rationalpassion (![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} rationalpassion) wrote,@ 2008-05-12 11:39:00 |
|
Auster Responds
Lawrence Auster responds to my post. It is a very brief reply, so I'll quote it in its entirety:
"There is a critical article about me at the Randian website Rational Passion that readers may find of interest. The blogger and his commenters are under the impression that they have refuted and dispensed with my arguments on race and the racism charge, when they have done nothing of the kind. I had corrected Siri Carpenter’s misunderstanding of Jesse Jackson’s famous comment about being afraid of black youth, and I gave the correct meaning of Jackson’s statement, which was that black youth are more dangerous than white youth, not (as Carpenter imagined) that Jackson felt guilty for thinking that black youth are more dangerous than white youth. In the best libertarian/liberal manner, the blogger at Rational Passion piously castigates me for not understanding that black youth 'are individuals and must be judged as such”! But it was Jackson who was making the racial generalization, not I. The issue in my blog entry on Carpenter article was the correct understanding of Jackson’s statement. So the writer at RP has misconstrued me, as badly as Siri Carpenter misconstrued Jackson. Are there any liberals/libertarians under 40 who can read?
"There’s more in the RP discussion about what a dangerous, racist, 'insane' influence I am, and I may post something further on it."
Well, if he wants to post more about me, he is free to do so. But while one can argue that I misinterpreted his post--I don't think I did, but I'm not going to argue the point--Auster's views on race are no secret. See, for example, this post, in which he says, among other things:
"I have never said that black people have no place in the West. But blacks are racially different from whites, they do have lesser civilizational abilities than whites, and therefore the more blacks there are in relation to whites in a society, or the more power blacks have, or the more whites accommodate black sensibilities or seek to make racial outcomes equal, the more the society is going to go downhill. My position on race relations in Ameica is that whites need to be the majority and to behave as the majority, as I wrote in my article, 'What is European America?'"
Everyone who is willing to respect individual rights has a place in the West--in America in particular--regardless of race. The assumption--more blacks means more black power means more kowtowing to black sensibilities (as opposed to "white sensibilities"?) means doom--is racist because it treats blacks and whites as collectives, not imprecise and, in most contexts, useless classifications of individuals.
And in the comments on said article, which Auster reproduces here, he writes:
"It’s a mark of how far we’ve declined as a society that a view that would have been endorsed as the common sense understanding of most Americans and all major American political leaders up to the mid 20th century--that America is a creation of the white race, and that the white race represents something uniquely valuable in history as well as being our own race to which we ought naturally to have some attachment--is now seen as utterly repugnant, inconceivably disgusting. Think of the reversal of values that has been worked by modern liberalism and conservatism that has brought us to this point. Today, a person who endorses race and immigration policies that are leading to the marginalization and extinction of the white race--and with the white race, its entire culture--is a good person. But a person who says that the white race and its civilization ought to be defended from marginalization and extinction, is an evil person. With the charge of evil waiting for them if they speak up, no wonder Americans are afraid to debate immigration publicly, even though a majority of them would like the present third-world immigration drastically reduced."
People are individuals. America is a creation of the Founding Fathers, not "the white race."
These are not isolated, out-of-context attributions. But notice the conclusion of the last Auster quote: people are not speaking out about their desire to dramatically reduce immigration out of fear. That's just what I said about left-liberals in my previous post: the "agree with us or you're a racist" mentality that is so widespread on the left is driving opponents of the left to agree with Auster's noxious views on race and immigration, even though his "racial realism" is a recipe for balkanization and hatred without end.
Lawrence Auster responds to my post. It is a very brief reply, so I'll quote it in its entirety:
"There is a critical article about me at the Randian website Rational Passion that readers may find of interest. The blogger and his commenters are under the impression that they have refuted and dispensed with my arguments on race and the racism charge, when they have done nothing of the kind. I had corrected Siri Carpenter’s misunderstanding of Jesse Jackson’s famous comment about being afraid of black youth, and I gave the correct meaning of Jackson’s statement, which was that black youth are more dangerous than white youth, not (as Carpenter imagined) that Jackson felt guilty for thinking that black youth are more dangerous than white youth. In the best libertarian/liberal manner, the blogger at Rational Passion piously castigates me for not understanding that black youth 'are individuals and must be judged as such”! But it was Jackson who was making the racial generalization, not I. The issue in my blog entry on Carpenter article was the correct understanding of Jackson’s statement. So the writer at RP has misconstrued me, as badly as Siri Carpenter misconstrued Jackson. Are there any liberals/libertarians under 40 who can read?
"There’s more in the RP discussion about what a dangerous, racist, 'insane' influence I am, and I may post something further on it."
Well, if he wants to post more about me, he is free to do so. But while one can argue that I misinterpreted his post--I don't think I did, but I'm not going to argue the point--Auster's views on race are no secret. See, for example, this post, in which he says, among other things:
"I have never said that black people have no place in the West. But blacks are racially different from whites, they do have lesser civilizational abilities than whites, and therefore the more blacks there are in relation to whites in a society, or the more power blacks have, or the more whites accommodate black sensibilities or seek to make racial outcomes equal, the more the society is going to go downhill. My position on race relations in Ameica is that whites need to be the majority and to behave as the majority, as I wrote in my article, 'What is European America?'"
Everyone who is willing to respect individual rights has a place in the West--in America in particular--regardless of race. The assumption--more blacks means more black power means more kowtowing to black sensibilities (as opposed to "white sensibilities"?) means doom--is racist because it treats blacks and whites as collectives, not imprecise and, in most contexts, useless classifications of individuals.
And in the comments on said article, which Auster reproduces here, he writes:
"It’s a mark of how far we’ve declined as a society that a view that would have been endorsed as the common sense understanding of most Americans and all major American political leaders up to the mid 20th century--that America is a creation of the white race, and that the white race represents something uniquely valuable in history as well as being our own race to which we ought naturally to have some attachment--is now seen as utterly repugnant, inconceivably disgusting. Think of the reversal of values that has been worked by modern liberalism and conservatism that has brought us to this point. Today, a person who endorses race and immigration policies that are leading to the marginalization and extinction of the white race--and with the white race, its entire culture--is a good person. But a person who says that the white race and its civilization ought to be defended from marginalization and extinction, is an evil person. With the charge of evil waiting for them if they speak up, no wonder Americans are afraid to debate immigration publicly, even though a majority of them would like the present third-world immigration drastically reduced."
People are individuals. America is a creation of the Founding Fathers, not "the white race."
These are not isolated, out-of-context attributions. But notice the conclusion of the last Auster quote: people are not speaking out about their desire to dramatically reduce immigration out of fear. That's just what I said about left-liberals in my previous post: the "agree with us or you're a racist" mentality that is so widespread on the left is driving opponents of the left to agree with Auster's noxious views on race and immigration, even though his "racial realism" is a recipe for balkanization and hatred without end.
