Stefan Molyneux on White Guilt


Stefan Molyneux is an articulate, entertaining video blogger whose videos I often watch. I especially liked his videos on single mothers and South Africa though his videos on Free Will and r/K selection, while good, failed to convince me. To my mind he has a tendency to overstate his case, as well as having a soft spot for conspiracy theories (he believes Merkel’s decision to open Germany’s borders was probably due to her being blackmailed). He also strikes me as having too much confidence in himself, though to do what he does that’s probably necessary. Despite taking what he says with a pinch of salt I rarely miss his videos.

Of course it could be that Stefan is right about Free Will, r/K selection and the blackmail of Angela Merkel and I am wrong. After all, as someone I was listening to recently said, it’s statistically extremely unlikely that my views represent the culmination of 4 billion years of evolution. So perhaps I should hold my opinions lightly and provisionally, as advocated by Oliver Cromwell when he said,

I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that you may be mistaken.

The downside to such caution was highlighted by W.B. Yeats in his poem The Second Coming:

The best lack all conviction while the worst are full of passionate intensity.

Is it really best to cede the field to passionate idiots? I don’t think so. And though Stefan is by no means a passionate idiot, I am me and he is him and I can’t help but prefer my opinions to his.

But I was going to say, before Cromwell and Yeats rudely broke in, that Stefan has made a very good new video about white guilt, a phenomenon I believe is behind native Europeans’ inability to raise themselves in defense of their ancestral homelands. There is even a group of white Europeans who appear to want Europe is be overrun by hordes of Middle Easterners and Africans. These hordes are made up of people who haven’t been able to build stable societies in their own lands so feel it is the duty of Europeans to take them in and thus give them a chance at wrecking our societies, just as they have trashed their own. After all, equality is everything. In letting these people in we are accelerating the demise of white people – down from 28% of the world population in 1950 to a projected 9% in 2060 – and putting our small, already overcrowded continent at risk. Any immigrant who believes it is white people’s moral duty to let them in has already lost any sympathy I might have had for him.

The thing I liked best about Stefan’s presentation was how he stressed reciprocity, something that put me in mind of the time U.S. Navy seals abseiled into Bin Laden’s compound and killed him. The imbecile Yasmin-Alibai Brown and daft old Paddy Ashdown claimed that the seals should have tried to bring Bin Laden out alive and put him on trial. Allegedly this would have demonstrated that we are better than Bin Laden and his kind. As it was, the seals shot him on the spot which, according to Yasmin and Paddy, put us on the same moral footing as Bin Laden. Neither of these fools seemed bothered by the obvious dangers of capturing Bin Laden alive and the virtual impossibility of trying and imprisoning him. Nor did they think it odd that we should extend human rights to a man who hated our society and killed several thousand of our citizens.

Then there is my Christian friend who believes that Gypsies don’t nick stuff but instead ‘exhibit difficulties’. He believes the best way of dealing with people exhibiting difficulties (i.e. committing crimes) is to show them more love.

I think both my friend and the ridiculous Yasmin Alibai-Brown are on a vanity trip here. They are keen to demonstrate their moral superiority by treating with the utmost punctiliousness, respect and kindness those who couldn’t give a toss about either us or our human rights. Acting according to principle, no matter how badly you are treated in return, is vanity gone mad. Giving unreciprocated respect and consideration is simply an invitation to be walked all over like a doormat.

In the real world most sensible people know that tit-for-tat is a good rule of thumb. If someone steals your stuff, don’t show them love. If someone wants to blow you up then you should dispense with the moral niceties that might be shown to more civilised people. Only those in love with their own self-image seem unable to grasp what is clear to any child in the playground.


4 thoughts on “Stefan Molyneux on White Guilt”

  1. I only discovered his YouTube channel a few weeks ago but I’ve already watched quite a lot of his recent output, and one or two old ones from when he first started about 10 years ago. I’m trying to work my way through his long video on the Roman Empire which sounds interesting. He does contradict himself sometimes: for example a few years ago he said voting was a waste of time and now he says Americans were right to vote for Trump. Thanks for mentioning the ones you liked above such as the South African video. I’ll watch those next.

    I’ve also started watching Paul Joseph Watson’s channel recently. He’s undoubtedly a bit of a rabble-rouser, and only a couple of years ago he was concentrating mainly on conspiracy theories, but just recently he seems to have found his feet as a serious commentator on the most important issues of our time.

    1. You could give Molyneux credit for prefacing his Trump support with admissions on his past positions and layer out good arguments for having the strength of Character to change his mind when presented with new evidence.

      With regards to r/K i think he’s right & you guys are wrong… who knows eh?


      1. “You could give Molyneux credit for prefacing his Trump support with admissions on his past positions and layer out good arguments for having the strength of Character to change his mind when presented with new evidence.”

        Yes, I probably could, and probably would, if I had seen the Trump video you are talking about.

        Any chance of you commenting on one of my posts without referring to r/K Theory? And who are ‘you guys’? I am one person and don’t know anyone else who rejects anonymous Conservative’s idea. Christ, I don’t even know anyone who has ever heard of it.

  2. Yes, I like both of them. I also only came across Paul Joseph Watson fairly recently. Without being conscious of doing so I tend to put people into two categories: us or them, and both Stefan Molyneux and Paul Joseph Watson are clearly in the ‘us’ camp. However, I’m not sure I would nail my colours to all of their masts. Stephan seems a little bit full of himself and often manages to get in a little story which is designed to highlight how clever he is. I also think he is wrong on the r/K Theory, something I’m quite interested in. As you hinted, Paul Joseph Watson was associated with Alex Jones who is, as far as I can tell, a complete nutcase. Therefore I’ll reserve judgement on him. However, those negatives noted I’m pleased to have them both on our side.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s