Back when only the founding population had suffrage, the opposing political factions were often organized around alternative philosophies of government. Even then, ideologies were often stalking horses for individual, regional, occupational, or denominational agendas. Within the past century, both these sincere ideological differences and parochial interests have been overshadowed by a new force in American politics: tribalism. The concomitant empowerment and demographic explosion of identity groups competing and conflicting with White American interests created a series of tectonic shifts in the fault lines beneath the surface of the American political landscape.

White Americans have a taboo against pursuing their group interests and an affinity for ideals and abstractions. They also retain the fiction that their representatives are beholden to them, despite a wealth of evidence to the contrary. In light of these factors, the ambitious politician seeking White votes is beset with the task of parroting a rhetoric that is rooted in abstract ideology, yet aligned with White American group interests. Once elected, it’s then in his interest to renege on both his implicit and explicit promises, as the lobbyists swarming around him pay more and pay more attention.

Non-Whites don’t have the taboos against promoting their group interests, and only bother wrapping their agenda in ideological abstractions when they need some White buy-in. They are; however, cognizant of the double-standard and never cease to exploit it to their advantage. Dorian Warren, an anti-White academician, relies on this blatantly obvious “identity for me, but not for thee” hypocrisy in his recent article “The Long Racial History of the Tea Party’s Deficit Trojan Horse“. His primary thesis is that deficit spending on big government programs is bad for Whites and good for his people, and that White Americans who ostensibly support “tea party principles” are acting in accord with their group interests.

Professor Warren is absolutely correct. He sees through the subterranean forces driving White American voters. Granted, few of them truly recognize why they’re doing what they’re doing and those who do feign ignorance. Failing to do so would violate the “racism” taboo. Warren is beholden to no such taboo, and can openly and explicitly advocate for his group interests. He comes right out and says it. He supports deficit spending because it’s disproportionately spent on his people…

A quarter of all African Americans live in poverty today, compared to 14 percent of Americans overall and 9 percent of whites. African Americans account for nearly a quarter of those receiving food assistance. More than a quarter of African Americans get health care through Medicaid. The typical black family has a dime for every dollar of wealth held by the typical white family. And all of these numbers are echoed among Latino families and other people of color.

Expanding the size and scope of America’s federal government must continue, as it’s central to the perpetuation of the ongoing transfer of wealth and entitlements from our group to his. Twenty years ago, Clinton rode into office on the slogan, “It’s the economy, stupid!” A more apt slogan might be “It’s about race, stupid!”

The history embedded in these ideas becomes tangible when looking at the policy outcomes they have been used to promote. Conservative activists-turned-Supreme Court justices like Clarence Thomas and John Roberts have used them to actively undermine federal civil rights and affirmative action efforts. From Reagan forward, Republican lawmakers have used the limited-government idea to hammer away at the social programs that were created in the 1960s to deal with the legacies of Jim Crow and slavery—welfare, equitable public education, Medicaid and Medicare. Indeed, throughout the Regean era, the “welfare queen” and “smaller government” tropes lived side-by-side, justifying a broad anti-federal agenda.

His call for a “strong, robust and powerful federal government that continues to be an instrument for racial equity and social justice” may resonate within the stately halls of the Institute for Research in African-American Studies, but it pierces the illusion held by Whites that the government’s insolvency is a problem to be solved by curbing fiscal irresponsibility and cutting back on bureaucratic bloat. This federal government is very effective and efficient. It’s working very well…it’s just not working for you, Whitey!

What escapes Warren is how flat the taboo against “racism” is starting to sound to ordinary people outside the government-sponsored anti-White cloisters he and his colleagues infest. He presumes that the federal government can continue swiping the foreign debit card and his people can keep swiping the race card indefinitely when, in reality, both cards are overdrawn and fast-approaching their expiration dates. If we hope to seriously defend ourselves and our way of life against the rising tide of “people of color”, we must expose this masquerade of concealing our legitimate interests behind arbitrary ideological avatars. And if we can’t expose it, then let’s hope Professor Warren and our other enemies keep doing our job for us.