Imagine a world in which facts are facts, and politics are somehow prevented from interfering with this. “Imagine” because such a world is impossible, not to mention, undesirable. Imagine nonetheless that it is a world exactly like ours with the following two differences:
1) everyone is neurally wired to esthetically prefer pale skin to darker skin. “Everyone” includes those with and without such a skin tone. This is a fact which is approved of, and popularised in an “imaginary” world via marketing, and consumption.
2) everyone accepts as a fact, that certain sub-racial populations successfully pass on genes which cognitively advantage their offspring: Jews, Armenians, Maronites, Greeks, Copts, Jains, Marwaris, and Parsis, are accepted as mentally more agile than other groups. In terms of Races, Orientals have the highest average IQ, but Caucasians boast the highest concentration of IQ above 150 – meaning that while an average Oriental is smarter than an average non-Oriental, most geniuses are White.
Now imagine that in this “factual” world the following also hold true – in sharp contrast to the “real” world of our everyday lives:
- Merit remains the pillar of Organised Society. The notion of a racial/ethnic spoils system at the level of distribution of public goods, is forbidden.
- Choosing one’s reproductive partner based on one’s preferences is not penalised in either way. People can marry those who are racially different, but can also marry those who are like them and celebrate their endogamy.
- That all Races have political representation in a “Racial Relation Council”. This may appear impossible to “imagine,” but add something concrete like The National Association of Whites to the NAACP and it’s not so far fetched.
From our two stylized facts, and three givens it follows that if everyone is wired to appreciate white skin, then they also prefer blue and green eyes to black and brown ones, and natural blond and sandy hair to jetty and dark. If Jews and Parsis are smarter than everyone else, they will dominate achievement awards and industry, while there will be absolutely no Orientals in the lower classes, and peoples of Eurasian but not Oriental ancestry are biased towards middle-class and higher, with an over-representation in politics, and the creative arts. A number of groups – Blacks, Aborigines, Polynesians, non-White Latinos, and pious Muslim Arabs, will comprise the overwhelming majority of the lower classes, with virtually no representation in the upper classes (oil sheiks are not “meritocratic”)
If the semblance to our “real” world is striking, does this make our “imaginary” world “Racist” and undesirable?
Is it untrue that non-whites esthetically prefer whiteness?
Let’s try to imagine the social expression of such an aesthetic preference. In a world in which homo sapiens sapiens are programmed to appreciate paler skin over darker when presented with a choice between the two – all other factors being equal (no room for economic arguments here!):
- the consumption of pornography would be biased across all races towards women and men, of European extraction.
- Models, fashion, glamour, and beauty, would seek to imitate the European mould.
- The consumption of Cosmetics would reveal a tendency to buy products which reduce dark pigmentation and help highlight the contrast between facial elements and pale skin. Hair colorants, not to mention chemicals used to give a European texture to hair (which boasts a wide gamut) would sell widely.
Since facts are facts in our imaginary world, no ideological system would aim to contradict, or preoccupy itself with such esthetically preferences. Aesthetics would not be politicized nor subject to radical interpretations because the biological nature of the process would be considered legitimate. People are born of all shades, but should that automatically mean they couldn’t seek to make themselves lighter, and need necessarily feel ashamed of wanting to look more European? In the imaginary world, – the answer is a no. While not everyone need give expression to their biological preferences for whiteness, those who do, are not penalised, and those who don’t – do not penalise others.
Naturally, this would raise the issue of what happens to the latter. One group in particular would suffer the most in such imaginary circumstances – blacks. The distance between a black and white, cosmetically would remain greater, than a “Latino” putting on blue-contact lenses, a Japanese curling and dying her hair, and an Arab imitating Al Pacino. Since Blacks would be crowded out of the middle class by Orientals, and out of achievement status by Orientals and Caucasians – their social status would be indistinct from that of the present “real” world.
On the other hand, groups of Jains, Marwaris, Maronites, and Jews, would dominate the commanding heights of global society, with an elite comprised of Western Eurasiatics (Europeans, Semites, Banias), and an upper middle class and professional class majority Oriental (Mongoloid).
Racial politics, would be neutralised by a Racial Council where the defense of merit would remain the prerogative, and the overriding goal of the organisation would be to maintain a political regime in which no ethnic group of any kind receives any sort of preferred social and economic access to public goods. Effectively, this council would assure that all self-promotion happens within ethnic groups, and not “between” them. The council would abolish affirmative action, but it would not prevent the self-organisation of black communities, and black communities would not penalise non-blacks who refuse to find interest in black social conditions – because everyone administers to themselves, without scapegoating others.
If such an imaginary world has both the traits of fantasy, and reality – it is hardly a coincidence. For contrary to all the demagoguery about Racism, everything indicates that mankind is programmed to prefer fair skin to dark, and some tests indicate that a preference for blonds is universal. Pornography is dominated by a Eurocentric schema, as is revealed in manga and Brazilian porn, not to mention the inmate cells of prisoners throughout the world. Cosmetics boast a preoccupation with Whiteness from North Africa to India and Japan – and it is foolhardy to ascribe this to some kind of scatterbrained theories of “deliberate White Aesthetic dominance”.
IQ tests reveal that Jews are the most intelligent ethnos bar-none, and that while Orientals achieve high-IQ as a result of discipline, Caucasians account for the majority of exceptional cognitive power (Caucasian is taken to include Indian elite casts).
As per Sub-Saharan Africans- the IQ tests are consistent across all controlling variables – yes, even the stereotype variable. Instead of denying it, means should be taken to improve the situation. IQ is only 50 % DNA, and this is the central mistake made by dna-phobes. Nor do lower IQs among Blacks bar Blacks from practicing hypogyny. No ethnos or race is condemned to endogamy – if it chooses out-marriage for aesthetic, intellectual, or physical reasons! Black leaders, of course, cannot stomach anything but militaristic endogamy! In our “imaginary” world, whites would enjoy the same privilege of promoting endogamy, while groups promoting exogamy would not be penalised for doing so, within any and all racial groups.
In an imaginary world, knowing our two stylized facts and believing in merit, would not amount to Racism – because while these conditions would relegate endogamous blacks to the lower-classes, an enlightened society would assure that the term “lower class” does not translate into “violence, suffering, and poverty.” In other words, there would be nothing shameful in a supermarket dominated by black employees , with an Asian manager. What is shameful, is seeing black ghettos in Compton and Oakland, with supermarkets in which Mexicans work, and blacks don’t. To those who think such an example extreme, you need to get out of your imaginary world.
Speaking of imaginary worlds – our “real” world is not meritocratic precisely in order to counter a few “real-life” facts. Our legalised institutional discrimination and quota system are the least of our worries compared to the aggressive demagoguery of certain political groups, which seek to exploit narrow interpretations of history, and who attack merit because it threatens their racialist agenda. Since merit deprives them of a status they esoterically consider their due, merit cannot possibly serve the altruistic functions other groups impart to it.
Normally, such demagoguery would lead to actual conflict between groups implicated in the dogma – but since ethnic representation is universally restricted to “minorities” and implicitly denied to “majorities” it is allowed to continue in its destructive campaign against its enemies (merit among them) without as of yet, prompting actual conflict.
Naturally, in the “real” world, there are sound reasons why facts are not treated as facts, and are not allowed to dictate our politics. Facts do not exist independently of a context, and whether or not blacks perform badly on an IQ test, must be taken in context. Two centuries ago – that context amounted to Slavery. Adhering to Aristotle and the universal human prejudice that certain kinds of people are fit for certain tasks, the barbarity of Negro Africa was used to justify the barbarity of Western White Europe, Arab Africa, and some Jewish merchants. Instead of performing their civilising duty and bringing learning and advancement to Africa, these groups acted oddly.
If they had truly represented the civilisation each one of them claimed as infinitely better than the rest- they had only two possibilities in regards to Negroes. One- write them off as beasts but treat them humanely, or two- admit they live like beasts but seek to elevate them. Instead, non-black Christians, Muslims, and Jews, chose to write off Negroes as beasts, and treated them bestially!
Whatever the facts – central to the Black problem and all Racial issues- we do not understand their context, nor cause – but we have a moral duty, to create a context, where if a people cannot be made to advance, this can not translate into either intra or inter-communal violence, and suffering.
The inability to restrain immoral conduct, and to justify immorality by taking “facts” out of a moral context, is the single greatest failure of civilisation as we know it (Granted it was Western Civilisation which corrected this mistake).
When the “real” world in which we live seeks to prevent Racial inequality by suppressing possible facts, it is merely admitting its inability to impart moral context to “facts,” while ironically lending legitimacy to people’s suspicions.
Racial inequality is a fact. What role is played by heredity, remains to be studied. Ultimately the context, should always remain moral whatever the causes behind the inequality. Alas, morality only exists in the imaginary world – and facts are but victims of immediate convenience.