About

Hi, and welcome to my blog!

Though I don’t have a big problem with disclosing my real name, I go by ‘HAarlem VEnison’ online for the sake of consistency. I am a novelist, playwright, poet-warrior, hitchhiker, former freight-rider, internationalist, panpsychist, evolutionary humanist, yoga-enthusiast, and post-racial theorist. Much of my inner life has been and will continue to be spent weighing in on the moral and ethical implications of civilization’s persistent–and ever-intensifying–collective denial that meaningful genetic variation exists between human populations, and that this variation is more likely than not to have a limiting affect on deep behavior patterns. However, I don’t mean to suggest that this should be used as a pretext for treating different races unequally. To the contrary, I am essentially advocating that public policy and secular morality be based on a decidedly agnostic position with regards to the origins of racial disparities. I am advocating for equality and the equal protection of civil rights for all people and all peoples. Importantly–and this is my principal connection to the alt-right–I adamant that the war on ‘white racism’ must end.

The cup is half full–but it is also half empty.

To anybody who would identify themselves as being “against racism”:

I have no qualms with the United States’ status as a multicultural society nor any of its democratic institutions; nor do I support the creation of any ‘white nation’ that would compromises the territorial integrity of the US.

Believe it or not, I am very much opposed to racial discrimination. In fact, I am very opposed to all forms of discriminatory treatment of people based on their outward appearances. However, actually ending discrimination – as I frequently contemplate – is easier said than done.

I am generally supportive of amnesty for undocumented immigrants, at least those who have grown roots in the United States, and believe that open borders is our global destiny even if it might be insane presently.

I support the idea of free, universally-available higher education. (It’s feasible!)

In fact, I am spiritually supportive of most liberal, leftist ideals. However, I believe that these ideals have, for at least the past several decades, been predicated on bad science. Paradise on Earth is not as simple as ‘ending racism’ while pretending that racial differences do not exist. (As I like to put it, you can’t launch a GPS satellite into orbit and expect it to work if you don’t believe in General Relativity.)

At the same time, don’t get me wrong: I am absolutely opposed to deliberate eugenics and paternalism.

I am not a right-winger; I agree with many of Occupy Wall Street’s sentiments. You might call me a pragmatic leftist.

I don’t have any major qualms with feminism or any other variety of gender-nonconformity so long as it doesn’t disrupt the big picture of human behavioral ecology. As far as individuals are concerned, I support them in their pursuit of happiness even though I tend to suspect that sexuality is mostly malleable. However, as somebody who sees the viability of society as being dependent on a preponderance heritable traits among those individuals who make up society, I believe that it is in the interest of a stable demographic trajectory that all mankind be encouraged to having ~2.0 children each–no more and no less.

I am neither a philo- nor an anti-Semite, although I am very opinionated about the “JQ”.

I am an avowed enthusiast of mutually-respectful dialogue even in spite of how vexing it may sometimes be.

Continuing…

That said, I am nevertheless a race-realist. This might be misleading, however, because I don’t contend race to represent a stable, discrete category; nor do I contend that races–let’s call them “human populations”–can have value ascribed them according to some hierarchy. Rather, I am a race-realist inasmuch as I am adamant that the hegemonic antiracist paradigm must be called into question, with antiracism here defined as all institutional and cultural structures predicated on the tired, old theory that racial differences can only be explained through the lens of culture, and that variation does not exist across fuzzy racial boundaries. To be blunt, this is an immaculate example of pseudoscience. I must emphasize that I, a student of the philosophy of science, am being dispassionate when I call it pseudoscientific.

To everyone:

While some political bedfellows might well join me in proclaiming the evils of the ever-intensifying war on ‘white racism’, many are hesitant to associate themselves with the idea that meaningful racial differences do indeed exist even if we are “99.9% the same” (as many antiracist apologists like to bring up). I believe this ‘tact’ on their parts is flawed because, after all, if it were true that observed differences in socioeconomic status and life-outcomes between races were due solely to external factors, like white racism, then I personally would be adamant and outspoken in my support of fighting–and winning–the war on white racism. That said, I am explicitly and unambiguously not a white nationalist, white supremacist, or fascist–although I can absolutely understand where such reactionary sentiments are coming from.

It is important to note that I am basically flying solo in constructing this uniquely sober, empathetic post-racial discourse which recognizes the probable existence of interracial variation but does so as impartially and empathetically as possible, without succumbing to the temptation of an ‘us’ versus ‘them’ narrative nor the creeping suspicion of any rigid hierarchies. That said, my critiques and screeds often switch without indication between being directed at the (largely) hate-spewing alt-right and those who are complicit in the banal evil that is mainstream antiracism. It is for this reason that many readers might find it difficult to properly frame my discussion. I say some very radical things and, despite how coherent and justifiable I feel my positions to be, I strike many readers as a bothersome anomaly, a platypus-like amalgamation of a naysaying racist and a bleeding-heart, moralizing humanist. Sadly, the human mind, encumbered by a need for metabolic frugality and data-compression, tends to see the world in black-and-white

It is as though I am standing alone atop a mount in the middle of no man’s land, equanimous in my state of supreme internal coherence, variably preaching, laughing or screaming at either side, hated by an angry mob on either side.

Though I am (mostly) alone where I stand today, I predict that it will prove to be the point at which human history soon pivots on its axis. I should add to this statement that I consider myself to be building upon the veritable mantle of the liberal, secular humanist tradition, with deference to multiculturalism, democracy, and the spirit of antiracism itself.

What is the “Acid-Right”?

You may be wondering what the “Acid-Right” could possibly be intended to signify or convey. Mostly, I do not intend it to be the label for any political ideology, let alone a movement. It is little more than the amusing name of this blog, hopefully conveying that I am not beholden to any political or cultural alignment or identity. Although I self-identify as a ‘racist’, for numerous reasons, and want to make whatever humble contribution I can to dismantling the hegemonic morality of antiracism–that which I, to put it a different way, define as the set of all sociocultural and institutional structures built for the purpose of buttressing the otherwise decrepit, pseudoscientific theory of racial sameness–I am nevertheless not a right-winger; nor am I a white nationalist or anything else of the like. In fact, although I see racial discrimination as an immutable faculty of cognition–one which is inspired by an evolutionary need to recognize patterns and make quick judgments–I am nevertheless fundamentally much opposed to it and try my damndest to not only be proved wrong in my expectations of others based on race, but to see the glimmer of my own soul in every person I meet.

What is your relationship with the “Alt-Right”?

By the original definition of the alt-right as anybody who questions the hegemonic dogma of racial sameness and disagrees with the war on white racism, then I am most definitely a member of the alt-right. That said, I am certainly not a right-winger, and I disagree with many of the beliefs, sentiments, and dispositions that often accompany the belief in race-realism. To put it plainly, I am not a white nationalist, white supremacist, or neo-fascist (or paleo-fascist!). I do not harbor any hopes for a “New Roman Empire”. Regarding ‘white supremacism’, I don’t think there’s anything fundamentally special about the fuzzy set of human lineages that are colloquially refered to as the ‘white race’, and I don’t think that the achievements Western civilization can be attributed solely due to any “white genius” per se, to use the language of Richard Spencer.