The best reason to reject racism is that it alienates more people than it befriends. The social penalties of being a racist are simply too high, while the social rewards are non-existent. No white person will thank you for caring about them because of their race. Even other racists will not thank you for caring about the white race -- white nationalists insult and attack each other more than any other group.
There is no racist community. Humans are herd animals that need a community to live within. Therefore being a racist is self-destructive.
However, this objection can be countered if racism is True. If racism is True, then self-immolation for the sake of racism is still the correct path. Announcing yourself as a racist and going about campaigning for racism, even though the task is thankless and self-destructive, is spiritually fulfilling because it is literally seeking martyrdom.
But there is no conflict between convenience and integrity. It isn't a question of whether you can be happy or proud. Because racism isn't true.
For racism to be true, it has to care about race qua race -- ie, not because race correlates to some other factor, like intelligence, personality, or behavior. If we are just talking about racial correlates, it's easier to discard race and focus on the correlates directly (this is where the idea of race realism comes from.) It is possible to admit that some races correlate more closely to an objective good than some other races, without being a racist. A racist would prefer a worthless white over a super-competent Asian. A race realist would judge every individual separately based on their own individual merit, while still being aware that objective judgements of individuals will disproportionately favor the genetically superior races of the world, and thus not be distraught when the results of their individual judgments turn out slanted in 'favor' of one race or another.
I have tried to find issues that were 'race qua race' in support of racism for the longest time. The most compelling race qua race arguments are trust, loyalty, and physical beauty. Whites are more trustworthy, both inherently and because we are more similar to each other. Odds are, a white will have more fellow feeling for another white than an Asian for said white. A community of purely white people could be trusted to be more trustworthy and loyal towards each other than a diverse community where everyone is looking out for their own sub-group. However, there are other ways to produce trust and loyalty, that have been well documented, than sheer racial homogeneity.
Consider football teams. They aren't homogeneous, but they do trust each other, and are loyal to each other, on the playing field. Their bonds of friendship are real. The same is true of military units that serve together. Race doesn't matter to these people, they are bound by something higher, that has given them plenty of trust and loyalty to one another.
These are just proof of principle examples. An entire society can't train together under harsh circumstances like the army or a football team. How can a large community of tens of millions or more racially diverse people feel that sort of camaraderie, then? My answer is simple -- art.
There is nothing that unites people more than a mutual love for something else. For a mother and a father, it is shared love of their children. For Christians, it is their shared love of Christ. For environmentalists, it is their shared love of pristine wildernesses. And for baseball fans, it is their shared love of baseball. Texans of all stripes will cheer, as one, for the Cowboys in the NFL. We like to think well of anyone who loves the same things we do. In fact, we like to love people who love the same things we do. Trust and loyalty can be generated not just through intensive training for a tiny few, but for the broad community, through shared objects of affection. An easy way for everyone to trust and stand by each other in a country is for everyone to love chanting USA, USA! at the Olympics, love the flag, the star-spangled banner, and everything else about our country as a whole. Anyone of any race can be a patriot. The more patriotic everyone is, the more trust and loyalty they can have for each other, since we then have a shared love of country.
These are all options, but I think the best option would be a shared love of art that enlightens and elevates the spirit. Specifically, the art I picked out as good community filters in 'A New Nation?' Everyone loving the same thing works, but wouldn't it be better if that 'thing' they loved was a meaningful entity, and not just an arbitrary banner to rally behind? If our shared love is itself a powerfully transformative agent, it homogenizes not just our hearts but our minds and our wills as well.
If we all love Clannad, that means we want to be like the characters in Clannad, all of us in the community. If we all love Crest of the Stars, that means we want to be like the society in Crest of the Stars, all of us. If we all love Plutarch's Lives, that means we all want to emulate the same virtues Plutarch highlights in his heroes from Greco-Roman times, together. There is a great deal of latent power in art. Art can change people. I've said it before and I'll say it again -- Beauty can save the world. It can also bring these 'saved' souls together, into a community of shared trust and loyalty. It is hard to hate people who love the same thimgs you do. Imagine a community that has learned how to live their lives and see the world from the same playbook -- the same collection of art -- a powerful homogenizing force, and is then only around other people who have taken that same journey. Imagine school children of all races together learning an artistic canon which will forever define our national community. Wouldn't they have shared memories and shared interests they could talk to each other about? If you say a stranger in this country, wouldn't you feel comfortable around them, knowing the great deal of culture the two of you have in common, because everyone learned the same artistic works in school? If you wanted to make a friend at the school cafeteria, would racial segregation really be necessary anymore? You could walk over to the other table and strike up a conversation about what you were all learning in class that day, and ask them what they thought about it, etc.
This sounds bizarre, but remember I am controlling for all other factors -- ie, everything except race is the same between the races, because we have already filtered for intelligence, personality and behavior. Racists must insist that not only must everyone be bright and well-adjusted, they must be the same race, in order for there to be race qua race benefits like trust and loyalty. But trust and loyalty don't need the help of racial instincts. We have prefrontal cortexes for a reason. We can control who we care about and what we care about. We aren't robots.
The only remaining race qua race ace whites have up their sleeve is the unique physical beauty our race contains. This includes our skin color, eye color, hair color, musculature, height, and unique facial traits like the shape of our cheeks, noses, lips, eyes, etc. Going by barbie doll sales and magazine covers, it's pretty obvious that whites are the most physically attractive race in existence. All the girls of other races try to mimic white girls and all the boys from other races try to have sex with white girls. But these physical traits, admirable though they are, are not the sine qua non of beauty. Why stop at the physical beauty of the white race? Wouldn't elves, like Legolas, like Lafiel, be even more beautiful? Wouldn't the large eyed looks of anime characters be even more adorable? Wouldn't girls with wings, tails, horns, or other various accessories be preferable to straight human bodies? If there is physical beauty beyond the white race's, then preserving the white race's physical beauty can't be a reason to make major decisions about how we structure civilization.
If we were permanently sacrificing the most beautiful objects in the universe by eliminating racism, racists would have a point. But there are more beautiful objects than white girls -- the girls in our imagination and art -- and the robots and genetically engineered girls that will soon inhabit our future. By the time the last white girl has disappeared from the Earth, due to our not protecting her unique genetics that creates her unique looks, (a prospect that is centuries away from today), something much more beautiful will already exist. Virtual reality that looks fully real to the people experiencing it, where people can look any way they please. Robots sculpted to look any way we please. Biologically enhanced individuals who could have purple eyes, light blue hair, and angel wings. The sky is the limit, when you think about it. Worrying about something as provincial as the beauty of the white race, when things much more beautiful will be at our fingertips, is a waste of precious mental space.
We can only prioritize one thing. For racists, that's racial preservation. But tht eliminates any other good thing we could prioritize, when it comes into conflict with racial preservation. These things could include commerce, peace, merit, freedom, fairness, objectivity, kindness, and culture. It's just not worth it. Prioritizing race means sacrificing everything else to race. It's better to sacrifice the dubious benefits of racism to the obvious benefits of a peaceful (ie harmonious), meritorious, free, fair, universally loving locally shared culture.
Sooner or later, science will prove that intelligence, personality and behavior is genetically determined, not environmentally determined. At that point insisting that individuals of all races must live up to the same standards, and that racism is not holding them back but people's own genes, which we had no hand in causing, will become common wisdom. A color blind world that judges people by the content of their character, not the color of their skin, will become possible once we stop trying to equalize the races. A racially homogeneous society will of course be better than a contra-factual dystopia -- but that can't last forever. Ever since the publishing of the Bell Curve, the writing has been on the wall. As the cost of genetic sequencing continuously goes down, we will learn more and more about genetics and how they affect our lives. Ignorance about racial realities will end. And when they do, racists will Not benefit from them. In fact, racists Rely on ignorance of racial realities, because this is the source of their legitimate grievances against the state.
Eliminate the anti-racist crusade against disproportionate impacts, and you eliminate any reason to be a racist. We can get rid of anti-racism and racism in one stroke. Objective, fair judgments can be made based on each individual's character. A community can be built around other things. Beauty can progress far beyond anything a distinctive racial look can provide. Racial survival is meaningless if no one can point to any special reason why a race should survive. Maximizing genetic interests sounds like something a cockroach might care about but humans with brains should be ashamed of mentioning. We live for our ideals, not our bodies. Christ. Racists don't have any good arguments. All racism does is back you into a corner and make you the enemy of mankind. You can't beat city hall -- ie, the only purpose of becoming a racist, and earning all of that opprobrium from others, is to martyr yourself -- it's not like you're going to convince anyone when your arguments aren't even True or rational.
I like and admire Jared Taylor, years ago I shook hands with him and called him my hero. But looking at his blurb for White Identity at Vdare today, I couldn't help but feel how weak and silly his arguments were. Here was a man who grew up in Japan, who didn't suffer at all from being surrounded by members of another race, and who didn't think racially for decades while still leading a meaningful and enjoyable life. And then he throws away all the empirical proof of his own life to become a racist, for such spurious reasons:
His first argument is people have an instinctual preference for their own race. That's true, but humans are better than their instincts. We also have an instinctual preference for chocolate, but only gluttons eat nothing but chocolate every day until they're 500 pound blimps. We also instinctively like sex, but it's still possible to remain a virgin until your wedding day, if you care about purity more than your body's instincts. Instincts, as often as not, impel us to do evil things, destructive things, both to ourselves and others. No instinct can be accepted or followed simply because it is an evolved instinct. It must be considered under the light of reason, and followed or not followed only as the mind sees fit. The body should have NO SAY in how we lead our lives. Leave that to the animal kingdom. Humans are a new type of existence in the universe, free to choose our own Good. We are too special to throw that away and join the crickets and bees.
His next argument is that attempts to integrate racially diverse societies have failed for decades. But this is of course looking at a straw man. We have failed because we didn't take into account correlates to race -- racial gaps in intelligence, personality and behavior. No racially diverse state has yet taken this into account. If they did, a racially diverse state could integrate and succeed. The experiment has not yet been tried on a full scale, but some examples should be pointing towards the answer -- Hong Kong was a joint venture by whites and Asians for centuries, and it worked out pretty well, don't you think?
If, like he believes, a racially diverse country will stay fundamentally segregated, then what is the harm in being racially diverse? The harm only comes when this voluntary segregation is forcibly banned by the government. A race realist government that doesn't blame 'racism' for all the ills of a diverse society wouldn't pressure people to do what they found uncomfortable. however, why stop people who want to have friends and lovers from another race if they want to? A racially diverse country simply gives people more options -- homogeneity takes those options away, as does anti-racist straightjackets that requires people mix. They're two sides of the same coin. Therefore, his argument that people prefer to segregate is still no cause to literally segregate countries by race.
His argument that other races constantly view things from a racial angle is also flawed. Two wrongs don't make a right. Why should we jump off a cliff just because other people are doing it? But it's also absurd for so many other reasons -- blacks and hispanics organize as racial groups because they seek benefits from the government to redress inequality. Whites are already the top dog. What would we organize for? To become even more advantaged over blacks and hispanics? Talk about bullying! Do we really have to organize as a race to beat out blacks and hispanics? Let the loser races do whatever they please, we'll still surpass them as individuals -- just like Chinese surpass Malays in Malaysia and Jews surpass everyone wherever they go. Competent individuals have no reason to fear 'organized black communities.' It's more sensible to just laugh at them. The entire strength of organized racial grievance groups is the belief that they are countering racism, which is all derived from the facts of inequality between the races. Once science proves these inequalities are due to genetics and not racism, the entire racial organization system will collapse of its own accord. The last thing we need to do is start mimicking the worst people in our midst by joining in on their folly.
He's right that just 'trying harder' won't help us. We need a more serious state, which is willing to accept that the races aren't equal and act upon these facts, through strict immigration control and eugenics, until everyone, of any race, is near-enough-to-equal with everyone else in our country. This solution is far more rational than segregating on the basis of race, which would allow whites of any IQ or criminality in but disallow Asian nobel prize winners and Olympic gold medal winners into the country. The idea is absurd. Surely Jared Taylor can see how absurd segregating by race is on the face of it?
Finally, his alternative to 'trying harder' is no alternative at all. Asserting a 'white identity' is impossible due to people's rational and historical objections to racism. Asserting a color-blind, merit-only metric appeals to everyone. It is rational, and has never been tried before, which means there can't be any historical bogeyman like slavery, the Holocaust, or colonialism trotted out to refute it. It would truly be the dawn of a new era for mankind. White identity has already been tried and it's already failed. It's dead. Put a fork in it. The potential for a new, merit-based, fact-based race realist but culture and values-centric nation, however, is limitless.