Why Pundits Never Explain “White Identity Politics”

A phrase used in an exclusively negative connotation, “white identity politics” is a favorite phrase among both wanton and conservative progressive writers. What these writers inevitability fail to do is identify the grievances which whites have with the current American system. These undefined grievances are dismissed without argument, and the author proceeds to wring their hands at the current state of affairs rather than grapple with substantive issues.

The reason is because the issues underlying the label are legitimate, and writers don’t want to grapple with them.

The first issue writers dismiss with their label is opposition to affirmative action. The problem with affirmative action is simple and easily found within Enlightenment principles: people shouldn’t be punished for crimes they didn’t commit. People also shouldn’t be subject to ex post facto punishment. Any argument in favor of affirmative action quickly becomes a justification for why white children should be discriminated against in college admissions and why white adults should face discrimination in hiring when they have personally done nothing wrong. In a zero-sum game between candidates for a limited number of available spaces, boosting one race is the same as discriminating against the others. This issue isn’t one that affects just white people: East Asians suffer from affirmative action as well.

The next issue, immigration, is somewhat of a chimera. There are several pieces that spring forth from to immigration. The first is that incomes and job opportunity should not be eroded through immigration. Immigration, in the massive numbers seen in America currently, depresses wages and limits job openings available for American workers. Increasing the supply of labor through immigration has predictable effects.

Alongside this issue is the issue of free trade. When free trade means making local natural resources more available to the world, this is a good thing. When the local natural resources are instead workers who live in 3rd world conditions with lax labor laws and no benefits, American workers are essentially being asked to adapt to the conditions of a 3rd world worker or live off of government largess, and that is fundamentally unacceptable.

Many immigrants who come to America also consume welfare and other government resources. The prospect of living at the level of an American welfare recipient is enough for people to abandon their homes and come here from the third world. And Americans, especially white Americans, are footing the bill for this generosity without their consent.

The immigrants who are brought here eventually gain the right to vote in our elections, as do their descendants.  These immigrants then proceed to vote against the type of country most white Americans wish to live in.

As it is stated in UN Resolution 1514:

All peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

The levels of immigration we have today undermine those rights among white Americans, while at the time the resolution was written in 1960, white Americans certainly had those rights. Mass immigration is the end of self-determination for the people who settled America.

From the same UN Resolution:

Any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

While illegal immigration certainly spits in the face of the territorial integrity of this country, other factors have contributed to the total disruption of national unity in America and are legitimate issues for grievance among white Americans.

In our schools, the history of white people is treated with a level of harsh criticism that figures from the rest of the world are not subject to. Every hero of white America is cast as, at the very best, tainted and imperfect. In some cases, statues are torn down of beloved heroes, names are torn off of buildings and roads, and their resting places are disturbed.

It’s just not limited to the treatment of history. Throughout school, white children are singled out as holding special privilege and infused with guilt about the color of their skin. It is utterly humiliating and unacceptable for the youth of a people to be forced to undergo this continuous ritual.

These three issues: affirmative action, mass immigration, and being cast as villains are three of the issues writers do not want to have to contend with. They don’t want to state their arguments against them because these are simple and straight-forward issues that would be seen as a human rights violations if they happened to any other group of people.

1 thought on “Why Pundits Never Explain “White Identity Politics””

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *