Two essays about White people

The first essay discusses rising death rates among middle-age Whites and sort of concludes that they deserve it. When I saw the piece was by Barbara Ehrenreich, I clicked on it immediately because I usually enjoy her work. Not this time. I think the essay, Dead, White, and Blue The Great Die-Off of America’s Blue Collar Whites, is terrible. If you read it, I urge you to look at the comments, many of which refute her points very well.

The second essay, The Nation Publishes Ethnically Motivated Anti-White Hate Propaganda Screed, is a response by Guillaume Durocher to an essay that appeared in The Nation magazine.

Durocher’s piece reads somewhat like the comments following Ehrenreich’s. A basic point is that White people as a group have needs and interests and that they should be allowed to speak about them without being called “supremacists.” (At the time of this posting, there are no comments under Durocher’s essay.)

I have written about White identity on this site once, making the point that:

I see nothing wrong with White identity or White identity groups, especially defensive identity groups that want to conserve and promote the values and culture of White people, who can be defined as people of predominantly European extraction.

The issues discussed in Durocher’s and Ehrenreich’s essays are well-worth thinking about and discussing with friends. I doubt they will be settled soon or that they can be reasonably summarized in a few sentences. I raise these issues because they are important and controversy can be a good thing, especially when it is resolved peacefully through words.

___________________

Edit 12/07/15: National Data: November Jobs—Americans Lose Ground As Immigrant Job Displacement Ties Obama-Era Record

3 thoughts on “Two essays about White people

  1. The civil rights movement like a lot of movements promised salvation but has turned into self-indulgent tribalistic status posturing. I have a dream that everyone is equal except for the civil rights heroes who alone should be able to define the correct views on status, race, public policy concerning intelligence, property rights, freedom of association, gender, sexual expression, sexual and familial organization, wages, prices, hiring and promotion policy in private organizations raised with private money, credit analysis, and much else besides. Why cant private individuals decide these things? Let’s Talk about civil rights supremacism not white supremacism.

    1. (Below is an answer from Peter Frost on an article on psychopathy. I think it fits here quite well. There is no permalink to his comment, but it can be found here: http://www.unz.com/comments/commenter/Peter+Frost/)

      Q: So is the real question how big and how coherent our in-group is? Modern civilization attempts to dissolve traditional small-group loyalties and make us all good citizens of the state. But is the cost that we start to regard everyone else as out-group members?

      Peter Frost: This is what’s happening with many white Americans. They have long had a weak sense of kinship while organizing themselves collectively at a broader community level. Unfortunately, those collective institutions have been either taken over by the government or forced to comply with principles of “fairness.” As a result, they no longer have any way to defend themselves collectively.

      This is not the case with other groups. They’re used to organizing collectively at the level of the family or kin group. They feel no guilt or shame over favoritism because for them it’s perfectly normal.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s