It’s perhaps fitting that the apparent rout of the “America First Caucus” amid Ruling Class attacks on the “Anglo-Saxon” legacy came on the day of Prince Philip’s funeral and the iconic shot of the black-clad, masked-up Sovereign sitting alone in a nearly empty church [Queen and Royal Family alone but for the gaze of the world, by Allan Little, BBC, April 17, 2021]. But Rep. Marjorie Taylor-Greene’s proposal struck a nerve. In one form or another, this issue will be back.

MTG and other Congressmen proposed an “America First Caucus” that included common sense proposals on immigration, Big Tech, infrastructure and other issues [America First Caucus Policy Platform Final, PunchBowl News, Accessed April 18, 2021]. But after a draft was leaked, Regime Media journalists rose in outrage at the use of the terms “Anglo-Saxon” and “European architecture” [Capitol Hill’s far right pushes Anglo-Saxon values, European architecture, by Oriana Gonzalez, Axios, April 17, 2021].

The would-be caucus members sounded what looks like an ignominious retreat (there are reports the proposal will be revived later this year), unquestionably because the GOP Congressional Leadership was pushing them to surrender. Well into the Biden Administration, the GOP has no strategy other than hoping Biden will fail—and attacking its own base. [GOP believes Democrats handing them winning 2022 campaign, Brett Samuels, The Hill, April 18, 2021]

To be clear, there may be something to the defense that the members of the America First Caucus didn’t fully vet the draft. Though the Regime Media ran cover for her, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez had the same problem when a draft version of the “Green New Deal” was put online [Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s rocky rollout of the Green New Deal, explained, by Tara Golshan and Elia Nilsen, Vox, February 11, 2019]. It included bizarre language about the challenge to “fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes” [Green New Deal FAQ, Accessed April 18, 2021].

But nonetheless, the Biden campaign essentially endorsed many of its ideas and is arguably trying to implement them in its infrastructure bill, once again showing that Democrats never abandon their frontline fighters [Joe Biden has endorsed the Green New Deal in all but name, by Julian Brave, The Guardian, July 20, 2020].

Unexpectedly, Anti-Defamation League chief Jonathan Greenblatt’s attack on Fox’s Tucker Carlson for daring to mention the fact that current immigration policy is Electing A New People blew up in his face. Even Greenblatt’s predecessor Abe Foxman voiced public disagreement, if only because he fears totally alienating the network [ADL hit with blowback over calls for Tucker Carlson to resign, by Dominic Mastrangelo, The Hill, April 14, 2021]. But Carlson’s devastating riposte pointed out that the ADL itself opposes the Great Replacement…in Israel. It just supports it for America. Did the ADL really think it could get away with this blatant hypocrisy? Amazing answer: it probably never thought about it at all.

Partly, this can be explained by political factors. In the current state of American discourse, it is extremely dangerous to criticize, or even Notice, Jewish organizations and their activities (which is why Carlson’s response was so remarkable). Consequently, they are simply unused to scrutiny.

But it may partly be a function of Jewish psychology. I noted last week that a considerable technical literature suggests that blacks are lower in “fairness” that the average white. Something similar appears to be true for Jews.

“Fairness,” as I noted in my article on blacks, is “impartial and just treatment or behavior without favoritism or discrimination.” This is a high-order value which demands that you put aside nepotism, ethnocentrism, and even personal gain, in favor of this abstract goal. So, on this basis, would we expect Jews to be as high in “fairness” as Whites?

[Excerpted from the latest Radio Derb, now available exclusively through VDARE.com]

Earlier, by Steve Sailer: Nope, No Riot in Chicago Last Night Over Mexican Kid Shot by a Cop

Here's a phrase due for an airing: "asymmetry of indulgence."

That phrase was coined by conservative British journalist Ferdinand Mount. He was writing about how Leftist politicians get a pass, an indulgence, when they speak in the globalist-universalist diction of Karl Marx and Mao Tse-tung; but when a conservative dares to murmur that perhaps rampant multiculturalism is not a great idea, he is denounced as Literally Hitler.

Plainly we have an asymmetry of indulgence in regard to police shooting of civilians. The asymmetry was in exceptionally plain sight this week, after the shooting of Daunte Wright in a Minneapolis suburb.

The tiny minority of us whose memories stretch all the way back to early January could not help contrasting this shooting and its consequences with the death of Ashli Babbitt:

• Possibly armed black male with an arrest warrant already extant is accidentally shot dead by white female cop. Nationwide outrage. Cop is fired and charged with manslaughter. City manager who said the cop was entitled to due process is also fired. Mass rioting and looting. 
• Obviously unarmed white female is deliberately shot dead by black male cop without challenge or warning. [Crickets.]

As Steve Sailer noted, the "Who, whom?" principle doesn't get any more in-your-face than that.

What happened to Ms. Babbitt was a shameful travesty of law enforcement, and the silence on it enforced by the Regime and its media lackeys is outrageous. It tells us all too plainly where we are.

We have, as the late Larry Auster told us, descended into an ersatz religion, with black people as the sacred objects. The emblematic image of our time: Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, a white man, kneeling in reverent supplication before the gilded casket of black street thug George Floyd.

White people are bad; black people are good. You didn't know that? The rising generations know it: it's taught to them in kindergarten. [Failure Factory, by Christopher Rufo, City Journal, February 23, 2021] In the world of the mid-21st century, if the U.S.A. is still around—which I increasingly doubt—most Americans will stand on it as the foundation of their social outlook.

Earlier: Rubio, Republicans, “Our New Spanish-Speaking Overlords,” And How To Fight Creeping Bilingualism

Donald Trump’s recent endorsement of Senator Marco Rubio for re-election in 2022 has American nationalists rightly skeptical of what POTUS 45 is thinking [That sigh of relief you’re hearing from Marco Rubio? Trump just endorsed him for re-election, by Anthony Man, South Florida Sun Sentinel, April 9, 2021]. Has he fallen for Jared Kushner’s bad advice: move to the “middle” and appease the Ruling Class? Rubio, although originally a Tea Party candidate, has become a pillar of don’t-rock-the-boat Republicans. And he’s part of the ascendant clique of Hispanic Republicans who all too obviously don’t care about preserving the Historic American Nation.

Granted, Rubio opposes Sleepy Joe’s Amnesty and appears to be reinventing himself as a national populist [Marco Rubio rejects Biden immigration bill, calls it ‘blanket amnesty,’ by Adam Shaw, Fox News, January 20, 2021; Rubio raises profile in pandemic, challenges GOP economics, by Jim Saksa, Roll Call, April 23, 2020].

But that doesn’t mitigate his past role as the ringleader of attempted immigration sell-outs. Look no further than his Gang of 8 Amnesty during the Obama era. Rubio’s change in rhetoric is welcome, but he still can’t be trusted.

Take a look at what’s he pushing now, and at what he’s said about Trump’s MAGA base:

• Rubio wants to disarm “suspected domestic terrorists,” meaning any conservative who goes against the grain and stands up even tacitly for the interests of white Americans [Rubio Reintroduces Legislation to Prevent Suspected Terrorists From Purchasing Firearms, Rubio.Senate.gov, February 2, 2021].
• He claims to want an unworkable multi-racial working-class party [Rubio: GOP must rebrand as party of ‘multiethnic, multiracial, working-class’ voters, by Joseph Choi, The Hill, November 11, 2020].