Let’s say you’re a white guy. Furthermore, let’s say you’re straight (there goes 2/3rds of people who bother to read my effort-posts). But bear with me, let’s say even if you’re a bisexual or gay white guy, or a black trans woman, you’re a straight white guy right now. Ok? Ok. Great, now let’s get started.
As a straight white guy, let me give you one more privilege that no one has talked about yet. You are the embodiment of negative logic in today’s ethical structure, and the logic of the negative is the most effective at cutting through bullshit. Through no consequence of your own, you are now in the position to embody rationality (not that you’ll probably be able to do it). How you ask? Well, let’s look at the current ethical stances that you, a straight white male, can embody.
1) Support (novice-expert)
This is clearly the easiest position to embody, and probably the smartest, assuming you are an Absolute Egoist. Your identity as a straight white male has no positive positionality; therefore, you let everyone do the talking for you. You surf along whig history like a champ, look at you go! The history of whiteness is one of oppression and death, and thus you disavow it totally. That is to say, you take responsibility for 100% of complaints against it, embody it, and then work to negate them by letting the arguments of others narrate this aspect of your body. Excellent! Who will argue with you? Someone may call you a cuck on the internet, but that person is an outcast, a right populist loser with no pull. Who cares? Support is clearly the smartest position for any white person to take.
The novice almost doesn’t seem like a novice because they are carried by the correctness of their position through both self-interest and flexibility. The experts are the ones who lead the world, lead companies, etc. Woke capital is redundant, all capital surfs the weltgeist. Non-woke capital wouldn’t be capital at all, it’d be ineffective reaction, stagnating.
2) Reactionary (novice-expert)
I am not a reactionary in that I think the position of whitewing (i’ll just leave that Freudian slip typo in there) traditionalism, ignoring all the atrocities, is ultimately boring and stagnant. It is by design boring and stagnant, and it’s methods are to stop change whenever possible, with the argument that change is bad. Unrelated to its boringness, this is a pretty stupid idea as a whole self-interest wise, as even reactionary theorists recognize. You think back to when white people exploited people and think, “jee wizz, wasn’t that grand?” Then you decide that this was so grand, you go out and tell everyone what a grand thing this was.
This being said, Reactionaries are (ironically) constantly playing the black pieces, and if you are a true Hegelian, you simply have to see what they are saying! To be a reactionary is to be against the flow of progress, and for all reactionaries talk about values (see: Evola, NRx legalism) the embodiment of values, those values are never refined since this is the positive position of whiteness. “Whiteness is good” is the idea of the reactionary, which I’m trying to tell you here, is throwing away the superpositionality of whiteness.
The novice aspect is your run of the mill white supremacist, right populist, knuckle dragger. The expert is your Steve Bannon-s, your mobilizers of temporary “holds” against the tide of whig history (which of course, are just more gris for the mill in whig history in the end).
3) Equality Morality (novice-expert)
Oooo, white guy, what are you doing? If you really want to be left, you should be support!
But ok, this is what I try to do, so I talk to myself when I say, “why! What possesses you!? Why stand for equality of ethical treatment?” It is not a very useful position, UNLESS there is something which is useful about a universal ethic.
A universal ethic means that every person, regardless of race or color, should be treated with the same ethical standards, with some exceptions. This is to say, a ruler who continues to exploit their populace needs a revolution against them. But wait! Is this not further support for the Support position? Yes and no. The support position, clearly being the smoothest to occupy in the current zeitgeist, barely drawing ire from white supremacists because you yourself are a white guy, is the embodiment of the negativity of whiteness.
But okay, let me argue for my decision to try to consider a universal ethic. It has to do with the fluidity of Being as its own end. To consider all humans under a single ethical category in terms of the weight of their position allows for the advancement of universal ethics, which is necessary so as to save humanity from the destruction of the self due to an unnecessary flux in individual identity. The support position has a flaw in that white people when talking to other white people about how to best help minorities has a bit of a colonist flavor to it, does it not? I don’t like to be condescending. I want to treat people with a universal dignity rather than a conditional one, Being not becoming-as-an-end.
Anyway white boys, choose your fighter; simply, because you have to.