Transcript: What is wrong with the Country (Jared Taylor)!

Jared Taylor: "What's Wrong with the Country?"

Transscript of the video follows below

This video with German subtitles: Die Probleme unseren Landes | Deutsche Untertitel
Text of this video: Transcript: What is wrong with the Country (Jared Taylor)!
What is wrong with our country" Original video, no subtitles, at Amren's YouTube Kanal
More Videos und Speeches from Amren's 2015 conference #1
Conference videos, Part #2

What’s Wrong With Our Country?

Speech delivered by Jared Taylor of American Renaissance at the American Renaissance conference in Nashville, Tennessee, USA on April 19, 2015.

English Transcription:

The subject I chose for today is “What’s wrong with our country?” Well, where to begin? How do you whittle that subject down to size? Clearly, I want to approach this question from our point of view. We’re here because we’re white and we care deeply about the survival of our race and our civilization.

So what must be changed in this country if its going to contribute to our prosperity rather than our dispossession?

If I had a magic repair kit, I think the first thing I would fix is a terrible blind spot in the mental life of our country.

It could be fixed with just four syllables. It’s almost like a magic incantation, but when you pronounce these four syllables loud enough for everyone in the room to hear, riddles that baffle sages are immediately solved. Taboos plunge from their pedestals and crash to pieces. Scales fall from people’s eyes.

The four syllables are:

Race and IQ.

These four syllables have the power to smash the entire egalitarian edifice. What they mean is that biology makes the races different. The races differ in average intelligence and temperament, and that’s why Switzerland is different from Haiti.

It’s that simple and obvious. It’s so simple and so obvious that 100 years ago everybody understood it without even thinking about it. It is one of the great ironies, one of the great tragedies of history that the entire West is stampeding toward the abyss because we have turned our back on something so obvious and so basic.

It solves countless mysteries.

Why are black crime and poverty races so high? Mystery solved.
Why are there racial gaps in test scores? Mystery solved.
Why so few blacks in the AP classes? Mystery solved.
Why do so many Hispanics drop out of school? Mystery solved.
Why did the Martial Plan work in Europe, but foreign aid to the rest of the world is a flop? Mystery solved.
Why can’t blacks and Hispanics pass civil service or teacher qualification exams? Mystery solved.
Why is Singapore rich while Nigeria with all its oil is a mess? Mystery solved.
Why are there so few black or Mexican programmers in Silicon Valley? Remember: All those brainy high-tech types claim to be stumped by this. But you’re not. Mystery solved.

This simple truth solves countless riddles that flummox professors and PhDs.

And it completely solves the problem of white privilege.

There isn’t any. There isn’t any because blacks and Mexicans rise or fall to about the level they deserve, and then some of them get an extra boost through race preferences. White people are not holding them down.

Of course, because the country firmly closes its eyes to the truth about race and IQ, there is an official but completely mistaken explanation for all those mysteries I just solved. “Racism” explains everything from black illegitimacy to the mess in Nigeria. And that is why so much perverted effort goes into ransacking the country for all this alleged racism. That’s why every racial encounter goes under the microscope and why every white person is guilty of racism, and cannot be proven innocent.

If we could just recognize that the problem is racial differences—not racism—then people like George Zimmerman and Darren Wilson and the Duke Lacrosse Team wouldn’t have their lives ruined by this hysterical hunt for “racism” that isn’t there.

HATE

There are other reasons why it would be a huge improvement if the country recognized that blacks and whites don’t perform at the same level because of differences in ability. It would eliminate a huge chunk of the hatred blacks have for whites. The country encourages them to hate whites by telling them they are just as smart as whites, work twice as hard as whites, but that we thwart them at every turn. American society tolls then to blame all their problems on “creepy-ass crackers,” as a famous black man once put it.

If we stopped encouraging blacks to hate whites, who knows how many rape, murder, and mugging victims—white victims—it would save.

So there are incalculable advantages to recognizing this little biological fact. If the country—and the world—accepted the truth about race and IQ, we could avoid a staggering amount of misery, waste, folly, guilt, and agony. It’s so simple, and the evidence for it is overwhelming. Just watch the news. Just take a walk through an American town.

But today, as far as race is concerned, it’s as if we were still limping along with the Ptolemaic solar system. It’s as if we still believed the sun revolves around the earth. Now you can build a ramshackle, Rube-Goldberg system on that assumption but you have to hold it together with string and baling wire. You have to have planets that sometimes go backwards in their orbits, and you have have orbits that stagger around like drunks.

You can get rid of all that nonsense with one simple concept—it’s the sun, not the earth that’s in the middle—and everything falls into place.

Race and IQ is an equally powerful, equally illuminating concept. And you can still—metaphorically anyway—be burned at the stake for pointing that out.

The facts about race and IQ are such a clear and convincing explanation for the way the world works that there are some very smart people who suspect that the truth about race is so obvious that everybody gets it but just keeps quiet. The great Murray Rothbard thought so. I can hear him now. “Everybody—and I mean everybody—understands that stuff.”

I got into a debate in print about this with Bob Weissberg, who also refuses to believe that people really mean it when they say the races are equal. He just can’t believe that anyone really believes anything so obviously untrue.

But I’m a simpleton. I believe what people tell me. And there are other reasons, besides my trusting nature, to believe them. Let’s say every congressman with an IQ better than that of a fried egg—and that could be a majority—quietly knows the score. If they did they would never pass something as idiotic as No Child Left Behind. It’s based squarely on the assumption that the races are equal. They would have found some way delicately to kill that bill—or more likely—no one would have thought of anything so silly. But it passed with overwhelming majorities in both parties.

Also, if the people who run the country were really in the know they’d think of a way to finesse the whole immigration problem. With enough huffing and puffing about the environment, you could easily justify ending all immigration. You could call the new zero-immigration bill: “An Act to Preserve the American Environment for Future Generations.” You could have an immigration policy that took race seriously but was completely silent on the subject.

How many people would you say actually run the country? If you count up the congressmen and the cabinet and the judges and the billionaires and the media tycoons, you get—what?—1,000 people? They are the people who run the country. Those 1,000 people do not act as if they secretly know the truth about race.

The reason we keep bringing Haitians and Guatemalans and Somalis into the country—and why we’re going to be stuck with another 100 million people by 2060—is because our rulers really do believe that the races are not only equal but that they’re interchangeable. Swap out the whites, swap in the Somalis and Jefferson’s America marches on.

The biology of race should be taught in fifth grade. Instead, students are taught the absurd fantasy that race doesn’t even exit.

So, if you wanted to fix what’s deeply, fatally wrong with this country, and you wanted to start by correcting just one factual delusion, a good place to start would be the basic facts about race.

Obviously, there’s opposition to the truth. All the blacks and Hispanics who swindle whites by trading on white guilt have a deep professional stake in the theory that white racism is the problem.

But the more serious opposition comes from all those whites who love to feel good about themselves by feeling bad about being white.

White people love to feel virtuous; that’s just the way they are. And the favorite liberal way to feel virtuous is to look down on other whites who are “racists.” It gives them a thrill. It’s like a snort of cocaine for them. If you told them, “No, actually there aren’t millions of racists out there for you to look down on,” white liberals would get the DTs, they’d get the shakes. They need white people to despise in order to feel good about themselves. And they are the most serious enemies of the truth.

Aside from the facts about Race and IQ, there is another piece of blindingly obvious reality that official America refuses to recognize. I was reminded of this in January when President Obama gave an interview at a website called Vox. They asked him if he didn’t think there was more racial polarization since he was elected rather than less.

Well, the leader of the free world did admit that Ferguson was worrying, but <>“over the long term, I'm pretty optimistic, and the reason is because this country is becoming more and more of a hodgepodge of folks. . . . you go to Tennessee and it turns out that you've got this huge Kurdish community.”

So black people are rioting, but Mr. Obama says I shouldn’t worry because Tennessee is filling up with Kurds. Whew. I feel so much better now.

But that’s the cuckoo official view: We’ve had a black/white race problem for 400 years, but we’re going to solve the problem by bringing in boatloads of Kurds! It’s the magic of diversity!

So this is the other utterly obvious fact that our defective country refuses to recognize: People prefer to be with people like themselves. Blacks like to be with blacks, Mexicans with Mexicans. And why does Tennessee have a nest of Kurds? Because Kurds like to hang out with other Kurds. Even liberals have to admit that the students in the lunch room sort themselves out very neatly by race. People don’t like diversity. They like homogeneity.

All around the world, the main reason people are killing each other is because of diversity. It’s because people of different races or languages or religions or nationalities are stuck together in the same territory. And yet we persist in this absurd and dangerous notion that America will be a great place if we just fill it up with people who are as unlike each other as possible.

So I’m talking about two really simple ideas: That races are different and people are tribal. These two ideas are obviously true, and necessary for our survival, and yet every institution in our country—public private, civil religious—fights these ideas as if they were the Satan and all his legions.

Why is it so hard to accept the obvious?

This wild persistence in believing diversity is a wonderful thing is especially hard to understand because, to quote Murray Rothbard, “no one, and I mean no one” actually practices diversity.

All these hymns to diversity are brazen hypocrisy. Even the most heavily certified, unimpeachable, Grade-A liberals avoid diversity just as much as we do. Look where they live. Look who their friends are.

You can get a sense of the depths of their hypocrisy if you try to imagine a world in which people have the usual craving for money and wealth, but it’s absolutely taboo to admit it. People maneuver all the time for more money, but they always have to pretend they had completely different motives. Money is just an “accident” a surprising side effect of what they did. If anyone actually admits he did something for the money, he’s shamed and stigmatized and banned from polite society.

I know it’s hard to imagine something as crazy as this, but I think it is an almost perfect analogy to the way liberals scheme their way around the race question. Their neighbors are white; their families are white, they work with white people, their dinner guests are white, their friends are white, they marry white people, but it’s all coincidence—an unfortunate coincidence, actually. They really, really wanted a life filled with fascinating Mexicans and intellectual black people and colorful, charming Kurds but, gosh, somehow it didn’t turn out that way.

It would be like someone saying, “Yes, I worked like hell to go to a good school and get into an investment bank and now I make $5 million a year. But believe me. It’s not about the money. I just love what I do. I’d do it even if it paid minimum wage.”

That’s liberals and race for you.

Their lives are guided by race and tribe right down to last night’s television program, but they would rather die than admit it.

Why is it so hard to get people to admit something that is universal and that they themselves practice all the time. As Sam Dickson points out, liberals need to learn from the hippies. They just need to get in touch with their feelings.

The fact is, we could base our survival on just one of these ideas—the idea that humans are tribal and that they are happier in their own homelands with their own people. Isn’t that enough? It’s enough for every non-white country.

And you could combine tribalism with conservation. Obscure species are worth preserving. The untouched people of the Amazon are worth preserving. The tribes of New Guinea are bio-socially unique and precious and are worth preserving. So are Korea or Ghana or Pakistan or Paraguay. These are valuable biological and culture entities. Well then, why not France or Sweden? Aren’t they biologically and culturally uniqe and worth preserving? What about America’s founding stock? What about Southerners? What about the Yankees in New England? Nope, you talk about preserving them, and you’re a straight up-and-down Nazi.

I don’t understand why the peoples of the West don’t have at least the same rights to biological and cultural continuity as the New Guinean highlanders. This position is completely consistent with liberal views on conservation and respecting the environment. But the rules that apply to the New Guineans and the Japanese and the Pakistanis and Vietnamese and the Venezuelans just don’t apply to white people.

There is a different approach that we can take to making the case for separation and survival. I was reminded of this when I read an opinion piece in the January 12 New York Times by Judith Butler, a “critical theory” specialist at UC Berkeley. She’s white by the way.

She was talking about police killings of black men, and mentioned cases like that of Eric Garner in New York, and she said this: “We can see the videos and know what is obviously true, but it is also obviously true that police and the juries that support them obviously do not see what is obvious, or do not wish to see.”

In other words, she thinks people like us are deliberately blind to the evidence. She concludes that black people are now “targeted and hunted by a police force that is becoming increasingly emboldened to wage its race war.”

Now, here is a person whom I would consider delusional pretty nearly to the point of insanity, but I’m sure she would think everyone in this room was delusional to the point of insanity. And I think she sees the world in exactly the same way the huge majority of blacks do.

Blacks and their white handlers really think they see oceans of racism. They believe the police are waging a race war. We, of course, see things differently. But at some point, it doesn’t matter who’s right and who’s wrong. If this were a marriage, it would be called “irreconcilable differences,” and it would be grounds for divorce.

We and they live in different worlds psychologically, and this makes it impossible for us to live in the same world physically.

When blacks and Hispanics insist on seeing things that aren’t there, the natural impulse is to try to explain why they’re wrong. I’ve spent years trying to do that. But, sometimes, when you’re up against the crazies, it’s a waste of time trying to explain anything.

For those people, we shouldn’t even try to talk them out of the idea that whites are uniquely, hopelessly racist. Instead, let them wallow in the idea, revel in it, preen themselves over it, and then propose the logical next step: If we are hopeless, the only solution is to let us go our own way. The anti-racists have been educating our children for generations, but white people are still seething with racism. This must mean we’re incurable. So what’s the solution? Separation. Put enough distance between us and all other people so that they are beyond the reach of our venom.

Isn’t that really what Judith Butler is saying? That whites are hopeless? Fine: consider us hopeless. We’ll build our society, and you and your black friends, you build yours. You don’t like the way we do police work? Fine. We’ll be responsible for our side of the line; you take care of you side.

That should be our position with the really crazed, incorrigible ones. If we’re incorrigible, you’re better off without us. Build your own neighborhoods and institutions and leave us to ours.

For 25 years, it has been the job of American Renaissance to try to inject some common sense into what is said about race in America. These ideas are making progress. There has never been a time since the suppression of common sense, that so many people have understood race. There’s evidence for this everywhere.

There’s something called the Manosphere, which is hugely popular among young men. It takes a grimly unromantic view of women, but it also takes race differences and tribalism for granted. The entire movement called “the dark enlightenment” is a mighty blast against orthodoxies of all kind, including racial orthodoxies. There are several influential, almost mainstream websites—such as Takimag and American Thinker that regularly laugh at racial orthodoxies. Even sites like World Net Daily and Breitbart and Christian News Network take a consistent line against mainstream foolishness even though they never cross the line into explicit racial consciousness. And I’m not even talking about the scores of websites that openly promote white racial identity.

The comments sections of newspapers are so full of sensible racial comments that liberals complain they may have to stop letting readers write comments. There are more sensible white people out there than ever.

But these numbers have yet to emerge from the Internet underground, so to speak. All these undeceived people are still in the shadows, leaderless, waiting to come face to face with each other and with our opponents.

How do you take all this intelligence and energy and forge it into a movement that does battle in the real world, whether through the political system or in some other way? I believe these are some of the questions that will be taken up in the debate after the coffee break. And as it may have dawned on some of you, I have just been laying out my view of what would constitute a minimal solution of the race problem: Widespread recognition of these two obvious, basic realities: racial differences and tribalism. And the question to be debated will be whether the political system can be used to achieve these goals.

I would like to conclude by reading a passage from one of my favorite books of history: Russia and the West Under Lenin and Stalin by George Kennan. I reread this book when I went to Russia, and I’d like to read to you what Kennan said about the early Bolsheviks. Let me point out that Kennan hated Communism and everything it stood for, but he was a shrewd judge of men.

I quote:

“It was a startling experience for European diplomats and businessmen, after long immersion in the Western society of the day—where the accent was so extensively on individualism, on personal vanity, on social rivalry and snobbishness—to encounter men who had a burning social faith and were relentless and incorruptible in the pursuit of it.”

“The Soviet leaders knew what they wanted; they worked day and night to carry it into effect; they gave no thought to themselves. They demanded discipline from others; they accepted it for themselves. In their seriousness of purpose, in the forthright simplicity of their behavior, in their refusal to bother about nonessentials, in their contemptuous rejection of personal considerations to the needs of the movement, in their willingness to get their hands dirty in the interests of the cause, for those who saw this first hand, the impression was unforgettable.”

Alas, not even our friends will say such things about any of us, but those are the qualities of men who make history. The Bolshviks had the dedication and force of will to overthrow an empire. It is our goal to overthrow an empire of deceit.

The Bolsheviks devoted their lives to a cause that was a tyrannical, murderous dead end, and yet they did so with a tenacity and faithfulness for which George Kennan, their bitter enemy, had the highest admiration.

How much easier should it not be for us to throw ourselves into a cause we know is not only right and beautiful but necessary for the preservation of everything we love. There is no greater faithfulness to our heritage than to work to ensure that we will have not just a heritage but also a destiny. A destiny for our children and for their children for ever.

We are the Paul Reveres of our time, riding through the streets of the entire Western World, shouting “White man, wake up!” And we must ride and we must shout until our people do wake up. And once they do, if we set the example, they will fight. They will fight for the right to be us, because only we can be us.