November 23, 2008

Arguments for White Preservation

By Ian Jobling • 2/14/08

Martin-uk sent in a comment on a recent post that lists the different arguments that can be made for white preservation. White preservation, he says, can be defended on the grounds of the value of diversity, even-handedness, tribalism, distinctive white values, and the distinctive capacity of whites for accomplishment and civilization. His comment performs an important service because it clarifies and distinguishes among arguments that white preservationists often run together in a confusing manner.

In my articles on The Inverted World, I have stressed the last two items in martin-uk’s list: the arguments from distinctive white values and the distinctive capacity of whites for accomplishment and civilization. I have criticized the argument from tribalism. You’re free to disagree with me, though—what’s your favorite argument? And which do you think is the most likely to convince the racially unaware?

What follows is an edited version of martin-uk’s list of arguments and his comments on it. He seems to agree with me that the last two arguments are the most powerful.

The value of diversity

Diversity is inherently valuable. It is a good thing, for example, that there are many types of birds and insects, and we all think it is a pity when this or that bird or insect, having evolved over hundreds of thousands of years, becomes extinct, especially when its demise is caused by the actions of human beings.

Similarly, it is a good thing that there are many different human societies and cultures throughout the world. Consequently, most people believe that the folkways of threatened cultures, such as the culture of the Australian Aborigines, should be preserved. But white society is just as valuable for the sake of diversity as Aborigine society. Indeed, even if whites were hunting their dinner with spears while Aborigines were building colonies on Mars, the world would still be poorer if white culture and values were eradicated by demographic eclipse.


It appears that multiculturalism and diversity are for white nations only. In fifty years, if present trends continue, Nigeria will be managed and controlled by ethnic Nigerians, China by ethnic Chinese, Japan by ethnic Japanese, Mexico by ethnic Mexicans, India by ethnic Indians, and so on throughout the non-white world, but our white children and grandchildren will have lost the autonomy and identity that comes from maintaining a majority in their own historical homelands. This is manifestly unfair.


It is normal and healthy for people to promote the flourishing of the ethnic group to which they belong. What kind of man would could remain unmoved before the prospect that his own people might die out and be replaced by another? Since I am white, I naturally ally myself with white causes and, where possible, take the white side in any argument, because white society and culture are mine. Whites are my tribe, if you like.

I cannot and do not need to cite reasons to justify my tribalism. The only explanation that is possible is people’s natural preference for their own kind.

White values

Concern for humanitarian issues like human rights and animal welfare appears to be native to the white race alone. Activism surrounding these issues originated in the West, and non-western nations only worry about them due to lobbying by whites. An example of such lobbying is the recent outcry in the UK over Japanese whaling in the Antarctic and wanton cruelty in Chinese zoos. When there are no majority-white countries left, it is quite possible that the world will embark upon a very illiberal course, with few rights for women and minorities, and even less concern for animals and the environment.

Whites’ capacity for accomplishment and civilization

Whites have historically been by far the most innovative race and have raised the quality of life of people the world over through their discoveries and inventions in medicine, technology, and science. Moreover, white societies generally exceed those of non-whites in qualities that are universally recognized as desirable, including wealth, democracy, honesty in public life, human rights, quality of life, and so on. Non-whites themselves testify to the superiority of white culture through their desire to emigrate to white countries. We should preserve the white race because of its capacity for accomplishment and civilization. If whites decline, the whole world will suffer.

Martin-uk added two comments on this list. Here is an edited version:

It has been suggested that white preservationists should take a leaf out of the blacks’ book and use the argument from tribalism. But surely the reason why tribalism is so popular among blacks is that they have no other justification for racial pride. Blacks can hardly use the arguments from accomplishments or values, can they?

Furthermore, a few weeks ago a white scoundrel tradesman conned about £500.00 out of a mentally ill and indigent lady I know. On the other hand, in the course of business I occasionally trade with an African black who has always been honest and straightforward in our dealings. Tell me, am I expected to feel something in common with this wretched white scoundrel and prefer him to the black man? This is what the tribalism argument would seem to imply

No comments: