On White Genocide

Armenian (Christian) Girls Crucified by Ottomans 1915

Empedocles, the Darwinian Reactionary, has a magnificent seven-part series from last fall: The Ultimate Guide To Cultural Marxist Genocide (I, II, III, IV, V, VI, and VII) in which he establishes, beyond argument in my estimation the following:

• the reality of historical human kinds, aka. ethnic groups;
• the basis for persistence of historical human kinds;
• various real threats to the persistence of historical human kinds;
• threats to the persistence of historical human kinds may be considered genocide;
• that it is natural and right for historical human kinds both to feel in-group affinity and advocate and work for their own continued existence;
• that radical Marxists have advocated, in various and deceitful ways, against European (i.e., white) historical human kinds having normal in-group affinity and working for their own continued existence; and
• that such advocacy may thus be called genocide

So the folks who go around meming White Genocide all the time are technically correct. But here’s why I think that’s a losing proposition.

First, it’s not what people think of when you say genocide. Here’s what The Goog thinks:

So the assertion that Cultural Marxists are engaging in White Genocide is at least a little misleading. What most people think when they hear the word “genocide” is systematic murder. This “milder” sort of genocide actually more of an active encouragement toward ethnic and cultural suicide. It is only deemed genocide by the broader connotation given by Raphael Lemkin, which includes

the disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups.

The 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) does not take such an expansive view, however. So White Genocide in the West is, at best, a semantical, quazi-talmudic point.

So when good-hearted defenders of European peoples and culture cry “White Genocide!”, the first thing an open-minded progressive or conservative will say is, “Where? Where are the corpses?” With the noteworthy exception of southern Africa, there are none. “No,” we may say, “We are using a more expansive definition of genocide that includes ‘disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion’.” It is true that Cultural Marxists seek this end, but it’s not enough to get anyone convicted under the UN Convention (assuming anyone could ever bring Cultural Marxists before the UN anyway). Cultural Marxists are not actually killing Christian Europeans, nor are they artificially limiting the size of their families. A semantical argument is no way to win, especially for Christian European peoples, who’s gift to the world, according to Curt Doolittle, was truth-telling.

A second reason that I think the White Genocide Meme is a losing proposition for defenders of European peoples and culture: I’m not convinced this sort of “soft” genocide is the sort of thing we should oppose. If you indict Cultural Marxists for White Genocide, then you can indict European Americans for the genocide of Native American and Australian peoples for exactly the same reasons. Strong peoples out-compete weak peoples. They always have and always will.

Members of weak peoples will often gladly join the strong. Languages, and the cultures they arise and live in, die. It is not the duty of strong historical human kinds to ensure the continued existence of weak historical human kinds. It is their moral duty not to actively kill them or steal from them. But not their moral duty to artificially prop them up. If an historical human kind has lost the will to see to its own continued existence, then they deserve what’s coming. What remains of their cultural and genetic heritage will be absorbed into a stronger one.

A third and final reason I think “White Genocide!” is poor hill to plant a flag on is that it reflects are certain lack of agency among European peoples. Weak peoples without agency blame their oppressors. Oppressor blaming even when largely true never does a people any good. In fact, it does much harm. It is a cry, implicitly, to a stronger group with stronger agency. Look at all the good “Blame Whitey” has done for American blacks over the past two generations!

If European peoples are the greatest peoples on earth (and I think, on net, they are), then to whom shall they cry for justice? God? Then pray, don’t engage in victim politics. And while at prayer, pray all the more for the internal fortitude to have greater agency and greater power to administer greater control over your own destiny. Cultural Marxists aren’t forcing European men and (especially) women to delay, reduce, or forego natural procreation. They may be cleverly and ubiquitiously suggesting it, but in the end, at least for now, European individuals retain the freedom to control their own demographic destiny.

The power remains, for the forseeable future, with Europeans not to commit ethnic and cultural suicide. Make European babies, folks. That’s what I did. And never get bogged down in victim politics. Even if the accusations are true, wrapping yourself in victimhood is a victory for your enemies, and dangerous to your soul.

There is no doubt that Cultural Marxists advocate for a species of genocide against whites. By ownership of all the major organs of cultural transmission (media and education), they quite effectively rob Europeans of a sense of ethnic identity and cohesion. This is a crime arguably worthy of punishment by death. But complaining about it concedes too much to the progressive frame I think; specifically, that there is anything morally wrong with this soft sort of genocide. European peoples should see their White Genocide, and raise them a Cultural Marxist Genocide.