A society, or part of it, always adopts definite modes of thought, speech, and action. And in time, inevitably, at least in modernity, those modes shift radically. What was once unthinkable suddenly becomes not only thinkable, but is everywhere, and the change is unstoppable, at all levels. This process has little to do with rational choice, even if the changes are abstractly entirely rational. We are almost at this tipping point with the realization by white people in America that they must act as a group to protect and advance their interests, just as every other group already does in America. Jeremy Carl tells us how we got here, in this excellent and extremely timely book, and what we should do to encourage and manage this process.
One term for this social process is “preference cascade.” What usually triggers such preference cascades is new information combined with fresh realization of personal interest. People will rarely adopt views, especially public views, directly opposing what they perceive (accurately or not) to be a core societal consensus. Placing yourself crossways to supposed norms is risky, and even aside from risk, most people desire to be seen as a member in good standing of a society. Or, put more bluntly, most people are sheep. If, however, they obtain new information, if they realize that many others in fact think thoughts contrary to what the supposed consensus dictates, and even more if personal self-interest also militates for something different, a change of views, first privately, then publicly expressed, is likely to happen. And with each such change, the next one becomes more likely, until a cascade results. Soon enough (and this entire process operates in fast-forward today because of the technology of communication), a new, but very different, equilibrium is reached.
You Should Subscribe. It’s Free!
You can subscribe to writings published in The Worthy House. In these days of massive censorship, this is wise, even if you normally consume The Worthy House on some other platform.
If you subscribe will get a notification of all new writings by email. You will get no spam, of course. And we do not and will not solicit you; we neither need nor accept money.
For a long time, this process has only ever benefitted the Left, which for decades has controlled the levers of propaganda and social power that allow the manufacturing of supposed consensus. But their power, despite desperate rearguard actions, has eroded in the internet era, and with each fresh attempt at repression, erodes further. The spells, they do not work as they used to. Oh, to be sure, many are still enslaved by the ubiquitous propaganda, and in some ways the atomization driven by the internet does increase Left capabilities to manipulate social views. Still, the preference cascade toward whites treating themselves as a coherent group, one of the existential nightmares of the Left for decades, is nonetheless in full swing. Every other group—Muslims, Jews, blacks, Chinese, whatever—organizes to protect its own interests, and has always done so, and been encouraged to do so by our rulers. But for sixty years, whites in America have been duped and coerced into entirely rejecting this basic element of human nature. No longer.
This book itself is proof of the change; The Unprotected Class could not have been meaningfully published even a year ago (nor would I have written much of what I say here a year ago). Even those on the Right would have viewed it as incendiary; now it just seems to state the needful and obvious. If it had earlier been published by some fringe press, or more likely self-published, it would have been dismissed (and essentially banned, by removing it from all mass market sales platforms). It would only be mentioned as an example of the (imaginary) boiling cesspool of “white supremacy” and “white nationalism” (about both of which more later), the existence of which required the whipping up of even more anti-white hatred. Instead, Carl’s book has gotten significant respectful and positive attention, including his interview with Tucker Carlson being the second-most-viewed video since Carlson launched his network, and encouraging comment from Elon Musk. Only a year ago, saying something as anodyne as “It’s OK to be white” was completely forbidden; it would have been both career- and social status-ending. Now prominent conservatives not only do not flee from it, but they say it, and more, and face no punishment or blowback for their speech.
But the audience for Carl’s book isn’t those who have already passed through the gates of the preference cascade. It is those yet to enter the gates. To this end, he exhaustively documents the simple facts about how whites are systemically disadvantaged and persecuted throughout America today, for an audience that does not already know these facts. He aims to accelerate the cascade, and to offer solutions which thread the needle, restoring justice to white Americans without causing social fracture. A tall order, to be sure. It is, and has been for sixty years or more, an article of faith among any person in good social standing that white people are the major source of injustice in America, and suffer no debilities of any kind. Stripping this delusion from people heavily invested in it their whole lives is no easy task. Moreover, whites do not like the idea they are encouraging racial conflict. We resonate with Rodney King, “Can we all just get along?” Certainly, my interactions with non-white people where I live are, quite literally, uniformly positive. But no, we can’t get along, on any level other than individual personal interaction, until white people are no longer treated as second-class citizens.
Carl begins boldly, and does not fade. He starts with the drug overdose death of the two-bit black criminal scumbag George Floyd, although his terms for Floyd are somewhat more polite, and the resulting imprisonment of the arresting police offers as political prisoners, with judge and jury, and all of white America, under duress from violent threats, from which the government made no effort to shield or protect them, but rather encouraged. He notes that all of this, and all the other massive violence in 2020 collectively known as the Floyd Riots, was wholly based on pure, unalloyed hatred of white people. Then, for the next three hundred pages, Carl relentlessly lays out the facts. None of these facts are disputed or disputable; you are simply not allowed to talk about them, which makes many unaware of them. The only response to stating any of these facts has been to scream “raaaaaacist,” and to attack the speaker. Again, no longer.
As Carl lays out, until 1970, America was nearly ninety percent white, and had always been so. It was “demographically unified.” That is to say, white people made America, the most successful country in the history of the world. Whatever problems America might have had, and they were few, it was those of European descent (which is what “white” means) who created America, and made it great. But beginning in 1964, the Constitution was rewritten in the name of so-called civil rights, to aggressively disadvantage whites at every level of society. (Here Carl extensively cites Christopher Caldwell’s recent The Age of Entitlement, the seminal work on this destruction of the American rule of law.) Freedom of association, long a pillar of American life and supposedly enshrined in the Constitution, was entirely vaporized. Alien legal concepts such as disparate impact were introduced to strip white people of their jobs and rights, and transfer the same to non-whites. Enormous bureaucracies, both inside and outside government, were set up to ensure white people were continuously made inferior citizens in the country they had made.
All this was very successful in its object, as the lived experience of any white person today, if he is honest, reveals. The results speak for themselves—for example, between 2007 and 2016, non-whites gained ten million jobs while whites lost 700,000, and that was before the anti-white frenzy of all major businesses after the Floyd Riots ensured that nearly every new job went to non-white people. Last week, New York proudly announced, without fear of pushback to their technically illegal actions, that the city had awarded contracts worth $2.3 billion to repair JFK Airport; white men need not apply. We could spend all day listing examples, but every white person who chooses not to delude himself knows that he is regarded by all institutions of power as tolerated, at most, and every day he has to struggle uphill against the massive privileges granted non-whites at his expense, institutionalized both in law and in every area of society.
At the same time white people are persecuted, non-whites, especially blacks, continue their long pattern of anti-social behavior. Blacks commit crimes at rates vastly greater than whites, including committing around sixty percent of all murders, despite being only twelve percent of the population, and an even higher percentage of stranger murders. Since 1968, there have been almost 200,000 interracial murders; seventy-five percent have been white victims of black murderers. White flight, and the consequent destruction of white American cities built up over hundreds of years, was not the result of racism. It was because any neighborhood where black people moved in saw crime, including such crimes as violent rape of the elderly, skyrocket, so white people left (with the encouragement of white real estate investors who exaggerated the devastating-enough effects of crime). This ethnic cleansing stole the massive generational wealth of millions of whites. Almost all supposed hate crimes against non-white people are hoaxes (and the innumerable videos you can see online of groups of blacks savagely beating individual whites are never shown in the so-called mainstream media, even though if there were a single such video of whites beating blacks it would be international news for months). Redlining wasn’t racist at all, but highly rational and not directed at blacks. The so-called Central Park Five, a group of black rapists supposedly exonerated, are 100% guilty. Nearly all anti-Asian violence is perpetrated by blacks. And so forth.
The response for decades has been to coddle blacks and pretend that it is somehow the fault of whites that these problems exist among blacks (and, to a lesser extent, among all non-white groups except Asians). Instead of dealing with the pathologies of non-whites in America, government policies across the board are aggressively designed to blame and harm whites. The core dogma that permits this is the falsehood that any differences in outcomes between whites and non-whites are due to white racism, which can never be identified with any specificity, but we are told permeates everything. Thus, the mortgage bailouts after 2008 went vastly disproportionately to non-whites, but were paid for by whites. The set of regulations euphemistically called Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing is simply meant to destroy white communities and confiscate their wealth. Schools have indoctrinated children with anti-white hatred, under many names and guises, for decades. Whites are turned away from all good universities in huge numbers, to instead admit grossly unqualified non-whites.
All mass entertainment and advertising is designed to marginalize and demonize whites, to “drive perceptions and changes in the culture” in an anti-white direction. The environmental movement has abandoned actual environmentalism for anti-white activism, the lens through which everything from conservation to climate change is now required to be viewed. The Tuskegee Syphilis Study was not racist, but medicine today is—including the infamous widespread explicit preferences for non-whites in treatments for the Wuhan Plague, while non-white (and non-Asian) doctors have much lower levels of competence, a problem getting worse fast. Medicaid, a trillion dollars a year, is mostly paid for by white people and mostly used by non-white people. Mainstream religious denominations are racist against whites; the military is even more so (the cause, naturally, of the massive problems in recruitment), even though most in the military who actually fight are white, including nearly all members of the special forces.
White history, that is, American history, is continuously erased, both in schools and through destruction of monuments, cancellation of holidays, and removal of all memorialization of the white accomplishments that made America and every place in it. Immigration policy is designed to replace white people and thereby transform America by crippling white political power (and America has never been a “nation of immigrants”; if anything, it is a nation of settlers, white settlers, those who came here to risk everything, as opposed to today’s immigrants, who come here for the gibs, including immediate preferences over native whites in employment, education, and benefits). The Democrats are the party of racial resentment; they have not won the white national vote since 1964, even though whites are a supermajority of voters, something unprecedented in history for any multi-racial democracy.
The reader has to take a breath occasionally, a pause from drinking from this gusher of truth. Carl doesn’t ignore subtleties, though, such as the position of Asians in the ubiquitous anti-white framework that makes up America today. Asians occupy a strange lacuna in America—they are overrepresented in many jobs, especially in tech, because they are not as subject to discrimination against them as whites, and because for cultural and genetic reasons many are capable of better average performance on some metrics than whites. They repay this favor by voting for the Left in large numbers. Yet they are, by other non-whites resentful of their success, increasingly lumped in with whites. Where this will lead politically is an interesting question, though a very secondary one to the question of white political action.
Generally, Carl is interested in documentation, not detailed explanation. For example, he briefly discusses the depiction of white and non-white people in entertainment media, including advertising, but does not talk much about precisely why it is that white people (straight white men universally; white women a little less; white homosexuals get a pass) are usually depicted as objects of hatred or as stupid incompetents, or both, while non-white people are depicted wholly unrealistically, both in disproportionate numbers and in their typical actions. And, of course, many white historical figures are depicted as black, as laughable as that is, from Alexander Hamilton to Anne Boleyn. Why? It is not simply to exalt non-whites and give them yet more they have not earned and do not deserve. Rather, it is also a deliberate attack on white people designed to deface their culture. It is the stories of white people which constitute the vast majority of American history; therefore erasing the stories of white people is a way of denying they made America. (Non-whites often project, and claim that their accomplishments have been erased, but the truth is, with a very few exceptions, they have had no accomplishments to speak of, relative to white people in America, so ignoring nonexistent achievements is hardly erasure.) It is also a humiliation ritual, enacted to keep white people feeling low and broken, required to be silent in the face of gross lies, similar to the ancient story of the Chinese emperor who made his courtiers identify a deer as a horse, and executed those who failed to follow his direction, seeing them as threats to his rule.
Carl does not pull punches in demonstrating that other races have consistently shown themselves, on average, to be less able than whites on many axes (except for Asians, who are sometimes more able), which is the real basis of racial differences that our rulers claim are due to white racism. (Bizarrely, huge percentages of self-identified liberals, and even many conservatives, fervently believe that racism is the cause of these differences, though they can never identify any mechanism or examples.) He points out that nearly zero black students score adequately to be admitted to any top law schools—but fewer than thirty percent of the federal judges appointed by “President” Biden are white. The result is rising incompetence among the judiciary. Everyone knows, or at least every lawyer knows, that Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson are dumber than two boxes of rocks. No doubt the cause of these abiding failures relative to whites is both cultural and genetic, but the results are extremely clear, and they have not changed and are not changing, despite trillions being taken from whites to give to non-whites to “redress imbalances.”
Why, however, has all of America become organized around anti-white hatred? Part of the reason is obvious—as Carl titles one of his chapters, “The End Game: Reparations and Expropriation.” “My central contention is that many of the fundamental trends I have outlined serve a common ideological purpose. That purpose is to create an intellectual and cultural environment to justify the expropriation of land, property, and other wealth from whites while instituting a permanent regime of anti-white employment and legal discrimination.” “There is a conscious effort by those in the political system to delegitimize whites and to retell the American story in a way that makes whites the villains to justify expropriating the vast wealth and prosperity produced by whites on behalf of the new American people.” Because whites hold most of the physical value in America, and provide most of the production of new value, seizing their assets is necessary to enrich non-whites. Reparations are only the first step, even though blacks in America are the richest black people on the planet, and many blacks have arrived very recently (such as Barack Obama and Kamala Harris, who count zero slaves among their ancestors). So-called land acknowledgements, of Indian tribes (usually ones who held land because they exterminated the previous inhabitants) are a similar step, which “justify expropriation by putting excessive value on the land itself rather than on its development, which was overwhelmingly accomplished by white Americans.”
“The final destination is a world in which whites have been stripped of political power and resources, which are then redistributed to non-whites using both ‘legal’ and ‘democratic’ processes. Again, this is already underway, but its speed and scale will dramatically increase as white political power diminishes. That the expropriators may not succeed is only true to the extent that whites can politically organize themselves and sympathetic non-white allies to oppose the state-sanctioned theft of their wealth and assets. White Americans already pay billions each year to subsidize our cross-border invasion and cultural erasure. If we don’t fight harder, we will soon be subsidizing our own expropriation.”
Carl would prefer, he says explicitly, a focus on inalienable rights of all Americans. So would we all. He realizes, however, I think, that ship sailed long ago. “Yet, as a practical matter, issues of anti-white discrimination and racism must be discussed as involving whites as a whole, not just issues of individual discrimination.” “If we do not correct the course we are on, I fear we are headed for the civil strife and racial violence that has characterized so many other multiracial countries over the centuries.” In short, Carl demands that white people no longer be oppressed, because if they are, violence will inevitably result. “To borrow a Cold War analogy, the only way we will achieve peace in our current era of racial strife is for people of every race to adopt a policy of Mutually Assured Destruction. Simply put, the Left must learn that when they use racist tactics [i.e., persecute whites], the blowback will be fierce, immediate, and extremely painful for them.” This means The Unprotected Class has a bit of a split personality, as with all books of today offering solutions, in that the author senses that future violence is likely, because that is what history teaches that the Left always brings, but hesitates to emphasize it, afraid of being seen as calling for it.
But beyond mere grasping acquisitiveness, there is also a political structure reason for the ubiquitous demonizing of whites. Envy and hatred are the traditional drivers of the underclass, which is typically the underclass for good reason, and in a supposed democracy this can be used to attain power. In the Jouvenalian sense, anti-white action creates an alliance of the high and the low against the middle. This allows the myrmidons to be whipped to a fever pitch and willing to do anything to shift power to the puppet masters. As the pseudonymous writer Raw Egg Nationalist said the other day, “In America, anti-white hatred has been normalized to an extent that would make Radio Rwanda envious. It is the glue that binds an enormous diverse coalition of the ugly, resentful, talentless and dispossessed, which is what makes it so very dangerous.” Moreover, anti-white hatred provides, for the Left, an excuse why the promised utopia not only has not arrived, but appears to be receding—if it were not for the white wreckers and hoarders, everything would be wonderful, don’t you know?
Yet none of this explains why white people, huge numbers of white people, so eagerly participate in this process. (Carl accurately refers to “white ‘progressives,’ the most powerful and most uniquely toxic group in American society.”) Yes, some white people see advantage for themselves, by participating in the thefts, and hope to be eaten last, though if they knew more history they would know that is a bad strategy. It also manifests the unique-to-leftism belief that one is not really something if one does not want to be that something. Leftists, especially the ugly, resentful, and talentless, are both wholly detached from reality and desperate to attain meaning in their lives through political action, so they see no contradiction in sawing off the tree branch on which they sit. In part it is also a habit. As Carl notes, for a long time many upper-class whites believed, perhaps as a consequence of East Coast ruling class attitudes passed down after the Civil War, that it was beneath a white person’s dignity to point out anti-white hatred—and after all, what was the need to complain, given that the propaganda machine and William F. Buckley told us everything was fine? Still, all of this is inadequate as a complete explanation. We instead have to turn to a phenomenon unprecedented in human history—the self-hatred of an entire dominant segment of society. This isn’t news; Jean Raspail clearly diagnosed it in his classic The Camp of the Saints, fifty years ago. We now call it “outgroup preference” and notice that it’s never existed before in human history. Why? I don’t know, and I don’t really care. Future sociologists can study it, when this self-limiting tendency has been completely erased.
It is crucial to note, however, that Carl misses, or chooses not to raise except by implication, another essential element of the end game of those pushing anti-white hate—extermination. Carl does refer to violent expropriations of other racial and ethnic groups elsewhere in the past, including Rwanda, but shies away from a full discussion—probably again concerned of being accused of calling for violence, when it is in fact violence against whites that is explicitly and openly called for every day in 2024 America. Regardless of the specifics, the mechanics are always the same for the Left. The aim is extraction from political opponents, through terror, and when all value has been extracted, extermination of those not killed in the terror. This is an inevitable process when the Left has and maintains power; it is happening this very moment, for example, in South Africa. It is a bit odd that Carl never mentions this, when the cover of his book pictures graffiti demanding “Kill All Whits.” The misspelling may seem humorous, but it is deadly serious—it shows both the intent and the intellectual level of those who espouse anti-white extermination. What the Hutu did to the Tutsi in Rwanda is what a very significant portion of America, white and non-white, wants for non-compliant whites, and even those on the Left who don’t actually want this would eagerly support it if it happened. It won’t happen, of course—there are far too many whites, and they are far too competent and too armed. We will never be South Africa. But even tending that way would be an awful way to end up.
Carl offers some hard-hitting, if not solutions, at least ways to address the problem of anti-white actions. As he points out, and as I have pointed out, America is never going to be an ethnostate, and we are going to have to get along, whatever the exact political arrangements and borders exist in the future in the lands currently known as America. Carl suggests encouraging multiracial minorities, especially Hispanics, to adopt a white identity, to “identify with the historic majority” (something social scientist Eric Kaufmann suggested was likely in Whiteshift, and is actually happening in significant numbers—and would happen more if special privileges were not granted to those claiming to be non-white). Carl also suggests “recruiting Asian Americans as allies and holding them accountable,” as well as “holding black political leaders and white ‘progressives’ accountable for anti-white policies and rhetoric.” The latter “must be confronted, exposed, and shamed, and their dangerous moral imperialism put down.” Finally, Carl calls for civil disobedience. This is a longer topic for another day, and Carl does note that what works for BLM rioters won’t work for whites. Yet whites must “make a graceful show of strength.” In practice, I suspect, this would just lead to a spiral of violence; the Left is perfectly well aware, though more viscerally than intellectually, that what leads to the downfall of regimes is very frequently street protests leading to preference cascades, which is why they have unleashed a wave of terror against the heroes of the Electoral Justice Protest, and any other direct action taken by the Right. And as to specific policy programs, Carl calls for net-zero immigration (remigration would be better); lawfare against the anti-white establishment; total elimination of affirmative action; a total overhaul (read: gutting) of so-called civil rights laws; wiping out the massive bureaucracies established to maltreat whites; and strengthening law enforcement (read: ensure white police are no longer punished for aggressively corralling black criminals).
Politically, what is going to happen in America, given that Carl’s policy proposals are not going to happen unless there are major changes in political power? We can make a few predictions, I think. First, these rising racial conflicts that are the result of attacking whites for decades will be hugely exacerbated upon any sustained economic downturn. Non-whites have for so long received transfers from whites that they are used to it and accept it as their birthright. Whites rarely consider what their lives would have been if they could have lived as did their ancestors, and they are deliberately sedated with weed, porn, and Netflix. In the past, if economic problems brought real pain, the screws could just have been turned more on whites, who would know that any objection would lead to their being unpersoned as “raaaaaacist.” That’s not likely to work anymore. This reality means that the contradictions are likely to be heightened in the near future. Second, the first man to explicitly defend whites in a concrete situation will gain immense and immediate power. I have been saying for years that eventually a political leader who will arise who promises to represent white interests. There is no logical reason this has not happened already; it is only social and governmental pressure that has prevented it. In any other society in history, such a man would have arisen decades ago. A good deal of support for Donald Trump is in fact a proxy for this; voters understand that Trump supports white people. He supports black people and other people, too, just as much, but does not prioritize them over whites; this alone makes him unique among all Republican presidential candidates. After Trump, though, the floodgates of opportunity, if we choose to call it that, will open, and someone will step through them. He may be good, he may be bad, but he will be.
More abstractly, the fundamental problem for addressing race relations in America is, and will be, whatever our political arrangements, that nobody can doubt that equal treatment will, every time, lead to unequal outcomes for different groups. This is true everywhere; America is no different than the rest of the world. Why unequal outcomes between races inevitably exist can be debated; it obviously has both cultural and genetic drivers, the relative importance of which differ in each situation. But in a free-for-all competition, every place it has happened in the past thousand years, white people have come out on top, and past performance is at least some indication of future results (though with the decline of the West, and the rise of China, we will see if this continues). Instead of frankly admitting this, and coming up with measures that allow racial comity, what one usually hears, and what the epigraph of this book calls for, is equal treatment. That’s fine, but we should be honest what that means in practice, and plan for management of the resulting differential outcomes.
Finally, let’s talk about “white nationalism” and “white supremacy,” because we hear those cant words incessantly, although neither term is ever defined—they are merely “linguistic kill shots,” in the words of Scott Adams, designed to work purely extra-rationally, though as with all such, their efficacy is declining fast. As to the first, white nationalism is merely the default term for any white person who suggests that white people should be allowed to have interests. For the people who use it, “nationalism” is automatically bad, so the combination term is doubly bad, or to coin a term, doubleplusungood. But of course nationalism isn’t bad at all; it’s merely love of, and prioritization of, one’s own country and nation, the norm throughout all of human history. True, some manifestations can take the concept too far, or into areas where it should not apply (such as religion—I discussed the resulting Christian heresy, phyletism, a few months ago). For the most part, though, nationalism is awesome, and something hated and feared by the Left because it necessarily opposes the core Left demands of emancipation and forced egalitarianism. (Similarly, the term “Christian nationalism” is also supposed to denote something bad, but nobody ever explains why being two good things creates a bad thing.) Thus, the proper response to being accused of being a white nationalist is “Of course. So what?”
As to white supremacy, that’s a bit more interesting. This is because there is, in fact, a version of what it could mean that we should avoid—the idea that white people deserve to rule because they are white, because white people are somehow abstractly inherently better than everyone else. True, white people have been more successful than any other group in human history, but that’s not some kind of Mandate of Heaven, just a combination of circumstances that shook out very well for white people. The extremely few people who believe this line of thought usually are driven by the basic desire to feel superior to others, and claim they seek a white ethnostate, which they tell us will automatically be awesome. Unlikely, but we’ll never know, because America isn’t going to ever be as white as it used to be. Whatever might be the ideal way to construct a society, we are stuck for the foreseeable future with some variation on the racial mix we have, and you can’t run a society, at least a successful society, without cooperation among all groups in the nation, something impossible if one group is deemed inherently more worthy to rule. But as I say, almost nobody actually believes this, so the amount of time we should spend on worrying about white supremacy is zero, and as with white nationalism, we should simply ignore its use as an attack phrase.
The reaction to The Unprotected Class itself proves it is a book whose time has come. Strangely, Carl has not yet been demonized by the Left. I wonder if they are distracted, or afraid, or are waiting to attack him. Maybe they figure ignoring him is the best course, though if so, that is a new tactic, and not one likely to succeed. No matter; the best thing you can do is give this book to someone who is uneducated on this topic, and have him read it. He will, whether he admits it or not, likely come out thinking differently—and if he does not, you will know what kind of person he is, and what that means for his future actions towards you.
You Should Subscribe. It’s Free!
You can subscribe to writings published in The Worthy House. In these days of massive censorship, this is wise, even if you normally consume The Worthy House on some other platform.
If you subscribe will get a notification of all new writings by email. You will get no spam, of course. And we do not and will not solicit you; we neither need nor accept money.