American Renaissance

The Social Suppression of Race Realism

Joseph Kay, American Renaissance, December 28, 2011

Ben Franklin’s advice on how to fight back.

Contemporary US race relations is a paradox. On the one hand there is a smothering PC consensus that absolutely forbids any public discussion critical of blacks. But judging from private behavior such as residential segregation and conversations among close friends, the very opposite prevails: black pathologies are frankly admitted.

This public silence has multiple roots but let me highlight just one, the reluctance of race realists to express views in “polite company.” As Peter Brimelow has put it, pointing out obvious racial realities resembles loudly farting at the dinner party. The upshot is that race realists are cowed into silence and the mendacious public consensus on race survives unchallenged.

I have long observed this suffocating silence but recent social encounters with those who drink the racial Kool Aid have provided some Eureka moments. These experiences crystallized just how the palpable racial truth is transformed into an unspeakable taboo.

So, what happens when in the course of a dinner one causally mentions, for example, that the black violent crime rate far exceeds the white rate? The reaction is hardly one of rational debate. The very opposite occurs — this “fart” generates intense emotion, accusations of being mean-spirited and undermining civility: “I find that completely offensive . . . are you suggesting that African Americans are sub-humans, unable to control their violent impulses?” Those especially offended may actually leave the table in a huff.

Any factual reply may elicit a blizzard of non-sequiturs on the order of “Bush-the-war-criminal killed millions in Iraq,” or “What about Big Pharma and their obscene profits?” In other words, a simple incontrovertible fact becomes an awful insult, and the often shrill responses make all the dinner guests uncomfortable. Who invited this trouble-maker? Pushing the argument with yet more statistical data only escalates the outrage and non-combatants will immediate suggest “let’s drop the topic and talk about something more pleasant.”

Nor do fantasy dwellers have any compunction about inventing evidence. Occupying the high moral ground seems to justify concocting a counter-reality, even a pseudo-science flavored counter-reality. Common “rejoinders” to crime statistics are, “That’s just because police disproportionally pick on blacks,” or “The criminal code itself is racist so what do you expect?” Or, “Judges and lawyers are all racist.” Anecdotal evidence is also a favorite: “I know lots of law-abiding African Americans.”

If one tries yet more logic (e.g., asking what explains high black crime rates in cities run and policed by blacks), even more facile, supposedly fact-based counter-arguments appear: “Black cops are just brainwashed to pick on blacks.” Needless to say, faced with an opponent who instantly makes things up, the race realist can never win, and goes mute to avoid ulcers.

If fantasy dwellers cannot come up with a specific rejoinder there are always the cliché, all-purpose “factual” replies to defeat realists. Differences in crime, welfare dependency, academic failure, and the like, are brushed off with “That’s because of white racism, poverty and discrimination” or “lack of opportunity” and, the old favorite, “It’s the legacy of slavery.” Our race realist might be told, “(non-existent) studies show . . .” or “That’s because racist Republicans have cut spending to help the poor.” In an emergency, they explain everything with “It’s the fault of capitalism” or the mother of all truth-killers, “That’s just a dangerous stereotype.”

Classical conditioning theory best explains this silencing. Race realists are punished for socially disruptive behavior and not only will be cut from the invite list, but more importantly, the truth teller learns via unpleasant experience never to raise certain issues. After all, no compelling reason exists to be truthful on racially sensitive issues, so the realist is responsible for his own plight plus the sin of annoying others. It is no different from teaching a laboratory rat that certain behavior brings a painful electric shock. After a few such awkward encounters, like the oft-shocked rat cowering in the corner, the urge to speak the truth on race “mysteriously” vanishes.

I am hardly the first to note the power of social pressure to impose orthodoxies, even those that clearly contravene reality. Alexis de Tocqueville over 170 years ago observed that in democratic countries like the United States the pressure to conform is inescapable. To quote De Tocqueville, “I know of no country in which there is so little independence of mind and freedom of discussion than in America.” Even widely held private views may be pushed underground if those in the minority go ballistic when challenged. That certainly applies to race today. It is also possible that aversion to inter-personal conflict is hard-wired into our DNA, since societies prone to contentious squabbling go extinct.

So, gentlemen of the race realist persuasion, what is to be done? The answer is obvious. As Benjamin Franklin used to advise: Fart Proudly.

About Joseph Kay

Joseph Kay is a retired academic who suffers from compulsive truth-telling disorder.


  • VikingManx

    Great article, and the new website looks fantastic! 2012′is the year we break into the mainstream…

    Fart loudly!

  • Oil Can Harry

    How to discuss race frankly in a social setting? Knowing that the wrong turn of phrase could turn the crowd against you?

    There are no easy answers. It’s probably best to navigate this minefield very carefully. Throw up a trial balloon (“Say, did you hear that the FBI claims blacks are eight times more likely to commit crime than whites?” ) and if you get a positive response proceed with caution.

    If they respond negatively you may want to beat a hasty retreat.  At least for the time being.

    • Anonymous

      Even on most internet forums……..well, the fur flys if someone says things that are statistically true. Bring up the homicide rate of Urban American males…..and, well most will brand you a racist, just like the author of this article states. These putdowns are meant to shut-up the evil folks who will not get in line with the brainwashing.

  • Anonymous

    This article makes me appreciate living in the rural South and rarely feeling the need to “educate” whites.  I honestly find it hard to tolerate the presence of liberal/pro-diversity whites  these days. In social situations most white folk here don’t bat an eye if you say you are racist, many times I have asked a white aquaintance for a referral to a business or whatever, and threw in “by the way I am racist” and they immediately respond with “oh, he is white” or “oh, well you want to go down to this other place” without even the slightest awkwardness.

    Not sure I would try that among white liberal aquaintances in a social setting, but then again why would I socialize with them anyway?

    • JohnEngelman

      Liberals like to claim that the way to dispel prejudice against a race is to have extended personal contact with that race. If this was true, Southern whites would be the least prejudiced whites in the United States.

      I have had extended personal contact with Orientals. That is part of the reason I like them so much.

  • Frankie Weisse

    The thing to be confronted and de-fanged isn’t race or racial differences.  There’s no way to stop anti-Whites by hammering them with more and more statistics about just how different the races are.  

    Diversity on a macro level IS real, but that doesn’t mean there’s any moral support for micro-diversity.

    The real THING to be confronted is the anti-white narrative, and anti-whites themselves.

    This cannot be achieved with facts because these people are demoralized and to a demoralized self-hating white, “true facts” don’t mean anything.   They’ve been successfully trained to think they are being morally superior by hating themselves and their own people.

    The way out is a type of “shock treatment” that accesses them at their baseline anti-white conditioning, and presents them with a paradox that creates internal cognitive dissonance.  Reciting statistics is NOT this.

    • Oil Can Harry

      It’s true that many whites are Keith Olberman/ Rachel MadCow types who are hopelessly brainwashed and won’t listen to reason.

      However, there are many others who still think independently and are not yet beyond redemption. 

      • Jason Smith

        A Keith Olberman type who has a public voice probably makes a great deal of money and is highly insulated by living in an exclusive neighborhood.  Plus, he’s a professional race apologist.  Any open race realist would never get hired as a television commentator.  Or if they secretly were a race realist, they would get fired as soon as they came out of the closet.  An average, middle class white person has to have a job.  That means having a boss and working for a company that has a myriad of rules/laws governing race, discrimination, diversity, etc …  The human resource department of that company probably gives talks about diversity.  They have to.  There is the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.  Any company suspected of discrimination can get sued for millions of dollars.  So no open race realist could work their way into a management position.  These people are screened out or, if they are secretly race realists, they know they have to keep their mouth shut.  Every point in the spectrum of employment:  government, education, law, industry, is rigged, so that no race realist can ever rise to a position of authority.  Your average middle class white person who is racially aware learns they have to keep their mouth shut or risk, perhaps not losing their job, but definitely not getting promoted.  And a company will certainly get rid of an employee who is too outspoken.  Maybe not right away, but you will be the odd man out and a candidate to be quietly laid off or let go somehow.   Look at what happened to Pat Buchanan.  

  • Sincerely Concerned

    Thank you for this piece.  Since moving here I’ve been alarmed by the truth the locals tell behind closed doors or in a lowered voice in a loud bar.  This is Florida, and sure, the people I hear race realism from are a little bit outnumbered by the traditional residents and the transients in the area (liberals) but the tides are turning and people are feeling a bit freer to speak their minds.  Outnumbered or not, one cannot ignore the facts about the acceleration of crime, AA, Section 8 housing, food stamps, etc. when it’s in the neighborhood, around the corner, or bless the bloggers, expressed on the internet using real news stories and it’s time we all talk about it.

    So, I disagree with Oil Can Harry’s comment. 

    Like other articles and comments have pointed out, new race realists seems to pop up when people find themselves living among the perpetrators, either for the first time, or for long enough that they’re fed up.  Each time I get one of the arguments Kay mentions in this piece, I ask the person I’m speaking with where he lives, where he grew up and often where he received his education (or whether).   Sure, I’ve heard Bush is a warmonger and Big Corporations are the evil of the world.  But, I don’t let people get away with using these accusations as an explanation as to why a certain segment of our population is more violent or less successful than others.

    When the person I’m speaking with seems to agree that long-term or even generational public assistance (sometimes only appealing to their taxpayer pockets is the only thing that works) may have a lot to do with it, I ask him what the next step should be.  I never get a response.  So, then I suggest that perhaps the person who’s been on welfare for 10 years yet is physically capable of working should be cut off.  Each time I get the same reply: “that would be unfair/mean/racist/bigoted/phobic”, yada yada.  I’m not uncomfortable continuing with other questions.

    We have to try to appeal to their logic, their pockets, or their sense of shame.  I’m not afraid to do all three.

  • Oil Can Harry

    “Sincerely”, I don’t disagree with your bold approach but it can become a problem if you’re at a function with your wife/girlfriend and she doesn’t want to make waves.

    Here’s a piece by a writer who often finds himself in similar situations:

    • Anonymous

      Another thing to consider in a social setting is the goal. Is the point to educate people and wake them up, or is it to let them know not everyone agrees with their group think?

      In the first case I would say bringing up the topic in a smaller more intimate setting is obviously best. In the second case if others are espousing social or political viewpoints that you find offensive and you do not want to start conflict by refuting their points, yet remaining silent is seen as approval, use tact and rely on social etiquette to stifle them.

      Simply saying “One of the great things about this country is that that everyone is allowed to have their OWN opinions on these topics.” then refuse to debate the topic or get baited into a discussion, just abruptly and cheerfuly change the subject to the latest movie or sports game. If others insist on baiting you and you stick to your guns by very politely refusing to discuss the matter then THEY look bad, you do not.

  • Anonymous

    I have no desire to debate white supremacy or black inferiority. What I want to discuss is how to restore segregation, especially to include no cultural mixing casting a pall over the conversation. I want to exist within my own culture and want to talk about how to get there.

  • David Owens

    I’ve found that one question tends to make whites think. As everybody knows by know, non-Hispanic whites will be a minority in the United States sometime around the middle of this century. If I judge that the situation is appropriate, I ask whites (especially parents), “What do you think life will be like for your children and grandchildren when whites are no longer the dominant majority?”  Generally, they simply become quiet and thoughtful, and it’s easy to see that the prospect is disturbing to them.

    Sometimes a progressive will insist that the prospect doesn’t bother him or her at all, that everything will be okay, but these answers always seemed forced and insincere. And don’t pursue it. Let it hang. Just smile and say, “I don’t want to argue about it, I just want you to think about on a personal level.” Then turn the conversation elsewhere, or break it off entirely if the other won’t let it go. Impromptu political and social debates at parties or dinners seldom turn out well, and you want those who would turn the moment into a nasty scene to be the bad guys who ruined the party, not you.

    Make your position known, but don’t get drawn into a debate. Get them to think about their children and grandchildren; it is very hard for people to lie to themselves about their children, and that makes the issue a very personal one once you’ve pointed out the relevance. Don’t let anyone provoke you to anger.  Ask a few pointed questions, then let the matter rest. You’re not out to win a debate or a shouting match; you want to make whites think, and let them know that there are others who reject the cult of multiculturalism and diversity.

  • wmarkw

    I’m not sure farting at a dinner party is the best analogy.  It get more like the social treatment of calling someone’s wife ugly:  true or false is irrelevant, simple manners dictates that it just isn’t done.

    But one way out would be to emphasize that race denialism isn’t good for blacks either.  The problems in their community with crime, low education priority, poor health habits, economic marginalization through the deteriorating quality of low-skill labor jobs; will require solutions that take differential intelligence into account.  Expressing at least a concern for their welfare, instead of coming across as if black behavior is purely a white people’s problem, would go some distance into showing your interest isn’t simply supremacism.

  • Anonymous

    I have started asking people to name the one majority black and black run city, state or country they would be willing to move to.  There has yet to be a single place named. 

  • Jason Smith

    Nice article.  I’ve found the BIG problem is one’s career.  Most of us have jobs.  We’ve learned that we have to keep quiet.  Imagine you are a low level manager.  You learn you have to keep quiet about race matters.  At every point in one’s career, this restriction applies.  Low level employees, upper management, college professors, teachers, etc …  There is always the economic pressure that comes from the fear your career may be damaged.  The only person free from this is maybe the small businessman.  Because he doesn’t have a boss, he’s free to speak his mind.  But he still has the fear he may get sued on some false ‘discrimination’ charge, or the SPLC or EEOC may come after him.   The super-rich have nothing to fear.  But they are very well insulated from black street thugs.  They may have minorities who work for them, but of course employees are screened out and they have to be submissive to the boss anyway.  On the other end of the spectrum, very poor whites have nothing to lose, but they have no power to make changes.  All they can do is speak with their immediate friends and family.  It’s almost as though there is an inverted power structure, or distribution function -  I imagine an inverted triangle.  Whites at the top have a lot of power but are not affected by minorities.  Whites at the bottom are subject to black street crime, but have no power to change our society.  Everyone else in-between has a boss over them or some economic threat which prevents them from speaking out.   At every point in this spectrum the system is rigged to prevent any kind of mass movement from springing up. Surely, someone here  with a keener mind can provide the answer out of this conundrum.

    • Oil Can Harry

      Sometimes I think the only whites who can speak honestly and publicly on race are retirees with pensions.

      Also, the idle rich- because an active millionaire would be afraid of his company being boycotted. 

  • Anonymous

    IF and WHEN I am called a “racist” I respond with an enthusiastic “Thank You”. 
    It seems to disarm the name-caller when I respond in the affirmative, agreeing with their assessment of me.   
    I have discussed sensitive racial issues with blacks, always deferring to their “hardship” and “suffering” and have been quite successful in getting them to respond positively, hopefully opening up their minds. 
    I know that this does not always work, but, I inform them that I am a truth seeker and it is never good to resort to name-calling, as it only means that one has lost the “argument”. 

  • Joshua50


     I suffer from the same affliction, and it causes me untold frustration, ulcers, and a considerable degree of social exile. I feel like the messenger of bad-tidings that everyone wants to kill.

  • JohnEngelman

    Liberals like to claim that Republicans reject science. Nevertheless, liberals reject the science of genetics when it reveals that individuals differ in innate ability, and that races differ in average ability.