Sunday, August 18, 2019

Why I Stopped Being White (and You Should Too)

Race is a touchy subject in the West. People across the aisle, especially white folk, tend to avoid it like a plague. A big part of the reason behind this reservation has to do with the fact that both the left and the right maintain an equally immature grasp on the subject. While the right seems to be convinced that race is some kind of scientific fact like a species of bird, the left seems to view it as an inescapable historical prison sentence with no hope for escape. Like usual, the left is wrong and the right is way fucking wrong. There is nothing scientific or permanent about race. It is a social construct as fluid in nature as gender or sexuality, and it is constantly evolving. Almost every known race was created by a collision of former races that have ceased to exist. About the only thing that the clueless class in the left-right paradigm gets right is that the white race is a very unique creature, and a dangerous one.

The white race is unique in that it is the first defining race of the imperial era and modern day imperialism defines its very existence. The Western Europeans designed the concept of whiteness to justify their expanse and enslavement of the New World and it's dark skinned cousins across the Global South. As the insatiable nature of capitalism demanded endless expansion, it's moneyed mandarins required the creation of a new super-class to rationalize the enslavement of the darker nations. This concept became even more necessary with American independence and the fall of monarchism.

This new white aristocracy replaced the royal bloodline and shaped the very nature of the planet's economic ecosystem. The First World was created with the excess wealth pillaged from the Third World, and it's subjects soon became victims of new races invented to further empower the white race. The colored races of black and Latino were constructed to both consolidate white supremacy's ill-gotten gains and to rob the many tribes that made up these racial monoliths of color of their diverse indigenous cultures. The white race is unique, not simply by the Machiavellian nature of its design, but by the necessity of its supremacy over other similarly constructed mass races to justify its very existence. But like most imperial schemes, white supremacy backfired.

Unlike the white race, the black and brown races were defined by their oppression beneath the weight of another race's supremacy. But these races didn't truly become authentic identities until they began to resist this oppression. Forcibly divorced from their indigenous cultures, they had to build new ones from the shattered fragments of what remained and fused them together with the kind of solidarity that only revolution can birth. The black and brown races were born beneath the smokey moonlight of slave revolts and peasant uprisings. But these weren't the only races constructed as a means of resistance against colonialism. My race was too.

I was born white but I had zero concept of what race truly meant until I stopped hiding my queer identity beneath this pale mask and came out of the closet. Once I found myself surrounded for the very first time by people like me, people who felt the way I felt, people who looked the way I felt, I experienced a deep sense of belonging that I had thirsted for my entire life. You see, race is not defined by the fickle parameters of blood and soil. It's defined by a shared history, vision and culture, and much like the black and brown races, being queer is defined by an existential opposition to white colonial culture.

There was a time when tribes across the globe reserved spaces for those of us who could not or simply would not conform to the perceived norms of gender and sexuality. That time ended with the western bastardization and spread of Christianity, which set the stage for modern white supremacy. Like the other anti-colonial races, queer people were forced to forge a whole new racial identity from the shards of the extinct but not forgotten pagan societies which once venerated us. We were born in the shadows of white supremacy and though we have always come in many colors, our queerness is what defines our existence above all else.

Since coming out and studying the history of my people, I have made a conscious decision to reject my whiteness and to forge a new queer tribal awareness that defines queer as a race unto itself, an anti-colonial race in the robust mold of the Black Power and Chicano movements. I have borrowed ideas from everyone from Noel Ignatiev and the Black Panther Party to Oswald Spengler and the National Anarchist Movement. It is a highly inflammatory and downright politically incorrect mission, but my aim isn't simply to create a queer race but to destroy the white one by using my privileged access to the master's house to burn down the whole fucking plantation, once and for all. And I invite other oppressed "white" people to join me.

The biggest problem with the left-wing concept of white supremacy is that while they have properly diagnosed the problem, they have offered nothing in the way of a solution. Creating a new class of limp-wristed, guilt ridden, yuppies does nothing to deplete white supremacy of its lethal power. There was a time before whiteness and there can be a time after it. The Alt-Right will bellyache like snowflakes that my philosophy is one of white genocide, but the white race is an unnatural conglomeration defined by genocide, not just of dark and queer people, but of Irish, Italian, Greek, Polish, Russian, Scottish and Welsh people. All of these once proud tribes, dissolved like corpses in the acid bath of white supremacy. I invite these people to join me in throwing off the shackles that tie us to this imperial beast. I invite poor "white" folk to embrace their true cultures, as hillbillies and rednecks and Cajuns and guidos and Okies and Crackers, as new anti-colonial races.

The bloodshed, at home and abroad, loosed by a sinking white empire has made the choice stark and clear. We can either stand with the uprising Third World or the suppressing First. We can either stand with the oppressed or the oppressor. I choose, as a queer person, to stand with my black and brown brothers and sisters. I choose to reject the blood spattered gift of whiteness and I invite you to do the same. Only a world of autonomous minorities can destroy a nation of imperial majority.

Peace, Love & Empathy- Nicky/CH

Soundtrack; songs that influenced this post

*  Wake Up by Arcade Fire
*  Tennessee by Arrested Development
*  Another Day by Galaxie 500
*  Bring the Noise by Public Enemy
*  People Got a Lotta Nerve by Neko Case
*  The Payback by James Brown
*  You Have Killed Me by Morrissey
*  Okie from Muskogee by Merle Haggard
*  I Against I by Bad Brains
*  Margin Walker by Fugazi


  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    1. No it wasn't, you douche. Nice try at getting the fire started.

  2. �� �� �� �� �� �� ��
    " AM I WHITE ? " by Red Ice TV © ������
    “ White people ” don’t really exist but White supremacy is real !!!

    �� �� �� �� �� �� ��
    " 2018 ' IT's OK TO BE WHITE ' # 1 ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN " ©️

    �� �� �� �� �� �� ��
    " WHY I DON'T WANT TO BE A MINORITY " by Red Ice TV © ������ 1 000 000 Views !!
    Every White country is being forced to “diversify” by importing millions of non-Europeans into their nation.
    Lana tells why she doesn't want to become a White minority !

    �� �� �� �� �� �� ��
    " DIVERSITY is a WEAPON AGAINST WHITE PEOPLE " by Red Ice TV © ������ 1 000 000 Views !!
    Lana explains how "diversity" is being used as a weapon against White people.
    Support our work and get full access to our archives at
    Subscribe and stream or download over 1400 programs, videos, films, Insight episodes, Red Ice TV & Weekend Warrior.
    More Red Ice TV, Radio & 3Fourteen @

    �� �� �� �� �� �� ��
    " THEY WANT YOU DEAD WHITE MAN !!! " by Red Ice TV © ������ 1 000 000 Views !!
    Anti straight white male hatred will backfire and be used as a catalyst for greatness !

  3. I agree with your basic premise but must take issue with one of your assumptions. This is an issue I have had with many on the left, even the non-statist left. The underlying assumption I take issue with is the idea that the conquerors and purveyors of genocide, or at least their descendants, actually benefited materially from the conquest, and that is simply not true. Wealth is produced by voluntary exchange, NEVER by killing. We are all, even "privileged" (we are only privileged in the sense that we are better off than the ones we have oppressed, we are not better off materially in any absolute sense) white people, poorer, both spiritually AND materially, than we would have been without the genocide and slavery.

    Many on the left see material wealth as some sort of static zero-sum quantity, that for one to have more wealth implies that someone else must necessarily have less, and, in my opinion, that is patently false. A proper understanding of economics shows that potentially, material wealth is virtually unlimited, and it is quite possible for EVERYONE to be materially better off that they are now. If that belief makes me a "capitalist," I plead guilty. The conditions for that to occur, however, are that we minimize coercive violence. It can never occur in an environment of widespread violence, conquest, war, slavery, and genocide.

    While we see eye to eye on many issues, I have noticed quite a bit of difference between us in basic temperament. While you have stated you actually thrive on conflict (correct me if I read that wrong), I avoid it like the plague, and will often go out of my way to minimize conflict in my personal life, giving in to the comfort requirements of others, just to seek some peace.

    There can never be any valid excuse for what many white people have done throughout history, but their crimes did not make their descendants wealthier.

    1. I think that our biggest difference politically is probably on the issue of economic theory. It's there that I remain a pretty steadfast Marxist in the Luxemborgian-Gramscian tradition. This chasm is probably to wide to bridge. It's one of those agree to disagree sort of things. Where we do see eye to eye is on the solution, voluntary free markets and peace, peace, peace. I don't hold ill will towards those who I believe have benefited from past atrocities. I still fall into that category in many ways. You can't go back in time and change the past. We must remember it, but we must also move forward with new solutions. I believe evolving past the class concept of whiteness is one of many ways to do this.

  4. I really wonder at the herd of writers who do not seem to know what a dictionary is. They keep describing fascism and keep calling it capitalism.

    There is no "we". There is only you and me and him and her. Fascists, communists, and other collectivists who speak of "we" always conclude that your money and my money is - somehow - "our" money. The hatred of true capitalism is the hatred of property rights. Parasites hate property rights. They are convinced that there is no end to the good that they can do in the world if they can just get their hands on everyone else's money.

  5. So you reject the manhood you were given and you reject the white skin you were given, yet you are given a platform to lecture the rest of us on "truth".
    This article is breathtakingly craven, servile, establishmentarian cr*p.
    You ARE the modern political class serving a global mafia that runs on the principle of divide-and-rule, which by its nature demands the use of lies or quasi-truth used to mask dishonest intentions.
    The future will be founded on truth serving the principle of not divide-and-rule but unite and prosper.

    You wouldn't recognise truth if your creator marched up to you and offered you eternal salvation.

  6. who is this "creator" you speak of and what exactly is the salvation you claim it can provide ?

  7. Hello from Australia, "Comrade Hermit". You have come to my attention via your fellow (former) Counterpunch columnist Paul Craig Roberts, an 80-year-old Reagan technocrat with a Wikipedia bio, who has somehow became a polemicist against American empire, but from what appears to be an anti-Israel and anti-anti-white perspective.

    Despite your own enthusiasm for an Ilhan/Tucker coalition, you seem to be beyond what Mr Roberts, at least, can tolerate, as he has written about this essay of yours with incredulity. And in fact, despite your enthusiasm for the destruction of America, your actual ideological innovation here (that "queers" can be a new *race*, defined in opposition to imperial society) would not be out of place in a New York Times op-ed.

    My own views would be closer to Mr Roberts, at least in the following sense... you might say I believe in the reform of white identity and western nationhood, rather than their deconstruction and abolition. And while I am stating my views, I might as well say that the destructive effects of liberal "transphilia" lead me to believe that an explicitly cisnormative culture is preferable (not that anyone is listening to me). I don't know how that would work, starting from here, though maybe today's Russia is worth studying in that regard.

    Before Trump, I was anti-American too, at least in the sense that I was interested in a grand global coalition that could route around the hyperpower. But we do seem to have returned to multipolarity and a world order with multiple great powers. In this world, exiting from whiteness seems geopolitically irrelevant, and more an internal affair of the Europe-descended countries - what kind of identities will work best for them, given their recent highly diverse immigration.

    1. Wow,OK, where do I start. First off, I have a great deal of respect for Mr. Roberts. I use to enjoy reading his work on CP a great deal, so I feel a bit like Sinead O'Connor being threatened by Frank Sinatra. I'm tempted to consider it an honor.

      Politically speaking, I am what you would call a panarchist. What I advocate is neo-tribalism with an emphasis on extreme localism. The problem with whiteness is the problem with America, regardless of who's in charge, it is quite simply too goddamn big. This is why I support a return to smaller and more intimate identities. One of my major influences are my Amish neighbors. I like everything real damn small, business, government, religion, race. But I'm also a strong supporter of voluntary individuality, so if a tribe want's to identify as white, black or Klingon, that's their business so long as they don't enforce it on others.

      As far as the queer issue goes, your misunderstanding is not uncommon on the right. The PC western establishment is attempting to hijack our counter-culture and assimilate us into their beige neoliberal banality. Me and many other radical queer folks oppose this wholeheartedly. Queer culture has existed for thousands of years across the globe. Nearly every tribe across the planet maintained a third gender before the Romans ruined Christianity and pushed it down every pagans throat. There are tribes untouched by colonialism which continue to uphold this tradition. The Buginese in Sulawesi have acknowledged the existence of five distinct genders for centuries, even after converting to Islam.

      The rise in third genders is not an aberration of modernity. Quite the contrary, it's a sign of tribal revival. The Spenglerian cycle is starting up again and people like me are answering a spiritual call from our ancestors.