Nothing you love will survive without white people

An Open Letter to Cuckservatives

Jared Taylor, American Renaissance, July 30, 2015

You aren’t just betraying your principles.

Dear Cuckservative,

You are not alone. Like you, Erick Erickson at, Matt Lewis at the Daily Caller, Taylor Millard at Hot Air, the blogger Ace of Spades, and Jim Harper with the Cato Institute are all squirming under the lash of this new coinage. They are squirming because a single word–cuckservative–lays bare the rot at the heart of your movement: American conservatism can conserve nothing if it cannot conserve the nation’s founding stock. I’ll put it bluntly: Nothing you love will survive without white people.

Do you stand for limited government and a balanced budget? Count your black and Hispanic allies. Do you admire Thomas Jefferson? He was a slave-holder who will end up on the dung heap with the Confederate flag. Do you care about stable families and the rights of the unborn? Look up illegitimacy, divorce, and abortion rates for blacks and Hispanics. Do you cherish the stillness at dawn in Bryce Canyon? When the park service manages to get blacks and Hispanics to go camping they play boom-boxes until 1:00 a.m. Was Ronald Reagan your hero? He would not win a majority of today’s electorate.

Do you love Tchaikovsky? Count the non-whites in the concert hall. Do you yearn for neighborhoods where you can leave the keys in your car? There still are some; just don’t expect them to be “diverse.” Are hunting and firearms part of your heritage? Explain that to Barack Obama or Sonia Sotomayor. Are you a devout Christian? Muslim immigrants despise you and your faith. Do you support Israel? Mexicans, Haitians, Chinese, and Guatemalans don’t.

Your great festival–CPAC–is as white as a meeting of the Sons of Confederate Veterans. That’s because blacks and Hispanics and even Asians don’t share your dreams. You’ve heard the old joke: “What do you call the only black person at a conservative meeting? The keynote speaker.” Outreach doesn’t work. You can’t talk someone into loving what you love. Faith, patriotism, duty, and honor come from deeply cultural, religious, and ancestral sources you can’t reach.

Why do you evoke Martin Luther King when you call for a “colorblind” America? You know he wanted quotas for blacks. You evoke King because you think he’ll help you silence blacks and liberals. But it doesn’t work, does it? That’s because only whites–and Asians, when it suits them–even think in terms of “colorblindness.” Blacks and Hispanics will squeeze every unfair advantage out of you they can. At what point will they ever abandon their aggressive racial agenda? When they’re the majority just think how hard they’ll squeeze your grandchildren.

You tell yourself that the things you love about America–and I love them, too–are rooted in certain principles. That is your greatest mistake. They are rooted in certain people. That is why Germans, Swedes, Irishmen, and Hungarians could come and contribute to the America you love. Do you really believe that a future Afro-Hispanic-Caribbean-Asiatic America will be anything like the America your ancestors built?

Let’s consider your principles. Do you dream of a traditional, religious, free-market society with small government, low taxes, and no gun control, where same-sex marriage is illegal, and abortion, divorce, prostitution, and illegitimacy are scorned? There are such places: the tribal areas of Pakistan and Somalia.

And what about countries that violate your principles–with high taxes, huge government, clogged markets, a weak church, strict gun control, and sexual license of all kinds? There’s Scandinavia. And yet if you had to leave the United States you’d much rather live in Denmark than in Waziristan.

Do you see the pattern? Even when they violate your principles, white people build good societies. Even when they abide by your principles, non-whites usually don’t.

We see that in America. Can you think of a majority non-white neighborhood you’d like to live in, or a majority non-white school you’d like your children to attend? No, you can’t. Why, then, don’t you fight with all your strength against the forces of immigration and integration that are turning ever-greater parts of your county into Third-World wastelands?

I know it would be frightening for you to step outside the ever narrower confines of what we are permitted to say about race. You would court the disapproval of every institution in America. You would pay a heavy price. Not since the last Red Scare has the price of speaking out been so high. In the 1950s, it was dangerous to spout Marxist foolishness. Today, the most dangerous ideas are the historical, biological, and moral truths that men such as Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Mark Twain, Walt Whitman, and your grandparents took for granted.

Muster up the courage. Speak these truths. They are your heritage. They are your destiny. They are in your bones. And when you speak these truths, you will join the people who see the only future for America in which the things you love are even conceivable. When you speak these truths you will join the camp of the saints.

And until you speak these truths you will feel the sting of the word “cuckservative.” You will feel its sting because you are not just betraying the heritage and promise of America. You are not just betraying your principles and dreams–even though you think you are working for them. You are betraying your people.

Written by Jared Taylor at American Renaissance

h/t Lee in the Mountains

Follow @BuelahMan


Did I rub you the wrong way or stroke you just right? Let me know below in the comments section or Email me at buelahman {AT} g m a i l {DOT} com

The blog owner does not necessarily agree with the information published or with the original authors’ ideology, but supplies this information to foster comment, reporting, teaching and study. If for some reason you actually liked this post, click the “Like” button below. If you feel like someone else needs to see this (or you just want to ruin someone’s day), click the Share Button at the bottom of the post and heap this upon some undeserving soul. And as sad as this thought may be, it may be remotely possible that us rednecks here at The Revolt please you enough (or more than likely, you are just a glutton for punishment??), that you feel an overwhelming desire to subscribe via the Email subscription and/or RSS Feed buttons found on the right hand panel of this page (may the Lord have mercy on your soul).

Comment Policy:

Please keep comments relevant to the topic. Multiple links will automatically relegate your comment to the spam section, so keep that in mind as you post. 1st time commenters must receive Admin approval, but have free reign after that.

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or

24 thoughts on “Nothing you love will survive without white people

  1. *Isaiah 13 : 14…..coming soon.

    Some conservatives have tried to defend ZIONIST KNEEPAD WEARING
    Huckabee’s comment by claiming his
    “implication is not that President Obama is Adolf Hitler,”
    as Breitbart’s Joel Pollak put it.

    “Rather, it is that Iran is Nazi Germany and that Obama is leaving
    just as the ….ahem,
    JEW HIJACKED U.S. left the pitiful little Jews of Europe vulnerable to
    mean, bad, ANTI-SEMITIC …Hitler in the 1930s.”

    Well, no.

    Look at zionist kneepad wearing Huckabee’s words.
    If Obama is marching synagogue of Satan GOG & MAGOG
    proselytes called “JEWS”…
    to the pretend ovens, he’s doing the job of an SS guard. …{show us the ovens!}
    True, he’s not depicted as Hitler. But he is depicted as a Nazi.
    That’s the ultimate condemnation in our post-Holocaustianity world.
    As Jews and others have argued repeatedly over the years,
    such analogies ought to be avoided in “responsible”
    stinky JEW POO mud slinging political debate.
    They poison the atmosphere.
    And they’re rarely valid.

    Read more: …about why there are no Gog & Magog “Jews” in the Old Testament

    “little people hitting each other, That’s what I like to see”….Napolean {Time Bandits}


    cuckservatives…when only stupid will do


  2. Tommy Sotomayor: Niggaz Are Outraged Because Hulk Hogan Called Niggaz,

    Hilarious commentary on the (Jew-run) media circus.

    Here’s another great one on the Bill Cosby smear campaign:


  3. “Do you support Israel? Mexicans, Haitians, Chinese, and Guatemalans don’t.”

    He’s making me want more Mexican, Haitian, Chinese, and Guatemalan immigrants.

    And everything he says about white people’s support of classical music and love of quiet natural outdoor beauty goes doubly for East Asians, and I don’t think they count as white.


  4. I stopped reading when he said this: “Muslim immigrants despise you and your faith”

    Really? What’s this clown’s view on 9/11? That’s the real litmus test.

    From what I’ve read and experienced, it’s the Jews who hate Gentiles and despise our faith, just read up on what they say about JC and his mother Mary.


    • Yeah, it appears that Jared has a hardon for Muslims. DC Dave suggests he supports Zionism (I’m not sure).

      The main point that attracted me is his calling out the fake “conservatives” especially redstate (which I had several interactions years ago).

      The point is that “conservatives” have become liberals in sheeps clothing. Yet the base still falls for these shills’ issues and turns their backs on the issues they once supported. Right or wrong, many conservatives consider Muslims as haters against their religion (which is primarily Christian).


    • You’re quite right about the Muslim vs. Jewish view of Christianity. Jesus ia an honored prophet in Islam. Talmudic Judaism is virtually defined by its hostility toward Christ and Christianity.

      Here’s your answer from the cuckoo bird himself, or herself, as it were, on your question about 9/11: ” Does President Bush really imagine Osama bin Laden saying to his men: ‘ Those Americans are just too damn free; they’ve got too much opportunity. Let’s kill as many as we can’ ? The idea is absurd. Islamic militants have a grudge against us because of our attacks on Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, and the Sudan.”

      A very bad egg has hatched in the B’Man nest, I’m sorry to say. Jared Taylor is a world-class stinker. I feel a little unclean having my work published on the same page. What will people think?


      • I’m trying to understand your logic with this comment. Taylor is lambasting Bush for his false narrative, then goes on to suggest that the “militants” are pissed because we attacked their countries. The quote has nothing to do with 911, but with American aggression afterwards.

        As I said in private emails, I am not defending Taylor, but please share with me how Taylor is incorrect in this view?

        He also writes in that very article you link to:

        With the risks so great, we should understand what we are doing with perfect clarity. If we go to war, it will not be because we are the land of freedom and opportunity, but because we are the best friend and benefactor of Israel. Should we go to war for Israel? Should we spend $20 billion to kill Muslims, and thereby expose our cities to inevitable reprisal for the sake of Israel? There had better be convincing answers to those questions, but no one is even asking them.

        Americans are prepared to kill and die for America; they will think twice about killing and dying for Israel. Surely, it is because he dares not say thousands of Americans have just died because of Israel that President Bush invents preposterous motives for the men who killed them.

        But even if Americans were prepared to fight for Israel, a war to “whip terrorism” will only whip up terrorism. Israel has responded with great force to terror attacks, and the fury that provokes among Palestinians leads only to more terror. What we are planning will have the same effect, except that the terror will be directed at us.

        Seems fairly accurate to me.

        If one wants to find fault in that article, I would suggest using the lines that support Muslims flying planes in to the buildings, which of course, is erroneous.


        • The entire assumption behind the Taylor article to which I link is that the Islamic militants did it because they don’t like our Middle East policy. It is really impossible to read it any other way. There is absolutely no room in that interpretation for a false flag. The “clown” has failed Greg’s litmus test, pure and simple.


          • There are a large amount of people in 2001 that believed the storyline, apparently including Taylor. Maybe he still does, but this post isn’t about any of that.

            In this very article you link to, Taylor is trying to explain that we should never fight for Israel. Is that something with which you agree (I do)? Taylor is explaining that Bush is full of shit. Do you agree (I do)? That Muslims are pissed about how we have ravaged the ME, especially for Israel’s purpose. Do you agree (I do)? He disavows the War on Terror, but I suppose you disagree? (I happen to agree with him on his stance against the WOT)

            Taylor wrote:
            But the main reason they hate us and want to kill us is that we support Israel.

            I suppose you disagree with that? (Just read around here a bit to see that I agree with that point, as well)

            Sounds like you have a personal issue with Taylor, but agree with much of what he says (correct me above where I am wrong). You are nitpicking shit and disregarding the issues/purpose of the post. Which (and how many) of your Seventeen Techniques are you employing trying to strongarm me into whatever it is you want me to do (delete the post, admit I’m wrong, agree with you that Taylor is an “asshole”????)?

            As I have already conceded, Taylor is wrong about Muslims flying planes into buildings (like many others were in the waning days of 2001). But to suggest that Muslims, in general, weren’t pissed about ME policy before that day is a farce.

            Nevertheless, the post is not about 911, Muslims flying planes, Muslims hating Americans, false flags, etc. I simply agree with the sentiment of the Open Letter he wrote, although not entirely (I have made this clear, to your obvious disdain). Come to think of it, I post pages and pages of your work that I don’t necessarily agree 100% with either. But it still goes up without vitriol or instigating others against you over minor points. Your hatred for this “clown” is muddying your demeanor towards me. That is unfair. I don’t write this blog in order to make you happy, nor do you write your articles to appease me.

            I do not appreciate you trying to put a wedge between me and commenters over your personal vendetta with Taylor whether you agree with me or not on the subject of the post. Greg and I can disagree over all sorts of issues without your needling. I’ve known him much longer than I have you and we survived several disagreements in the past. But he treats me with respect, something I see missing in this exchange.

            I deserve decorum and decent dialogue. Apparently you don’t see it that way.

            If you feel “soiled”, I feel like you just shit all over me.


  5. I’m sorry, but my BS meter just goes haywire at what Jared Taylor is saying with his “up with white people” article. In the first place he’s playing the Left versus Right game, which is the mind trap that the opinion molders want to lock us into. I’m one of you, he’s telling us, and here is how we conservatives are supposed to view the world. It’s a leftist thing not to like Ronald Reagan and not to like Israel. See how insidiously he slips it in. We’re conservatives so it’s just natural that we should like Israel. Only leftists care about those Palestinians but we’re not supposed to, because they’re Muslims (except for the ones who are Christians, but forget about them) and they’re not exactly white.

    He’s railing against our liberal immigration policy, but inconsistent with the focus of this web site, he’s not pointing the finger at the group that’s pushing that liberal immigration policy the hardest. Maybe he does so in some other article, but I seriously doubt that anyone can find such an article.

    The article that I posted in which Taylor has Islamic radicals responsible for 9/11 was found by Googling “Jared Taylor 9/11.” It’s true that it was written early in the game, but I don’t think one will find any revision of his postion based upon later evidence. And maybe a lot of people thought that way early on, but I was certainly never among them. Again, I invite anyone to find an article in which Taylor even hints at 9/11 as a false flag.

    I also think Taylor’s racial politics is completely consistent with the old “divide and conquer” strategy that we decry. The fact that he is a Yale (Spook U.) product is just one more reason to hold him at a very long arm’s length, in my humble opinion. Giving him a platform also sets one up for the “White Supremacist” sort of charge that we see here, and I do not believe that is a very good tactic to do that.


    • Much better tact in your addressing me. Thanks.

      Apparently, a former writer for AmRen (Ian Jobling) disagrees with you on some points.

      Salon paints him as an extremely conservative right-winger:

      The American Renaissance Foundation is an extremely conservative right-wing organization that also publishes a monthly magazine of the same name, American Renaissance (AR). The magazine’s first issue appeared in November 1990. The foundation was established by Jared Taylor (1952–) who serves as president of the New Century Foundation and as editor of AR. Taylor has ties to a variety of domestic and international racists and extremists. He is on the editorial advisory board of Citizens Informer, the newspaper of the Council of Conservative Citizens, a virulently racist group whose website has referred to blacks as “a retrograde species of humanity.” He has contributed writings to The Occidental Quarterly, a racist journal. He also has been a member of the board of directors of the National Policy Institute, a self-styled racist think tank, and has received funding from this institute.

      Taylor has close ties with members of various neo-Nazi groups and with Gordon Baum, the CEO of Council of Conservative Citizens. He is a frequent radio guest of Don Black’s, operator of Stormfront, a white supremacist online forum that also advertises American Renaissance conferences. He also has ties to Mark Weber, head of the Institute for Historical Review. European racists are among his close associates, including members of the British National Party, a racist, far-right political party in England, and the National Front, a racist, far-right political party in France. Nick Griffin, the head of the British National Party, has been a speaker at two American Renaissance conferences. Frédéric Legrand, a member of the National Front, is a frequent contributor to American Renaissance.

      I couldn’t remember where I heard an interview, but found it.

      His main issue is race related and no matter what Jewish influence there is, he questions why whites have allowed it to destroy our heritage (around the 25 min mark). He discusses affirmative action. He discusses slavery (and whites being blamed). He discusses multiculturalism culminating in white genocide. He discusses the absurdity of “white privilege”. He discusses the negative impact of illegal immigration (no assimilation, as an example) and his aversion to amnesty. In a nutshell, he discusses almost everything I discuss here.
      The entire interview is very good. (I should note that Red Ice is very Jew-wise.)

      Maybe he is playing the left versus right game. Maybe he is a leftist feigning conservatism. Maybe his entire agenda is as you say. And maybe it isn’t.

      I never said, as much as you seem to want to insinuate it, that I agree with everything the man has said or written. Nor did I intend to make this post about debating 911 or Muslims or your dislike for Jared Taylor.

      Had you first used a rebuttal like this, my BS meter would not have gone off towards your motivation. I don’t take kindly to accusations and insults, especially from someone I have worked so closely with. For God’s sake, you have my phone number where we could have discussed it without all the rhetoric and games but for some reason you felt an attack on the blog was the best way to address our differences.


      • The telling passage in the article remains: “Are you a devout Christian? Muslim immigrants despise you and your faith. Do you support Israel? Mexicans, Haitians, Chinese, and Guatemalans don’t.”

        It still speaks volumes. I wouldn’t have sent it around even to a private mailing list without at least some comment distancing myself from the sentiment on display. I also do not care for Taylor’s broad-brush racial politics. I think that it is intentionally incendiary. The fact that Holocaust skeptics make common cause with him, I think, gives them a bad name. It makes them all out to be just “white supremacists,” sitting ducks to be attacked.

        And speaking of his broad brush, I might remind readers that when I lived in Puerto Rico, one of San Juan’s radio stations played classical music exclusively. One of the French horn players in the San Juan Symphony Orchestra lived in our building; I heard him practicing a little too much. I have attended classical music performances at the Kennedy Center in Washington, DC, at which Taylor’s beloved whites were in a minority in the audience. The fact that he has a lot of the “right enemies” is no defense, either. So did the phony Clinton critic, Christopher Ruddy.


    • Does Phil Weiss write about race issues, specifically about how the white race is being torn apart? (Somehow, I doubt it, being that he is a Jew). As far as I know Taylor is not Jewish.

      I suppose your point is that by both being from Ivy League schools, they are basically the same? Right? No matter the differences?


          • The second sentence by Jared Taylor has links to four articles. Have you read them all?
            Consider who is more reasonable Jared Taylor or the four articles he dismisses?

            The Ace of Spades blog made an interesting observation. “I was saying: It’s as if on the heels of last month’s racial shooting someone gave the GO code! Now we show our hand.”

            Indeed Jared Taylor’s comments have appeared as if on cue.

            The Ace of Spades also wrote, “I feel a lot dirtier about being an immigration-restrictionist now than I did an hour ago.”

            Whoever directed you to Taylor may be delighted they are driving a wedge between you and Dave Martin.

            In my opinion the Ace of Spades blog was more thoughtful and would have been a better choice for you to post than Taylor.


            • The only person driving a wedge between Dave and I is Dave. He has my phone number and could call me to express his opinion and offer advise. But to come here to chastise me (and to insult me via emails) is certainly the only wedge being driven. (This has already been explained, but the high horse is still be ridden)

              Then you add some snarky comment that had little direction or explanation (comparing a Jew to a non-Jew as equivalents and adding the schools they attended in some sort of crypto purpose I have yet to understand).

              People are welcome to disagree and CONSTRUCTIVELY offer correction and advise. That is NOT what happened here. The tact is the problem.


  6. Just a general observation and question, BMan. I’m not walking into the fray because I don’t know. What happened to publishing comments in chronological order? Took me awhile to figure out who said what first. I know, some other bloggers have taken up that practice. Is there a reason for it? It kind of fogs the mirror, imo.


Comments are closed.