White Shift: criticism of migration repressed

White Shift: criticism of migration repressed, by Eric Kaufmann. Part 1 is here.

The Left’s quest to widen the definition of racism and harness guilt and shame to repress criticism of immigration can be said to have worked well between the mid-1960s and 1990s. …

The great political realignment that is occurring now:

The ebbing of anti-racist norms as they pertain to immigration and multiculturalism polarises the electorate along the open — closed psychological dimension which is restructuring Western politics. At the crux of this debate is the question of whether whites can legitimately defend their group interests through restricting immigration.

Small-l Liberals insist this is racist, while conservatives see it as a normal expression of group partiality.

Once politics goes tribal…

In an insightful piece penned soon after Trump’s election, the Brookings Institution, Arab-American scholar Shadi Hamid argues that, were he white, he could imagine voting for Trump as an expression of racial self-interest: “For me, the more useful question isn’t why Trump voters voted for him, but, rather, why they wouldn’t. It seems self-evident that minorities would generally vote for the party that goes out of its way to consider — and protect — the rights of minorities … Why would whites, or at least a large percentage of them, act any differently? … [If I were white] I can’t be sure I wouldn’t have voted for Trump. This may make me a flawed person or even, as some would have it, a ‘racist.’ But it would also make me rational, voting if not in my economic self-interest then at least in my emotional self-interest.”

Ethnic self interest is perfectly respectable, despite what the left would prefer you to believe when it comes to whites (but not every other ethnic group):

Hamid adds that ethnic group interest is a near-universal theme in human history and the demographic struggle for power between ethnic groups is a persistent feature of the modern world. Hamid argues that being attached to an ethnic group and looking out for its interests is qualitatively different from hating or fearing out-groups. This is a distinction social psychologists recognise, between love for one’s group and hatred of the other.

As social psychologist Marilyn Brewer writes in one of the most highly cited articles on prejudice: “The prevailing approach to the study of ethnocentrism, in-group bias, and prejudice presumes that in-group love and out-group hate are reciprocally related. Findings from both cross-cultural research and laboratory experiments support the alternative view that in-group identification is independent of negative attitudes toward out-groups”.

So, lefties got the science wrong on this one too. Another self-interested con job, as they import masses of left voters into the West.

Ethnic groups are like large but more dilute families. Is love of one’s family an expression of hatred for others? No, of course not, lefties.