Saturday, January 19, 2019

antiracism at home, racism abroad

A subject I’ve touched on before is the extraordinary hypocrisy of the modern West. In our domestic policy we have elevated antiracism to the status of a state religion. But when it comes to our relations with foreign countries, countries which are sovereign states, our policy seems to be one of hysterical xenophobia and even out-and-out racism.

We go into paroxysms of guilt at the thought that a non-white person’s feelings might be hurt in our own countries but we think nothing of bombing non-white countries that have the temerity to want to run their own countries their own way. And we never stop lecturing foreigners on how they ought to treat their own citizens, even as the West becomes more and more a cultural and moral sewer.

Peter Hitchens offers an interesting recent example.

A British citizen has been arrested in Singapore for drug trafficking. He visited Singapore and knowingly and deliberately broke the laws of that country. As a result he is likely to be punished by flogging. That’s the penalty under Singapore’s laws. The fact that Singapore has tough laws and actually enforces them is well known, and should certainly have been known to a young man who was expensively educated at a fancy school in Britain. Now the British government is protesting. How dare Singapore presume to have its own laws and presume to expect people visiting Singapore to obey those laws! How dare Singapore presume to have different laws from Britain!

Whether one thinks that flogging drug dealers is a good idea or a bad idea is immaterial. This is Singapore and the fellow was given a fair trial and convicted in a Singaporean court. Whether the British government approves or disapproves of Singapore’s laws is irrelevant. Britain should mind its own business. But it won’t.

Similar things have happened in Australia. The Australian government has in the past protested when Australian citizens have been tried and convicted in Indonesian courts and then sentenced under Indonesian law, for offences committed on Indonesian soil.

There is a breathtaking degree of arrogance involved. There is an assumption that only western values and western laws and western ways of doing things are valid. The West assumes it has the right to impose its values on the non-western world.

No wonder non-western countries despise the West.

If we want to argue that we in the West should be allowed to retain our own nations and our own cultures then we do need to take a long hard look at our behaviour towards other people’s cultures. If we believe that we deserve to be permitted to cherish our cultural values then we need to accept other people’s rights to cherish their cultures, even if we don’t happen to like some aspects of those cultures. It isn’t our business. The days when western nations would routinely send a gunboat to bully non-westerners into doing what they’re told should be behind us.

As Steve Sailer never tires of pointing out, we need to stop Inviting the World but that can’t happen until we stop Invading the World. And we need to stop imposing our cultural values on the world.


  1. The Left - i.e. the mainstream modern West - is defined by what it is against; there is no coherence to what it is for.

    And what it is against is God specifcially, and The Good in general.

    1. And what it is against is God specifically, and The Good in general.

      It's interesting that the obsessive domestic policy antiracism and the foreign policy racism, even though they seem to be opposed, are both negative destructive impulses. Both in their own way are based on hate. So yes, both can be said to be motivated by hatred of the Good.

  2. I object! I think the West respects Saudi Arabia, its culture and customs, quite well!

  3. The ironic thing is that our belief in the universal supremacy of our values is precisely why we can no longer stand up for ourselves.

    All excesses end up turning into their opposite - the belief that we are better than everyone becomes easily the belief that we are uniquely bad. Communists become fascists, etc. Extremes meet.

    What if we were moderate. We are not uniquely bad but neither are only our values valid. Maybe then we can simply have healthy self respect without seeking to dominate others.

    And the belief that only our values are valid comes of course from Christianity - and most Christians today still think that. A militant, proselytizing religion has given us bad mental habits.

    Christian bloggers still write about how Christianity is fated to take over the world, or the world must accept Christianity, etc.

    The mental disease of wishing to dominate others has become the disease of humiliating ourselves before others.

    The basic sin is to see the world divided into Good vs Evil - then it becomes just a matter of filling in the categories. Today you're good, tomorrow you're evil.

    But what if we take the moderate position and say all sorts of things are a bit good and others a bit bad - instead of a cosmic fight, you accept the world more, you seek less to dominate others or life, and don't feel the need to either hate others or hate yourself.

    You accept your self and life.