The Richwine Atrocity: How Come Only the Left Retrieves Its Wounded?

William H. Regnery, VDARE, May 28, 2013

I have an unusual personal perspective on the Jason Richwine atrocity. William F. Buckley’s breakthrough book was his first, God and Man at Yale. In the early 1950s, he scoured Manhattan for a publisher, without success. This caused him to go far afield and contact a small Midwestern house then located in a walk-up office in a Chicago suburb. The publisher was my uncle, Henry Regnery.

And the rest is history—save for two incidents.

The book not only made Buckley’s reputation but also certainly added luster to my uncle’s struggling firm. However, the Henry Regnery Co. suffered an offsetting financial blow when, at the behest of Mortimer Adler, the contract to publish the Great Books series for the University of Chicago was withdrawn because of the Buckley book.

Regnery issued Buckley’s next book, McCarthy and His Enemies, co-authored with his brother-in-law, Brent Bozell. But there would be no hat trick. By then, Buckley was a bankable literary commodity and could cut a better deal with an established New York house. So he did.

My uncle was a kinder sort than I am, and I remember him recounting the break without rancor and more the kind of bemusement that implied “that’s just Bill…”

I had a darker take on Buckley’s selfishness and treachery, which was borne out by subsequent events. But unfortunately, Buckley’s traits are now dominant in what calls “Conservatism Inc.” or the “Respectable Right.” In this respect, perhaps Buckley was indeed, as we are incessantly told, “the father of modern conservatism.”

Dr. Richwine has been defended by my friends who inhabit the guerilla outposts of the Dissident Right. They are right to blast Richwine’s Cultural Marxist oppressors, but they overlook an important asymmetry between the two sides. The Left may savagely attack their perceived enemies, but they consistently stay loyal to one another.  As the saying goes, they retrieve their wounded. The Right, on the other hand, is filled with people who will, out of cowardice or cynicism, betray their colleagues when the going gets tough.

“No Enemies To The Left” was not an idle promise restricted to the French Left. Leftists hardly ever abandon a comrade on the field of battle. The association between Barack Obama and the admitted terrorists Bill Ayers and his wife Bernardine Dohrn has never been disavowed by the President. The inflammatory positions held by his long-time Chicago pastor Jeremiah Wright have been spun into irrelevancy.

By comparison, those on the other side of the aisle are forever slashing at their right flank.

Buckley had perhaps the most notches on his quill. The excommunication of Robert Welch was succeeded by demeaning the feisty libertarian Murray Rothbard, and then on to many of Buckley’s own colleagues: first, Joe Sobran, to be followed by Peter Brimelow, and John O’Sullivan. In the end, Buckley’s entire intellectual cohort was replaced as Catholic conservatives and paleocons were switched out for GOP publicists and a collection of ex-Trotskyites and Scoop Jackson Democrats who had purloined the name “conservative.”

Buckley’s behavior instructed a generation, not the least of whom were his successors, as demonstrated by their axing in 2012 of long-time writer John Derbyshire.

But there are many other examples, some long forgotten. Thus soon after becoming Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich made fellow Georgia academic Christina Jeffrey “Congressional Historian.”Forthwith, the Left surfaced a classroom comment, which, taken out of context, converted a contextualizing aside into a rationalization for the Third Reich. Gingrich dispatched her with haste. Jeffrey was eventually exonerated, but her dismissal indelibly marked her as an unsavory footnote in history.

My friend Samuel T. Francis, a History PhD from the University of North Carolina, had his award-winning editorial career truncated by another alleged conservative, Wes Pruden  of  The Washington Times, which proclaims itself as the conservative voice in the Capital. The paper first demoted and then fired Sam. Truth was not at issue but stepping on Leftist sensibilities was. In an obituary memorable for its pixels of journalistic pornography, David Mastio [Twitter] who the same paper later made deputy editorial page editor, declared, “Sam Francis was merely a racist and doesn’t deserved to be remembered as anything else…America is a better place without him.” [Francis re-fought immoral battles of 1964,Washington Examiner, February 22, 2005]

And then there’s my own experience. As a freshman at Penn, I became a member of the Intercollegiate Society of Individualists (now Intercollegiate Studies Institute or ISI) in the fall of 1960. For more than 45 years, I was continuously associated with the organization as an employee, donor, and trustee—until my own encounter with Political Correctness. In the spring of 2006, I was removed involuntarily from the board by a vote of 15 yea, 2 nay, and 2 abstentions. My infractions of orthodoxy involved delving into group differences and cognitive heritability.

I had known many of the hanging jury for going on half a century. Chief among them: then-Heritage Foundation president Ed Feulner, Dick Allen, Ken Cribb and the late Charlie Hoefflich. The others were the usual suspects: a politically connected DC lawyer, southern dilettante, sunshine general, a clutch of Beltway types, and a smattering of tenured academics. Of the lesser lights, our working relationship went back 15-25 years.

Since then, I have had never a comment in postscript from any of “my friends and colleagues.” But other than a late-in-life lesson of fraternal treachery, the incident only raised my hackles.

Now comes the matter of Dr. Jason Richwine. Hired by the Heritage Foundation in 2010 as a newly minted PhD. from Harvard, he was forced into a very public resignation in 2013 because, not his work at Heritage but the unrelated topic of his years-old dissertationimmigration and IQ—was suddenly the object of Leftist Two Minute Hate.

All readers are familiar with this atrocity—to paraphrase Mae West, “Truth had nothing to do with it.”

I do think it’s pertinent, however, to consider the damage done to Dr.  Richwine personally. Dr. Richwine is in his early 30s and married with two young children. The nature of his research makes an academic future problematic, and the behavior of Heritage will always cast a pall on his reputation. Long after the specifics of the incident are forgotten, Heritage’s peremptory action will serve as shorthand for some sort of culpability—much as Joe McCarthy’s censure by the Senate obscures the validity of his charges.

Even if it lacked the courage to stand firm, Heritage could have opted to succor the Richwine family by managing his departure. He could have been put on a sabbatical to do independent research. This would have thrown a scalp to the stalkers, provided financial support for his wife and children, and given him time to find another perch.

To put into perspective, consider that in 2012 the Heritage raised $82,000,000.00, spent $80,000,000.00 and in 2011, the last year reported, its “rainy day” fund stood at $143,231,547.00 If, say, the courageous treatment of Dr. Richwine cost 10 percent in lost contributions, likely a high figure, the organization could tap its war chest and continue to spend at its present rate for 18 years.

President Jim DeMint and the board of The Heritage Foundation stand convicted of, in Madeline Albright’s indelicate vernacular,having no cojones. But this seems to be an evolutionary determined necessity for putative right-wingers who seek extended stays and handsome sinecures along the Potomac.

As a thought experiment, consider a stillborn Heritage in 1972. In its absence, how would the condition of the Republic be much changed?

After all the public relations hype, policy papers, and marginal legislative victories, what good is an organization that will not stand up for the most basic and hard-won of Western political rights, untrammeled inquiry and free expression—be it right or (and more to the point) wrong?

With the Left ascendant and Political Correctness policing the national discourse, the Heritage Foundation’s further demonizing of dissent amounts to a copycat crime.

The actions of Heritage are the work of humans and not robots. The buck not only stops with President DeMint and founder Dr. Edwin Feulner but runs through the Board of Directors:

  • Thomas A. Saunders III
  • Richard M. Scaife
  • J. Frederic Rench
  •  Meg Allen
  • Larry P. Arnn
  • The Hon. Belden H. Bell
  • Midge Decter
  • Steve Forbes
  • Todd W. Herrick
  • Jerry Hume
  • Kay Coles James
  • The Hon. J. William Middendorf II
  • Abby Moffat,
  • Dr. Nersi Nazari
  • Robert Pennington
  • Anthony J. Saliba
  • William E. Simon, Jr.
  • Brian Tracy
  • Phillip N. Truluck
  • Barb Van Andel-Gaby
  • Marion Wells.

When the Black Book of Political Correctness is written about the intellectual inquisitions of this era, those who animate ISI and Heritage will be listed as secondary enablers. Not in the sense of Bernardo Gui and Cotton Mather, but in the manner of an Urban VIII.

Reciting odes to the “Western Canon” is no substitute for its tough application, which often puts the messenger in harm’s way. What I trust will not be lost to future historians is the context of their hypocritical bloviating.

Dogs are born to chase bikes and cats. The Left is similarly constituted to pursue the totalitarian chimera of universal equality. Missionary work is lost on this crowd.

But those who claim to “stand athwart history“—but in fact aren’t willing to risk the pleasant lifestyles for the truth—should be held to account. Those who further soil themselves by not accepting truth as an ultimate defense and revile those who seek it should be revealed and reproached.

Harry Reid would never abuse a kindred spirit the way Newt Gingrich savaged Christina Jeffrey. Media Matters would never cashier a researcher for, say, proposing to test students for an Authoritarian Personality Syndrome.

There is honor among thieves. It merits the respect and emulation of honest folk as well.

Topics: ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Ageofknowledge

    The left is diverse and can’t ever seem to come to agreement on anything that benefits the nations of Western Civilization at least any longer; however, throw a rock into their midst and they will stand against you united.

    Meanwhile, the right tears itself to pieces. Who are the number one victim of white nationalists? The correct answer is white people.

    • sbuffalonative

      The Left knows that all they have to do is hold their ground for a few days and the story will fade into the background or be replaced by another issue.

      The Right, on the other hand, fold immediately. They even RUSH to acquiesce.

      You don’t even have to put up a defense for goodness sake, All you have to do is WAIT a couple days and the storm will subside.

      Also, it’s best not to quickly defend or react to your position which is what the Right does. In doing so, they only make matters worse.

      Be quiet and let the storm pass.

    • Freey’all

      Thanks for pointing this out. There’s something very sick in this movement. I’ve seen posters spontaneously offering up white women who they consider ‘feminists’ – without even defining the term – on the altar of Diversity for all kinds of sadistic punishments. Further, there’s an ethos here that it’s not sufficient to be pro-white to avoid such castigation; one has to hew to every point of race realism or white nationalist dogma to be considered loyal or worthy.

      Pro-white is pro-white, for the most part, and the sooner people realize we’re stronger for supporting a broad, varied and inclusive coalition of pro-white beliefs the better. The RR/WN Inquisition is almost as absolutist and draconian as the PC one.

    • Exoplanet Finder

      We used to stand united too. It was called the Color Line, both in America and in Pre-WWI Europe and its colonies.

  • Gwynn Ap Nudd

    Great article. These folks have their marching orders. Sure they stand opposed to the Left, but as the Left marches forward, they have mastered the art of walking backwards in synch.

  • Robert Binion

    William F. Buckley and Emily Dickinson never had to hammer out a living among a molasses of blacks “wid de rings like Liberace.”

    • ATBOTL

      I believe the original line was “all jeweled like Liberace.”

  • Old Right

    How come only the Left retrieves its wounded? The Right retrieves its wounded, too. Many of those you’re characterizing as “Right” really aren’t. The Right stands for small government, states’ powers, traditional Judeo-Christian values, our English common-law legal foundation and minding our own business. There’s nothing conservative about “neoconservatism,” and the sooner those of us on the Right wake up and come to grips with that, the better.

    Joseph Sobran said it so well:

    If you’re for warfare, you’re a conservative.
    If you’re for welfare, you’re a liberal.
    If you’re for both, you’re a moderate.
    If you’re for neither, you’re an extremist.

    RIP, Joe.

    • Gwynn Ap Nudd

      A true American Patriot wouldn’t have fought in any of the wars in this century as per the words of the Founding Fathers. For warfare? What, Where, Why, and for Whom? I love Sobran and it’s a witty four lines. But don’t make it out to be more profound than it is. There were huge Anti-War protests before both World Wars. But ordinary Americans and Patriots protesting War doesn’t fit the narrative so it was deleted down the memory hole.

      • Sick of it

        Yeah, it’s hard to find people lining up behind the new war around the world without any useful purpose thing. Especially now that the wars are benefiting al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.

        Re: the world wars..umm why did we waste our people’s lives for The British and French empires? Call me an old-fashioned American isolationist who doesn’t believe in entangling alliances (much like George Washington).

    • JSS

      Awesome quote. Will use it often from now on.

    • So CAL Snowman

      There is nothing Judeo about traditional American values. I am beyond sick of seeing this Judeo-Christian nonsense. Although I do agree with you that many that are characterized as “Right” really are not . . . Ann Coulter I’m looking at you.

    • Sean

      I have no small amount of distaste for the phrase “Judeo-Christian”. I respect what you are saying but if we can stand united against hyphenating Americans then why bastardize our religious heritage as well?

      I mean no offense of course, just the idea of “returning to Judeo-Christian values” is itself rendered wrong by the context of history within the USA because the Judeo piece of that phrase seems to be a very recent addition.

    • George

      This “Judeo-Christian values” rubs me the wrong way.
      We should forget Judeo and just say Christian.
      I definitely dont want Judeo values in my life.

    • WR_the_realist

      Yes, those four sentences describe Ron Paul as well as Joe Sobran. Against both warfare and welfare, Ron Paul has indeed been labeled an extremist.

      • Against both warfare and welfare, but fundamentally denies race and is for open borders? A country that doesn’t do warfare, welfare and border control won’t be a country for long. OTOH, Joe Sobran mostly recognized the reality of race for just about all of his productive life.

        • WR_the_realist

          Ron Paul is more lax on immigration issues than I would like but I wouldn’t say he for open borders. I don’t believe he would have voted for the illegal alien amnesty bill. Unfortunately his son will.

          It is true that on the matter of average racial differences Ron Paul turns a blind eye. Of course in a truly libertarian society racial differences would have fewer egregious consequences. You could hire whom you want, serve what customers you want, and associate (or not) with whom you want. When the inevitable group differences in outcomes occur there would be no government agency declaring it a “problem” to be solved with government coercion.

          • Son still might vote against the GBof8 bill, (but said on This Week with the Greek this past Sunday that he would vote for it if only it had MORE work visas), but still make it clear that he wants an amnesty bill of some sort.

            As far as father, well, someone who opposes having real border security because it would “trap us in” (as if anyone other than a thug on the lam or other sort of neer-do-well actually wants to flee TO Mexico) is someone who isn’t on our side on immigration.

            Now that I think about it, I now realize that where Rand is now on race and immigration issues is where Ron would be right now if he would have become President. Son is merely continuing the father’s apparent leftward march.

          • WR_the_realist

            I don’t assume Rand and Ron have identical positions. I have to say, I knew Rand favored that horrible immigration bill but am surprised that he wants even *more* work visas. That’s too bad, on many issues Rand Paul is pretty good, but that one is a deal breaker for me. If Rand gets the next Republican nomination for president I’ll have to vote third party *again*.

          • I think I figured out why Rand is so hung up over more and more work visas. Think of an industry obviously related with the state of Kentucky that requires a lot of stoop type labor. Certain archons of that industry would like that labor to be as low cost as possible.

            I have read in V-Dare that Lexington and surrounding areas are filling up fast with Hispanics. Not just for horse farms, but also because the University of Kentucky’s grounds work is probably outsourced to some third party firm like Top Care that loves to hire Hispanics on the EL CHEAPO.

          • Realist

            To say he is for open borders is to say that someone who can choose to either allow or not allow a stranger on to his property is for allowing that person on his property.

  • The__Bobster

    It’s always ticked me off that we eat our own at the behest of the leftists. Meanwhile, Dan Rather and Sandinista Sam can always find a job.

  • joemcgee

    The Richwine Atrocity: How Come Only the Left Retrieves Its Wounded?
    At this point in time, this is completely irrelevant. We’re far beyond academia, who were/are never known for their ability to stand up for their beliefs. These people are all talkers and nothing more. That includes our enemies. When it comes to the inevitable shedding of blood, none of these characters will be found anywhere.

    • Sick of it

      They have trained soldiers from the military, civilian agencies, cartels, gangs, etc. As stated, we continue to throw each other under the bus.

      • joemcgee

        I’m talking about academics in general. Not the sort of people to look to for support when the going gets rough.

        • Sick of it

          Some of them used to be a part of the weather underground and other radical groups who know how to use explosives.

  • Snowhitey

    Most of today’s conservatives are mere extensions of the Left. Whether it is the folks at Heritage or the folks at Fox, the true meaning of conservative does not apply.

    A rare breed, the true conservative is a noble man on an honorable mission to defend his identity, his heritage, his culture, his beliefs, his family, and his faith against all enemies. He is consistent and makes no excuse for what he is or what he believes in. He seeks no wealth, no fame, or no privilege for his actions. His prize is larger and far more valuable. And the two things a true conservative never is… he will never, ever be red and he is never, ever yellow.

    • Morris LeChat

      Buckley was an extension of the left, everything he did or said had to be couched in “intellectualism”. Plain talk was beneath him.

  • Jackryanvb

    Rey sad, depressing and true.

    Buckley personifies the Post World War II Conservative movement – just out for his own $, his own ego. Always willing to throw an honest White man under the bus for daring to speak up for the legitimate rights of our people.

    • OlderWoman

      I never liked Buckley. He was pretentious.

      • As you can read below, I have an aversion to theories about political movements and ideologies being compromised by nefarious forces swooping down on them from high, especially if there is a better explanation. However, if there’s a chance of any such story being true, it is that TPTB basically used Buckley as a battering ram to ruin/neutralize the American right wing. I have read credible accusations of Buckley being CIA.

        People made a big deal of his son, James Buckley, endorsing Obama, not long after Bill Buckley died. I just happen to think that James is now where Bill would have been right now now if he would still be living. Son is just continuing father’s tradition of moving the right leftward.

        • Sick of it

          He’s not the only example of such. Of course, I DO believe in nefarious forces in the form of a multi-century conspiracy on the part of the Tudor family, whose enemies were conveniently wiped off the map, piece by piece. Their clan has employed the Rothschilds for centuries and is also a part of the Bilderberger group. Unfortunately, some of my own family helped to keep them in power during the War of the Roses.

        • Seek

          Buckley’s son is named Christopher. James Buckley is the name of his former U.S. senator brother and also one of his nephews.

        • Seek

          Well, Buckley was CIA. This is hardly a secret. His boss in Mexico City was none other than E. Howard Hunt.

  • Tim_in_Indiana

    Unfortunately, the corruption known as “political correctness.” the shuffling and scraping to appease the race-denying left, runs at all levels of society. The sickness that’s rotting white nations wouldn’t have gotten as far as it has if it didn’t.

  • Anon

    What part about “controlled opposition” in unclear about conservatism? It’s not sick. It’s not dysfunctional. It’s adherents are not “betraying” nor even turning on eachother.

    Conservatism is a manufactured meme designed specifically to disempower whites. Joining with the conservative movement is no more wise than a radical, violent, white extremist joining a local white supremacist organization. Over half in attendance and 100% of the leadership are government agents looking to arrest, if not outright assassinate the other half.

    Over half of “conservatives” and 100% of their leadership are communist plants, looking to document, dissipate, discredit or otherwise control/destroy those who join such a movement in good faith.

    I can’t even say treason is our main problem as those doing these things are true believers. True radicals willing to form their entire lives around playing this role.

    • Over half of “conservatives” and 100% of their leadership are communist plants

      I think we can do without that kind of rhetoric. It’s not any more complicated than the fact that lamestream conservatism is fundamentally egalitarian-Lincolnian at its root. Lamestream conservatives will have just about the same core reaction as liberals to the Jason Richwines and Charles Murrays and Jared Taylors of the world because they both share the same premises of racial equality.

      • Jefferson

        The irony is that even lamestream pro-amnesty “conservatives” like Sean Hannity and Karl Rove are still labeled as “racists” by many left wingers, even though there is not a single racially aware bone in the bodies of Hannity and Rove.

      • WR_the_realist

        Lincoln was hardly an egalitarian. He opposed slavery (as do I) but had no illusions about the equality of the races. The one time he met with blacks while in the White House was to discuss the matter of resettling blacks in Africa.

        • Sherman_McCoy

          I also oppose slavery, as blacks are just as useless as slaves as they are at anything else.

        • Fighting_Northern_Spirit

          The one time he met with blacks while in the White House was to discuss the matter of resettling blacks in Africa.
          Yes, and at the same time that he was meekly reporting to Congress that he had approached blacks and found they had very little interest in returning to Africa (or being relocated to Latin America), he was engaging in a fratricidal war against his White brothers in the South. While he was not an egalitarian it’s true, he had no problem with using force on the White South, yet he wanted to get the consent of blacks. Can you spot what’s wrong with that picture? Granted it’s hard to say what he would’ve done if he had lived, but his actions in life were not encouraging.

          • WR_the_realist

            I’m not making excuses for the atrocities of the Civil War, nor for Lincoln’s assaults on the constitution. I am merely pointing out the fact that Lincoln was no egalitarian. By today’s standards Lincoln and 99% of white northerners of that time would be labeled incorrigible racists. Racial egalitarianism is much more recent than the Civil War. Few people in the 1930s were racial egalitarians. It is much more accurate to say that the social revolution of the 60s was a reaction against Naziism. Peter Brimelow accurately stated that our immigration policy since the mid 60s is Hitler’s revenge against America.

          • Fighting_Northern_Spirit

            I didn’t mean to imply that you were making apologies for him, and if it came across that way, I apologize. The point I was trying to make is that it doesn’t matter what a politician says, or even what he is. All that matters is what he does.

        • What Lincoln himself was or was not, (and he was all over the map as far as that goes, typical whore politician), is irrelevant. What is relevant is that racial egalitarianism is the net consequence of his life’s work and public legacy.

  • je suis paganisme

    Could this “treachery” be just a lack of creativity? Conservatives, in general, are not creative or artistic.
    Creative and artistic people are “intuitives” as opposed to “sensorys”, which most conservatives seem to be.
    Intuitives have a greater breadth of vision, and can see more possibilities in a given situation. That is why they are creative.
    Conservatives are generally wooden-headed and hate creatives. For some reason, they are threatened by us. ‘Tis a pity; we could be quite valuable.

    • Could this “treachery” be just a lack of creativity?

      Partially, yes.

      • Robert Binion

        Just like race, “time” does not exist.

        • Only for the living.

          • Robert Binion

            Though abus-ed, I lay supine, stared at the sky and knew that something was terribly wrong.

    • WR_the_realist

      I don’t think the actions of mainstream conservative groups are due to a lack of creativity. They are due to a lack of integrity and a lack of honor — two attributes in which conservatives like to imagine they are superior to liberals.

    • Fighting_Northern_Spirit

      You obviously know some personality theory, but you’ve missed the mark. There are plenty of creative conservatives. NTs and NFs dominate the intellectual vanguards of both Right and Left. While it’s true that SJs tend to be more conservative, they also tend to be basically non-political.

      • je suis paganisme

        I respect your opinion, but I speak from what I have experienced.
        When I went to college, all the conservatives majored in Business Administration. When I told them I was majoring in Psychology, I was treated with disdain and contempt, and openly so. That is the major flaw of conservatism, in my opinion. They have contempt for the humanities. What they value is money-making. “Conservatives” should want to conserve culture, morality, national wilderness areas, classical philosophy. Instead, they are ruled by money.
        It may be true that certain artistic craftsmen, such as woodworkers and textile artists, are sensory; but in my experience the painters and sculptors are intuitives, as are the writers.
        I respect your insights and experiences.

        • Fighting_Northern_Spirit

          What you’ve been describing is the seemingly-eternal conflict between NFs and SJs, and the utter incomprehension each temperament has for the other’s point of view. This has little to do with politics I’m afraid, and would be present even without a political context. Unfortunately, as an intuitive who leans to the Right, you’re going to come into contact with a lot of SJs, who tend to comprise the mainstream of dutiful yet unanalytical voters on the Right. Railing against them is like complaining about the weather. Forces of nature don’t care what your opinion is. Likewise you should not care too much about their opinions either. That may sound harsh, but it’s really for your own self-preservation. Accept that they exist, they have a right to their own points of view, and get on with your life. The conflict has been going on for probably thousands of years, and will probably go on for thousands more.
          Just as you say, most writers are intuitives, and as I said, the vanguard of the Right is composed of intuitives. If you look at some of the comments around here and elsewhere on the race realist web, it’s obvious we have some gifted writers. As my ISFJ mother used to self-deprecatingly joke about herself when asked to write anything, her short story would go something like “a tree is a tree is a tree”. Salt-of-the-earth types rarely write well, so with that in mind it should be apparent that nearly everyone who visits this site will be an Idealist or a Rationalist (or both). And naturally some are going to be annoyed when you insinuate that the rest of us are not creative.
          I read Keirsey in 1983 and found personality theory an extremely useful tool to understand the world. But after kicking the ideas around for a decade it had become obvious to me that the tool had immense limitations, and all the connections and pigeon holes I’d thought I’d filled were oversimplified, or flat out false. It became even more obvious when I got on the internet, where intuitives are vastly overrepresented, and yet we’re so varied that it was next to impossible to generalize about any of us. The frogs keep jumping out of the box.
          All this is to say, you’re among friends here, or as friendly as intuitives get with one another (I’m sure I don’t need to tell you that intuitives can hate each other with the bitterest hate, folks who feel strongly about things often do). We are not the sheep you describe. But keep in mind that there are also some intuitives who feel that things like Psychology are soft or pseudo-sciences and deserving disdain, just like SJs do. Rationalists and Idealists can have their conflicts too. That’s not what you might expect – but it’s yet another instance where the theory can be useful, but it has to be checked against reality. It oversimplifies, and can be worse than useless in some instances.

          • je suis paganisme

            Well said, Northern Spirit.
            But, although I am an NF, I have experienced enough of reality (working in 105 degrees all day, torn muscle fibers, chronic tennis and golf elbows, working with blacks, etc.) that I do know, as you say, that reality can tear theories to bits. Plus, if one studies sleight-of-hand and magical illusions, he could quite possibly come to the conclusion, as I have done, that most things are sizzle, and not steak. Theories, I think, are at a place in between the sizzle and the steak.
            A lot of SJ’s can probably see that many (most) theories are academe-scented brain farts. I do not, nor am I in a position to, apply harmful and dangerous sociological theories to society. I am fascinated by personality, color and artistic theories, though.
            Have a good week-end.

  • Jackryanvb

    It’s also a sad reality that American racial realists tend to be insular and a bit paranoid. I have a twenty plus tear record of positive White realist activism, I’m the #2 writer at Occidental Dissent (very popular Southern nationalist/race realist blog) yet I was treated with suspicion and fear at the Amren Conference in Tennessee. Some suggested I looked like Tim Wise or Felix Derzinsky the head of the Bolshevik NKVD.

    • How were you treated with suspicion and fear?

      • Jackryanvb

        Mr. Taylor was very on guard even though I’ve been strongly supporting his work, financially contributing to him for twenty years, have attended supported his speaking engagements at Vanderbilt, brought Virginia Abernathy over to our side.

        The small New York Jewish contingent was very nice, which caused others to question my race. One Cuban, Puerto Rican White did suggest that I looked Like Felix Derzinsky the murderous first head of the Soviet NKVD.

        My response was to suggest that they read some of my extensive White realist articles at Occidental Dissent. Most people at the conference were sort of familiar with Occidental Dissent, but didn’t remember anything I wrote.

        Vdare representatives (Fulford and Peter Brimelow’s twin), The Derb were a bit better, but kind of beaten down having been purged from Conservative Inc. Nobody wanted to support my desire to start up a strong Chicago based White race realist group.

        So, yes a bit disappointing. But, at least Middle Tennessee was nice.

        • It would be nice for you to get a reply from people who dealt with you and those you are accusing. But I will say that, considering your history bemoaning and deriding those with more “militant” beliefs, you should at least have expected some resistance and hesitation.

          Personally, I would be on guard just because of the whole Occidental Dissent connection. But that is an another topic for another day.

          You showed up, so that at least should command a bit of respect and at least a brief response from those who attended.

          • It’s truly a red letter day on AR. Jack Ryan is being accused of not being militant enough.

          • I thought about contacting my representatives and voting on my response, but I said to hell with it, put on my big boy pants and took care of it myself.

          • Militantcy can be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on what one is militant about. Being militant about the continued existence and prosperity of our own people is a good thing, being militant about the Laffer Curve is a bad thing. I’m not going to try to speak for Jack Ryan for sure, because I might be wrong. But I think his counsel for as long as I’ve been reading his commentary on AR, back in the days when he was just “Jack from Chicago,” is that our people are being militant about the wrong things.

        • David Ashton

          There are just too many nutjobs, nutzis, shills and trolls besetting the “far right” which used to be the patriotic mainstream, especially when the Usual Suspects come into the discussion from any angle. I noted only today, for example, that Professor Kevin MacDonald was described as the “scholar” that “anti-Semites” love and as someone who wrote just what his “judeo-masonic” paymasters demanded.

    • Freey’all

      Anyone advocating for any type of pro-white ’cause’ or agenda, platform, etc. is naive or incompetent if they’re not somewhat paranoid. Whites are the enemy of the state.

    • Snowhitey

      I don’t condone what happened to you; however, perhaps the reason may be that your often vicious and insulting dismissal of folks who believe in the genuine facts of conspiracy makes you smell like a Fed. Just saying…

      • Jackryanvb

        At the Amren conference, I didn’t get in to any arguments about conspiracy theories or argue with Whites trying to form alliances with radical Islam immigrants (stuff I do get in to arguments here). Instead it was just suspicion that I wasn’t on the White side.

        Well over 95% of our program really isn’t very controversial for anyone who is White racially conscience.

        Oppose, reverse White genomic idle
        Oppose, stop Black attacks on Whites
        Limit, decrease the population of Black welfare underclass
        Promote positive White culture, oppose the worst Hollywood MSM anti-White agenda
        End, decrease White vs White conflicts
        Be kind to our own kind – just try to help other decent awhile people.

        14 words

  • Bobby

    To sum up, The Republican establishment is USELESS to European-Americans, more useless in fact, then it has ever been in its history. The sooner European-Americans quit the GOP, the sooner they might find a political party that actually represents their will. And, P.S. Buckley was enough to make me throw up, every time I saw that snake on some talking head show.

  • Talltrees
  • Morris LeChat

    I think the failure of conservatism stems directly from Buckley’s influence. He was never willing to really engage the enemy, and he was ever willing to throw others under the bus. He was one of those who is ego centric about his “intellect” and basically tied the white man’s hands behind him because he established an ethos of ” oh we don’t do that””We don’t DESCEND to the level of certain things”. He was so interested in being superior and above it all that he became totally ineffectual.

    • Jackryanvb

      Plus he became a very selfish old man, surrounded himself with young yes men who endlessly flattered Buckley, making big deals about Buckley’s run for New York City mayor where Buckley only won a small Libertarian level of support.

  • Xerxes22

    Most of these “Conservatives” are just opportunists. They worship money and nothing else. That’s why they can pretend to support the interests of the American people and yet be for anmesty and open borders.That is also why they cave in to any kind of pressure from the Left. If might affect their bottom line.
    BTW, what does a tax exempt organization like the Heritage Foundation spend eighty million dollars on? Salaries?

  • Rhialto

    There is a key aspect to this that is overlooked: Liberalism is a definite ideology. Liberals agree on immigration, economics, governmental organization, gun control, welfare, social manipulation, abortion, etc. Except for guns, the enemies of liberalism disagree on these issues.

    The so called right wing comprises many groups that are often antagonistic to one another.

    For example Christian Conservatives are homophobic, anti-abortion, and pro massive immigration. Libertarians are pro massive immigration, same sex marriage (“life contract”), and abortion on demand. “Main street” republicans give moderate support to liberal social programs, but stress business interests, and support immigration to reduce labor costs.

    All these groups condemn any group that has any contact with a pro-white agenda. Thus they reject VDare, the site of this article. At the same time many white nationalist groups also reject VDare for reasons that I can’t state here.

    Liberals may not have a majority in the US, but they have a strong plurality (~40%?). Meanwhile their enemies are divided and fight among themselves.

    • Christian conservatives have the most agreeable attitudes on immigration (agreeable to us) compared to all the major religious groups. The reason for the vast disconnect between CCs on the ground and CC leaders, on immigration, the reason why the lay won’t lay the law down on the leadership is because the lay who have the right attitude on immigration unfortunately don’t grok the gravity of the immigration issue. IOW, leadership can get away with being open borders in total contrast with the lay because the CC lay is more primarily interested in the issues in which the CC leadership hasn’t budged on, mainly religious-social issues.

    • Jackryanvb

      Vdare is my favorite race realist site and Vdare basically publishes articles and letters from any and all perspectives that promote the legitimate rights of our people.

  • Archimedes_777


    Thank you for the great article. You are very right.

    One other factor is the left is on a big payroll. It is at the feet of its paymasters, the Jewish billionaire Oligarchs, who use the left to destroy USA.

    Joe Biden paid tribute to his masters and owners and operators as per the link below. Since the Judaists control all 3 branches of govt., (including the Jew dish airy where they are able to get cases fixed very easily) so they can foist libbarbarianism, alienism and open borders on USA to destroy it while keeping Israel pure and secure.

    Coming from the horse’s mouth!

  • Charles Lufkin

    Peter Brimelow and his buddy Regnery continue their petty vendetta against NR(Brimelow was sacked by the magazine in the 90’s). NR has strongly opposed amnesty and supported Richwine’s right to explore the role of IQ(the major piece where Richwine replied to his critics was carried by NR).NR describes Richwine’e work in it’s most recent issue ” as a legitimate area of scholarly inquiry”.Yes, they had no business sacking Derbyshire but the best way to view NR, is fairly good on immigration(evolving). and in need of improvement on the nation question.I find Brimelow to be a petty vindictive man.

  • me

    Marxists will always take care of their Marxists. This would be more accurate. The so-called ‘conservatives’ are actually leftists. The so-called ‘leftists’ are actually Marxists. And both Republican and Democrat politicians are described with one word–WHORES. We need a third, fourth, and fifth political party. We need to set term limits for the Supreme Court. We need to reverse the ‘corporations are people, too’ decision by the ‘Supreme’ Court of charlatans. We need to do away with the PACs. We need to drive out the Marxists, the globalists, AIPAC, and the other anti-USA lobbying groups away from our federal government. And, we need to start taking care of European American interests, above all else. We need a political party that the Reactionary/Dark Enlightenment can get behind. If we do these things, we can secure the future for our children.

  • Tinker Tailor

    “Did you ever happen to think, Dr. Haber, that there might be other people who dream the way I do? That reality is being changed out from under us, replaced, renewed, all the time — only we don’t know it? Only the dreamer knows it, and those who know his dream. If that’s true, I guess we’re lucky not knowing it. This is confusing enough.” – George Orr, played by Bruce Davison, in 1980’s “The Lathe of Heaven”, the first made-for-PBS film.

  • AllSeeingEyeSpy

    I have to disagree in a way. We on the right have to police our own. And some ridiculous comments from the ‘far right’ do get censored on here. Especially comments against interracial relationships. You’re more likely to get censored on this website, unfortunately, if you say any number or things, or sometimes, anything, from the political left. That’s just wrong, in my opinion?

    The acception, of course, is our own John Engelman, who claims to be a card carrying communist, and then adds that he thinks blacks especially are inferior to whites. . basically parroting some of the views on here. So basically, Engelman is wrong about everything, but it’s good to have him anyway.

  • Charles Lufkin

    National Review has opposed amnesty and supported Redwine’e right to discuss the IQ question.In fact he used NR as his main forum to explain his views after the controversy arose..We have a lot of purists amongst racially conscious whites, who seem to believe that unless you are with us almost 100% you are untrustworthy.Peter Brimelow has carried on a vendetta against NR since the 90’s when they sacked him and seems very petty on the issue.The list of some of the most prominent supporters of Redwine–NR,Limbaugh,Coulter,Buchanan,Barone,Murray.

    • The ambiguous “with us” means absolutely nothing if you can’t even define and publicly declare who “us” is.

    • Guest



  • Teachable Moment

    Capitalism is anti-racist because it’s anti-human. Richwine and his fellow bean counters are in denial about that fact.

  • Fighting_Northern_Spirit

    On the far Left there’s a saying that when they need a firing squad they line up in a circle and open fire; so while the corporatist Left may look monolithic, they have no particular love for their Left flank either. It’s all about consolidation of power, and turf. The main difference is that the default, low-information mainstream flows downhill and to the left by design, leaving beautiful lies like racial egalitarianism unquestionable.
    As for the Richwine affair, I must admit to being puzzled by the fuss. He seems to be basically a numbers guy who simply followed where the numbers took him, definitely not a white nationalist, and barely a race realist. He professes a love for Charles Murray, but even after allowing for his relative youth – he was only 12 when The Bell Curve was published and the SHTF – he comes across as a bit disingenuous when he claims to be surprised by the reaction to his work. The slightest hint of race realism is anathema to the mainstream, and even the most cloistered academics know it.
    The only aspect of “the atrocity” I found unusual was that more-or-less mainstream conservatives like Limbaugh and Michelle Malkin were willing to go to bat for him. I would’ve expected just the opposite, and it gives me hope that Question Diversity’s idea of the Mississippi-fication of American politics will move Whites away from the moronic Leftist center.

  • Serious question about the Right/Left conundrum:

    If a person is very left of center, then they are called a Liberal—a product of the Left. Abortion, drugs, homosexuality, guns, death penalty, immigration, religion, economy, the multitude of environmental issues, etc.

    How many of those issues does it take to make a “Leftist” if that same person espouses a pro-White, “racist” stance on the need for Nationalism?

    If you really want to find out why there is such a rift, and why the Right side of insanity has a knack for devouring its own when the topic turns to race, then all you have to do is ask that question to “conservatives” and watch the dissonance build.

    • How many of those issues does it take to make a “Leftist” if that same person espouses a pro-White, “racist” stance on the need for Nationalism?

      * If you are pro-aborticide because of gender-feminism, then you’re cool. If you’re pro-aborticide because you want a legal means to reduce the non-white population, then you’re evil.

      * If you’re against Christianity because you hate the Republican Party, then you’re cool. If you’re against Christianity because you want white people to adhere to pre-Christian spiritualities so we can harden ourselves racially, then you’re evil.

      * If you advocate environmentalism to shut down the American economy, then you’re cool. If you advocate environmentalism because of the damage non-whites are doing to the environment, then you’re evil.

      * The only kind of men who can be stereotypically masculine on American college campi these days are black athletes. For everyone else, especially white men, being a man is practically a crime.

      • As if any “pre-Christian spiritualities” could even run modern civilization.. Absurd!

  • Occigent

    “I have to disagree in a way. We on the right have to police our own.”

    If leaders don’t have enough care to ensure a mental and cultural paradigm of whiteness intolerant enough to protect the people from the enemy that looks like them than defining an enemy on the relatively spurious grounds of color will be impossible. Your discenment has already been co-opted.

    If whites were bad the media wouldn’t have to lie.

  • Jackryanvb

    Another problem with American WN, white racial realists organizations, magazines, blogs, podcasts is that they almost always end up as one man shows. Peter Brimelow at Vdare is an exception as he features, pays multiple good writers.

    With American Renaissance or David Duke in his most successful 1990 s days, it came down to one (talented) guy, everybody else had to pretty much volunteer and we haven’t developed new, younger talent, or any female talent.

    It’s not just the message, it’s organization, fundraising, marketing, personality, developing a team.

    • That’s a flaw that I can say really does exist. An the concept of TEAM is most definitely something that many in the pro-White sphere don’t have a good grasp of.

      • robinbishop34

        “the concept of TEAM is most definitely something that many in the pro-White sphere don’t have a good grasp of”

        Agreed. It would seem to me that whites really aren’t at war with non-whites as much as they are with each other.

        • Occigent

          Team is a bad word. Whatever works would have to look more like a Priesthood. We would need to appoint someone and agree that’s the man, create a myth, create hierarchy, and imbue the whole thing with mystical qualities that trigger our selflessness.

          Then we serve it as it retakes the world.

          A team is thinking too small.

  • It’s more about the leftward trend inherent in any real democracy. Of couse, you can’t have a democracy for any length of time in a multi-racial country.

  • Charles Edward Lincoln III

    The New York Times published an excellent article on the importance of biodiversity to human survival today, the need to preserve fully functioning ecosystems and the habitat of the genetic variability in every viable population:

    I see no reason why the logic and goals of the environmental movement do not apply to racial conservation as well. Preservation of our own kind (the white caucasian race, and even of its internal diversity) is at least as important as the preservation of Polar Bears, Siberian Tigers and Snowy Owls to the future of the world, quite possibly more so.

    This article also shows the disadvantages of central planning as compared with local development and competition. The need to preserve biodiversity is recognized on the left as a matter of dogma, but on the right only by “racists” apparently. So let’s form our alliances where we can.

    Challenge the leftist environmentalists in your social circle and life generally to explain why snail darters deserve a space of their own while the Nordic, Celtic, and every white variant does not?


    My uncle was a kinder sort than I am, and I remember him recounting the break without rancor and more the kind of bemusement that implied “that’s just Bill…”

    This is a good example of the lack of seriousness and psychological intensity among the old WASP types that doomed them. Losing isn’t a laugh matter. Our enemies never react that way.

  • mrcan

    conservative has many meanings but the Canadian founding principles of Peace, Order and Good Government speak to truly conservative values. The founders presumed respect for institutions such as the family and organised religion, specifically Christianity. The new conservatives are neo-cons…they in reality worship the individual over our founding principles and truly despise religion, again specifically the Christian religion. Conservative is a bastardised term that essentially has no meaning anymore.
    At this stage in history…soon to be her-story, the politically correct liberal left feminist pro-gay multi-cultural multi-gender crowd have the field. They have the ball and they are running with it.

  • WilliamFlax

    I had not realized that ISI has also been corrupted. An old friend, who was active there back in the 60s & 70s, must be rolling in his grave.

    I completely agree with William Regnery’s “atrocity” designation. Jason Richwine deserves the support not only of all true American Conservatives, but of all those who revere the simple pursuit of truth.

    I am accordingly devoting the June Feature at my Truth Based Logic web venue, to the subject, “Jason Redwine & The Assault On America’s Future.”

    One of the main points, is to contrast the absurd behavior of the Heritage Foundation with the views of Thomas Jefferson–who had something, after all, to do with their being an American Heritage. Jefferson called for studying the races as subjects of Natural History in his only book, but then he was not so “enlightened” as those who pretend to be defending that “heritage.”

  • StillModerated

    William Regnery visited my church when it was a fledgling mission meeting in a Catholic school classroom. He’s a real quality fellow. Sam Francis was despised by the pathetic, cringing, young milksops at CPAC because he was “fat, blotchy, dumpy, and a smoker.” He was never a Christian, yet was fired from the Washington Times over the issue of the Southern Baptists repenting for the perceived racism of their ancestors. He quoted Scripture to back up his position. As true revenge, he became Romanian Orthodox on his deathbed.

    I met Joe Sobran at one of Richard Delgaudio’s functions in Arlington, and we talked about the effectiveness of conservative bumper stickers — which I was selling at the time. Joe was a true expert on popular culture. We kept in touch by phone and talked Shakespeare, conservatism, and the John Randolph Club — which I recommend to all AmRenners. His works will live on for future generations thanks to the tireless efforts of Fran Griffin. Check her website and buy a book or 3. Please!
    For Jason Richwine, I recommend he start a lawn maintenance business, First off, he’ll earn more, and second it won’t stop him from writing. The pen is mightier than the sword, and nobody can threaten a small businessman. I for one, will keep him in prayer, and will buy a copy of his dissertation even though it’s probably dry reading. It will have a place of prominence on my bookshelf — right next to I’ll Take My Stand, The Southern Tradition At Bay, Company Aytch, The Triumph of Provocation, The Roosevelt Myth, and A Texan Looks At Lyndon.

  • DiversityIsDeath

    What we know as “the right” or as “conservatism” is not compatible to “race realism”. Therefore anyone who expresses any sign of racial reality will be thrown under the bus by “the right”. Conservatism has failed White people. Republicans have betrayed White people.

  • Paleoconn

    Buckley will go down in history as one of the most treasonous forces to his people and country. I no longer quote him to refer to him when making a conservative argument. He is dead to me, literally and figuratively.

  • Paleoconn

    The Left eat their own. Anyway, no real conservatives expect the Respectable Right aka Conservatism Inc. imbeciles to have their back. Credit to vDare for those terms which are so appropriate to describe mainstream (pseudo) conservatism.