Implicit Whiteness #2- SWPL = SBPDL, Or, Implicit Whiteness Among the Elite

We live in a world of implicit whiteness. Most people in the US are still white. This should mean whiteness is not important, but what kind of white person you are is very important. There are a variety of different kinds of white people, all relating to the system in different ways.

A few years ago a guy named Christian Lander put out one of those thin humor books you see in airport newsstands or on the front tables of bookstores, with the provocative title “Stuff White People Like”.

This phenomenon is not new and not first identified by Lander. Twenty years ago Paul Fussell wrote a book called Class: A Guide Through The American Status System. About ten years ago David Brooks wrote one called Bobos in Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There. These books talk about things the chattering class has been obsessed with since the 50’s- who is really high-class, and how it should be defined.

Where Lander struck a nerve- and got far more attention and sold far more books than with a more descriptive title such as “Stuff Pretentious Young People Who Went to Expensive Colleges And Wish They Were Higher Status Than They Are Like”- was to use the word white. The word “white” when used to describe people is always bad, and the best way for him to mock these people was to call them white.

People criticized the book on the basis that 1) the people described were only a small portion of white people 2) some of this type of people aren’t white and 3) many of the things described- sushi, dogs, living by the water, foreign travel- are liked by many different kinds of people.

What Lander has really identified is status competition by which upper middle-class white people try to assert higher status than other upper middle-class white people. Steve Sailer has noted that class competition explains a lot of white political behavior. “Stuff White People Like” looks at this in terms of consumer behavior.

Real status has nothing at all with what you consume, it’s simply a matter of money and power. What “swipples” are trying to do is put themselves close to people who have cultural, and thus political power. Actual rich people don’t try to show their sophistication by eating sushi. They go to expensive French restaurants. They don’t fuss over what $20 bottle of wine is good- they get a $200 bottle. They don’t go backpacking in Peru, they stay in a fine hotel in Switzerland. They don’t live in Brooklyn with roommates, they live by themselves in Manhattan. This is just as true of hipster-type rich and powerful people like advertising and media moguls or pop stars as it is among Wall Street types. 

“Swipples” or hipsters don’t really mimic upper-class behavior, but they are trying. The elite like being sucked up to. They like that these people are trying to get their approval, and trying to distinguish themselves from ordinary middle-class people. Because of this, “SWPL” behavior is positive implicit whiteness- besides actual elite behavior, the only positive kind.

One purpose of elite or pseudo-elite behavior is to make a status distinction from other whites. I believe I have stumbled upon another, which is also important. In Physical and Social Isolation From Blacks I wondered how we might maintain separation from blacks without using open segregation, which is frowned upon in this establishment, as the E-trade baby says. I noted that convenience store owners sometimes play classical music over speakers to disperse black loiterers, and wondered what else along those lines might work.

Mindweapon reposted this; RVT commented here and there that in addition to classical music, blacks don’t like flowers, classical or Victorian architecture, and dogs. He thought this was pretty obvious, but a lot of people were shocked by the flowers comment, including me.

These are all upper middle-class things; and it strikes me that the other purpose of such behavior is that it keeps blacks away. Swipple and hipster clothing, hairstyles, behavior, music, and recreational activities are all “Stuff Black People Don’t Like”. There are black swipples and hipsters- I live in an area thick enough with hipsters you occasionally see a black one- but they are quite rare, and they are among the few well-behaved blacks. It’s impossible without formal segregation to keep blacks out completely, but SWPLs do it effectively enough.

Furthermore I’m not really a segregationist. If blacks are willing to conduct themselves in a civilized manner, they should be allowed to go where they want. But where civilized behavior is insisted on, blacks will be few.

I’m not saying go out and get some skinny jeans, a smiley face tattoo, a stingy-brim fedora and dye your hair purple. I find swipples and hipsters ugly, annoying, and stupid- “gay”, as the kids still say in spite of the thought police. But seeing this we can gather some clues as to how to protect ourselves.


About thrasymachus33308

I like fast cars, fast women and southern-fried rock. I have an ongoing beef with George Orwell. I take my name from a character in Plato's "Republic" who was exasperated with the kind of turgid BS that passed for deep thought and political discourse in that time and place, just as I am today. The character, whose name means "fierce fighter" was based on a real person but nobody knows for sure what his actual political beliefs were. I take my pseudonym from a character in an Adam Sandler song who was a obnoxious jerk who pissed off everybody.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Implicit Whiteness #2- SWPL = SBPDL, Or, Implicit Whiteness Among the Elite

  1. mindweapon says:

    The way to be a SWPL without the pretentiousness is to focus on social reform. There have always been social reformers — abolitionists, temperance movement (epic phail, but it did have a temporary victory), the early feminists agitating for the vote. All of these movements were flawed and misguided, but they were right for their time. They were responses to very real problems.

    The temperance movement was because women and children were in poverty because men would spend their paycheck on booze. The feminist movement was opposed to cads who would get women pregnant and leave them in the lurch, and was also in favor of Eugenics and White survival and limiting colored fecundity. They didn’t realize that giving women the vote would create a nightmarish world of evertyhing they opposed. They knew women who were sensible housewives. They didn’t realize that they were helping create a society of race-mixers and old maid cat ladies. Talk about unintended consequences!

    Everyone looks to the Revolutionary War model; Thomas Jefferson and George Washington organizing an army. But that was a medieval age compared to today.

    The model we need to look at is social reform movements, I think similar to the early feminist movement. So the question is — what problem do we attack?

    If you know my writings, you’ll know that my selection for a social reform cause is economic relocalization. — starting with agricultural and food processing relocalization, followed by industrial/artisan relocalization (artisan shops making stuff like bicycles, washing machines, repairing and maintaing machinery).

    For example, instead of bringing in seasonal workers from Mexico for a harvest, local employers need to be flexible enough to let their employees work on the local farms for a few weeks a year for stuff like the planting and harvesting The farms should pay a somewhat higher wage than the local jobs, so there is an incentive. The logic is that this money will stay in the area, rather than get Western Unioned back to Meheeko. People who do the same shit all the time will be psyched to do something a little different for a couple weeks at a time. Make a big party out of it.

    Also, stay at home mom’s should have food processing and laundry businesses. Their kids can help them. So instead of being an employee, having to own a car and commute and sweat getting fired and sweat pleasing a boss, the stay at home mom’s can be their own boss from day one, AND have kids, AND stay home with the kids.

    Now the grumpy old conservatives will object:

    1. No one wants to be a farmer any more.
    2. Agribusiness and the supermarket system do it more efficiently.

    First, no one wants to be a farmer. This labor needs to be distributed across the population. There’s a lot of minimum wage workers, a lot of unemployed, and a lot of people who do literally NOTHING and like it (welfare, social security disability, tards, et cetera). Meanwhile, the middle class works its ass off in offices and has no life, while tards and welfare negroes frolic in the streets like puppies in the sun and breed like rabbits.

    Screw that. Let’s put our local lower classes to work again, instead of bringing in Mexicans!

    Distributing the labor solves the perennial problem of agricultural labor. Using Blacks and Mexicans was a bad solution. Using our native workforce seasonally, like the USSR did, is the way to go. When something is in season, the pay should be high enough that every auto mechanic and store clerk should want to go pick apples or berries. “Overpaying” them above their regular wage (say 15 bucks an hour with lots of overtime) is actually a great idea, because they will spend that money LOCALLY. And no, this will not make food prohibitively expensive, because so much money that used to flow out of the community will stay in the community.

    The stay at home moms and whoever needs/wants a job will process the harvest, and it will be sold locally. Again, more money staying IN the community.

    There will be some full time farmers, but they will have employees doing shift work. They won’t be these gritty, overworked men who spent their life at tedium. They will be basically managers.

    So this is the long term vision. In the short term, I organize community gardens. And I must say, there are no blacks involved. None. No Hispanics either. Some Americanized Asian stoner kids, and Whites.

    Community gardens bring out the most spirited and social-reform minded people around, and no they aren’t big liberals. They might be “default liberals” who will in the future be open to reasoning with. If you are in a city area, you’ll get lots of SWPL’s.

    To wrap it all up — economic relocalization, which is catching on slowly but will gain steam, is the social reform to concentrate on in 2011 and beyond. OUr current economic system is broken, but the masses have not admitted it to themselves yet. They are still in denial. Other things to do — car sharing, house sharing — anything to save money or produce things people really really need (not luxuries, but only necessities).

  2. Mr. Roach says:

    There is a flipside too. Where blacks are plentiful–as in sports–whites often behave worse, exposed as they are to the normalcy of bad black behavior. I think this is why soccer is getting so popular in the ‘burbs. Your point on minority behavior is also important in this way. Most white people don’t really mind Asians. Why? They behave well, even if they tend to push their kids a tad harder in school than most of us would be comfortable with.

  3. RVT says:

    Of course the ultimate black repellent is confidence. Nothing scares blacks more than white people who aren’t afraid of them in the slightest.

  4. Pingback: Linkage is Good for You: Routine Edition

  5. Tom Wolfe also wrote some excellent material along these lines.

  6. spandrell says:

    You are not really a segregationist? Now you’re playing PC too? please. Blacks don’t belong out of Africa, period.

    • Small numbers of blacks who conform to white behavior don’t cause real problems. Hunter Wallace argues that all the BRA problems began right after the Civil War; but the North didn’t need to have or maintain segregation because there were few blacks and they didn’t cause trouble.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s