And Red State's Jay Caruso runs with the story, "White Supremacists Form a Super PAC. Take a Wild Guess Who They're Supporting?" (That's a safe link, to Caruso's Twitter feed. Red State and the National Review people completely lost it this last couple of weeks over Donald Trump. It's been pretty ugly, really.)
This isn't the first media outlet hyping the so-called "White Nationalist" support for trump. The group's robocalls were also reported in Iowa. The Washington Post covered them, sensationally, apparently. Jared Taylor, who's interviewed at the CNN video, responded to WaPo's report here, "Donald Trump, White Supremacism, and the Insanity of the WASHINGTON POST":
The Washington Post recently interviewed me for a story about robocalls I made to support Donald Trump in Iowa [Hear a white nationalist’s robocall urging Iowa voters to back Trump, January 12, 2016]Still more. (Via Memeorandum.)
The reporter, Peter Holley [email him], was the usual bright young lad, and we had a 45-minute phone conversation that covered a lot of ground.
People who know nothing about racial dissidents call us “white supremacists,” so I explained why that’s wrong.
Me: “No, I’m not a white supremacist. If that’s someone who wants to rule over people of other races, I’ve never even met one. They’re extinct.”I went on to explain that “white supremacist” is the most morally-loaded expression of contempt for a white person in the English language. I told him it’s the equivalent of calling blacks ni**ers. If you want to say someone is so wicked and primitive that you needn’t pay attention to a word he says, you call him a “white supremacist.”
Mr. Holley: “What about someone who thinks white people are superior to other people?”
Me: “I don’t think that. East Asians have higher average IQs, lower crime rates, fewer illegitimate children—they’re superior to whites in lots of ways. Do you want to call me a ‘yellow supremacist’?”
Well, Mr. Holley managed not to call me the equivalent of a ni**ger—but referred to me as “editor of the white supremacist magazine American Renaissance.”
When I emailed to ask him why AmRen is “white supremacist” he wrote back to say: “I think, given the content of your magazine, that’s not inaccurate.”
I suppose the best we can hope for from Washington Post is that it be “not inaccurate.”
So what did he call me? A “white nationalist.”
As I like to ask, what do you call a black person who prefers black culture and prefers to live and hang out with other black people? A black person. It’s the ones who don’t prefer black culture etc. who are called names like “Oreo.” It’s the same with Hispanics. “Coconut” is not a compliment.
But as soon as a white man says he prefers white people and European culture then you need a swear word for him. If you’ve been talked out of “supremacist” you go with “nationalist”—because it has the bomb-throwing aroma of Basque or Kurdish nationalism.
Years ago, I sometimes let people class me as a “white nationalist.” But I’ve since concluded that the term is hopelessly tainted. White advocate, race realist, identitarian—I accept any of those terms. But I can’t get the WaPo to use them anyway.
The less sophisticated-East Cost-liberal that a paper is, the better. Local community fishwraps have written touchingly straightforward stories about me. Even USA Today recently wrote “Taylor, who describes himself as a ‘white advocate,’. . . .” [White nationalists urge support for Donald Trump in Iowa, by Fredreka Schouten, January 12, 2016]
I tried to warn WaPo’s Mr. Holley about the Southern Poverty Law Center ($PLC to VDARE.com). For the 100th time, I tried to explain how contemptible it is to look for people with whom you disagree, claim to read their minds, and then call them “haters.” It’s like “white supremacist.” “Haters” are so unhinged that what they say is sure to be rubbish, so if the SPLC’s Mark Potok says Jared Taylor is a hater that’s all you need to know about him...
That's all good.
Remember, though, I draw the line at flying the Confederate Flag. If you're going to insist flying it because is "heritage not hate," you've lost me. I'm sympathetic, but I just don't buy the "heritage" argument, even less so after spending all last summer reading Civil War history.