus any concentration of power, whether in the government or in the private sector, represents in some wise a threat to the individual's freedom. The problem with the Left's concept, however, is that the State represents a far greater threat to freedom than the capitalists of the free market; for the capitalist relies for his power on the good will of his customers, while the government relies on the police. Certainly this is borne out in the history of government: The leftist utopias of the present century have killed more than a hundred million people, while relatively little violence has ever been attributed to corporations.

It would be easy to dismiss Race Traitor as just another foray into liberal clownishness, idiocy and decadence, but there are some useful points which can be made by examining its writings. Consider, for example, the explanation of black failure as being due to "white privilege" -- an explanation somewhat different from (but closely aligned with) the traditional Left/liberal explanation of black failure as due to "racism" and "discrimination". The reason why Race Traitor has moved away from the traditional left/liberal explanation in favor of "white privilege" is apparently that "discrimination" can no longer easily be maintained since whites are now discriminated against via affirmative action and similar laws; while "racism" can no longer easily be maintained because there is increasingly-public evidence that blacks are just as "racist" as whites, and in fact a good deal more so (how better to explain the overwhelming predominance of black-on-white crime?). The theory of "white privilege" then, avoids the intellectual and factual baggage of the Left's older explanations, but allows lefties to continue to travel pretty much the same sorry path.

But even if "white privilege" is a last-ditch attempt to justify the old left/liberal cant, it is still far out in left field in terms of credence, in large measure because it violates the scientific criterion of the Law of Parsimony, which dictates that the simplest theory which correctly explains the facts is to be preferred. In the case of black failure, the simplest theory is not "white privilege" -- it is rather that blacks are significantly inferior to whites in intelligence (15-20 points below the average white in IQ). In fact, the "white privilege" theory is not merely improbable as an explanation, but clearly wrong in view of the fact that all other immigrant groups who were discriminated against by whites -- Chinese, Jews, Irish and others -- became successful within a generation or two in spite of such discrimination, while blacks, even with all the help of affirmative action and similar programs, seem frozen on Square One. And the explanation of "white privilege" is also obviously wrong in view of the fact that in the one place where it is impossible for blacks to suffer from white privilege or any other form of racial discrimination -- Africa -- there is not a single instance of blacks building a civilization worthy of the name (Egyptians were not black), and they cannot even maintain the civilizations which white men established for them.

But the problem is not just that Race Traitor is a traitor to both truth and common sense. The problem is the hubris inherent in seeking to wipe from the face of the earth what Nature, in her evolutionary wisdom, has seen fit to create. And it is not just that Race Traitor advocates genocide -- whether it be in its biological or psychological form -- but that it seeks to deny the achievements and quintessential worth of the white race, and particularly to deny that it is white men who have been responsible for building Western civilization. This is not, of course, to say that certain other races have not had great civilizations in their own time, or that they might not have done as well as whites under different circumstances, but it is to say that the white race has achieved a pinnacle of success not achieved by any other race; and thus to deny the value of the white gene pool and the culture which it has created is not only deeply dishonest, but ineluctably stupid.

It is my guess that the underlying motive of the men of Race Traitor is white guilt -- the feeling that life has dealt them a good hand by virtue of their race and that they somehow have no right to it. But as many others have pointed out, life is unfair: Some of us are beautiful, some ugly; some of us are wealthy, some poor; some of us are smart, some stupid; and so on. Most people, of course, are inclined to accept this unfairness, not merely because they are powerless to change it, but because they realize that employing the talents they have offers them an excellent chance for happiness in life. Certainly they need not feel guilty for whatever success they achieve, for a rising tide lifts all boats, and the greater the wealth of society, the greater will be the opportunity of the less successful for helping themselves. Certainly no one needs to engage in the nasty leftist habit of raising the unsuccessful by pulling down the successful, a program which guarantees failure for everyone. If the desire for self-betterment -- aka "greed" -- is wrong, it is just as wrong in the leftist who -- greedy for power -- betters himself at the expense of the successful by seeking to lock society in his totalitarian grip; and in fact it is doubly wrong since his lust for power is fueled by the most petty of human emotions, envy.

Men are not created equal, and neither are races; and it is high time for "race traitors" and the rest of the pitiful, palpitating left/liberal retinue to get over it.

Postscript: According to Instauration (April 1998: 17), "Chief guru of white studies is Noel Ignatiev, who says he is not a Jew but was raised in a Jewish home." Need we say more?


* * Back to the Home Page of John "Birdman" Bryant, the World's Most Controversial Author * *