May 17, 2013

Ed West out at The Telegraph

Ed West, one of the most intellectually sophisticated pundits in the English-speaking world, is out of work after four years at The Telegraph in the U.K.
It's my job as a conservative to depress you, so I'm sad to say that, as this will be my last blogpost here, you'll have to find  some other way to get yourself down from now on; maybe stick yourself in a room with some Radiohead CDs and a bottle of gin and put Requiem for a Dream on a loop.... 
Conservatism may sound miserable, even misanthropic, but it only recognises that within the communities we live in, which are from an evolutionary point of view unnaturally large, there need to be firm rules to minimalise free-riding, violent conflict and economic disaster.  
The idea of evolutionary conservatism is to build a society that is as just, progressive, wealthy and happy as is possible within the boundaries of human nature. 
Evolution explains why people are unwilling to pool their resources with people unlike them, why men who are not expected to be providers will become hyper-masculine, why poor people are more hostile to welfare claimants than the rich are, why we’re more scared of terrorists and paedophiles than car drivers, and why things like the gender gap will never be eliminated (though social forces can reduce it). 
Evolution even explains why so much of political debate still revolves too much around Marx and Freud, and too little around Darwin; people just find it difficult to embrace controversial ideas, and are unwilling to accept that they’re wrong. We’re all guilty of this, because we’ve evolved that way, and that’s why political debate is always dominated by irrationality, prejudice, wilful ignorance and tribalism. 
It’s why opinions can inspire very strong feelings, hatred even. We all must occasionally see the face of a know-it-all columnist whose views we disagree with and want to punch them in the face. (Sometimes I look at my own byline picture and want to punch it. I’m sure it must be impossible, after writing comment pieces for a while, not to hate yourself to a certain extent; in fact there’s probably something wrong with you if you don’t. Maybe you’re a psychopath.) 
But then we haven’t evolved to live with such confrontational views being shoved in our faces; humans have a deep-seated desire to be in communion, which explains both the appeal of religion and the moral cowardice of those who hold an unpopular opinion or inconvenient truth when faced with a mob. 
That’s ultimately what political commentators are for, to say something different when faced with the collective madness that passes for current opinion. 
I hope that over the last four years I’ve occasionally succeeded; I’ve regretted some articles, although the Telegraph weren’t keen on a piece called “My five worst blogposts”, which could have had a Ratner effect. But don’t hold it against me. 
So thank you for reading and commenting; I like many of the commenters, and often find them interesting and informative. So thank you, and I will continue somewhere the struggle against cultural Marxism, the Frankfurt School, Lib-Lab-Con, Common Purpose, Gramscian hegemony and reality in general. And remember, if you think things are bad, they can always get worse, and probably will.

Ed's book The Diversity Illusion is available from Amazon.co.uk.

23 comments:

sunbeam said...

"why poor people are more hostile to welfare claimants than the rich are,"

I've heard this, and think it is something I have observed, but what are possible explanations for it from a sociological, or even genetic standpoint (reading these sites it seems like you can't separate the two).

And:

"there need to be firm rules to minimalise free-riding,"

What gives? Most of the truly rich seem to me to be rentier types, no matter the trendy tech fads, or boardroom machinations they took to get there.

Not many of these guys are Henry Ford, or Thomas Edison.

It has always seemed to me that in general conservatism idolized Wall Streeters. Anyone who can make a buck can't be bad at all right?

Rearranging the pile of beans to make sure you sit on the tallest heap isn't making more beans.

Anonymous said...

West, like Richwine, is just another privileged bully getting his way in the world.

Anonymous said...

The Daily Telegraph is just another scotch-irish mouthpiece.

Simon in London said...

:-(

Anonymous said...

"I've heard this, and think it is something I have observed, but what are possible explanations for it from a sociological, or even genetic standpoint (reading these sites it seems like you can't separate the two)." - They are the ones that have to live with the dysfunction it spawns. eliminate that element and the poor would go back to being pro redistribution.

Anonymous said...

This is sad news.

All we need is one millionaire on our side to fund an opinion magazine or think tank to collect these huddled intellectuals yearning to speak free. It might be called "The Mother of Exiles".

"Keep, archaic rags, your storied prose!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled intellectuals yearning to speak free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming sheets.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Anonymous said...

The idea of evolutionary conservatism is to build a society that is as just, progressive, wealthy and happy as is possible within the boundaries of human nature.

So how is it any different from progressivism?

Alice said...

Progressivism claims there is no human nature.

RD said...

Did West quit his Telegraph gig? Or did he get pushed out for being too politically incorrect?

Anonymous said...

Will the Mail or the Express take him?

goatweed

BrokenSymmetry said...

"All we need is one millionaire on our side to fund an opinion magazine or think tank to collect these huddled intellectuals yearning to speak free. "

Thank God for Taki

Anonymous said...

"All we need is one millionaire on our side to fund an opinion magazine or think tank to collect these huddled intellectuals yearning to speak free. It might be called "The Mother of Exiles"."

Why doesn't this happen? I speculate it's because millionaires have so many Hispanic servants. And it's so hard to be anonymous. Especially with the left wing Using all their contacts and tricks to expose and defame "racists".

Is there any solution to this?
Robert Hume

Anonymous said...

sunbeam
"why poor people are more hostile to welfare claimants than the rich are,"

"I've heard this, and think it is something I have observed, but what are possible explanations for it"

They're not against *deserved* welfare payments. They're against people who fiddle the system. The reason the poor are more likely to be hostile is they are more likely to live next door to the people fiddling the system so they see it more.

(Obviously when i say fiddling the system i mean people who are fiddling it on a small scale not the people doing it on a vast scale like the Wall St. banks.)

.
"West, like Richwine, is just another privileged bully getting his way in the world."

Jews have vastly more privilige than anyone else so anyone who is genuinely against "privilege" rather than simply an anti-white racist would criticize Jews for it first.

.
"The idea of evolutionary conservatism is..."

"So how is it any different from progressivism?"

1. Progressivism denies evolution except for homosexuality.

2. Modern progressivism has been hijacked by what is for the most part poisonous meme warfare designed to destroy ethnic and cultural cohesion. Destroying ethnic and cultural cohesion will have the opposite effect they (the genuine ones) think it will.

Anonymous said...

'Why doesn't this happen? I speculate it's because millionaires have so many Hispanic servants. And it's so hard to be anonymous. Especially with the left wing Using all their contacts and tricks to expose and defame "racists".'

Maybe Takimag counts. Does it? I guess other alternatives are:
a) We can find someone who financially benefits from an end to immigration or border enforcement.*
b) One of ourselves builds a fortune and dedicates some of it to this cause.
c) Someone uses his family's wealth for this project (this was how the Frankfurt School got bankrolled, through Felix Weil's father's wealth).

*Maybe a fencing contractor - hey, why not get the company that built the Israeli fence? It's not like they wouldn't have connections, it would be a win-win! Think of all that border to cover!

Ross said...

He still works for the Catholic Herald.

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/author/ed-west/

Cail Corishev said...

"why poor people are more hostile to welfare claimants than the rich are,"


Here's a possibility: if I'm a poor person, I've been told all my life that wealth is a zero-sum game. If a rich person gets a new dollar, he took it from a poor person somewhere, right?

Therefore, if another poor person gets a dollar he didn't deserve, that must have come from the zero-sum pie, and therefore might have come from my pocket. He's stealing from me.

A rich person might feel the same way, if he pays much in taxes. But he can afford to have a dollar stolen more than a poor person can.

International Jew said...

One reason we don't have "more millionaires on our side" is that millionaires (ok, really, we're talking about deca- and centimillionaires) usually own businesses, and the promotion of "controversial" political views is bad for business. Left activists will organize boycotts against you. Local, State and the Federal government will find ways to harrass you, or at the very least place you at a disadvantage against your competitors. Moreover, your anonymous contribution today may well be on the front page tomorrow.

Anonymous said...

This is a depressing turn of events but I have a feeling we'll be seeing more of Mr. West. In his final column he said he would "continue somewhere the struggle against cultural Marxism, the Frankfurt School, Lib-Lab-Con, Common Purpose, Gramscian hegemony and reality in general."

My main concern is that he won't have a platform to reach people who don't already share his realism.

Maybe he can become a British Steve Sailer and influence more "palatable" writers through a personal blog, or maybe he will go on to work primarily as a non-fiction author. In any event, he's young, smart, and talented. Water finds it's own level.

If you are reading these comments Ed, we luv ya!!!

-The Judean People's Front

Anonymous said...

What would you have us do in retaliation for the supposedly intentional attack on the USS Liberty. You guys all, rightfully in my opinion, opposed the recent intervention in Libya, but Qaddafi openly targeted Americans in the discotheque bombings. So I guess I want to understand what constitutes unconscionable attacks on the US and what is just the diplomatic equivalent of a mosquito bite.


I will also add that quite a few paleocons are very outspoken in support of Russia, a nation who let us not forget killed 278 people including a US congressman basically for the hell of it. I say we punish the Israelis for USS Liberty right after we arm the Georgians to re-take South Ostessia. It is just odd to me that every other country on earth can attack America, and the Paulites go blowback, but then one country "attacks" the US and all of a sudden its my country right or wrong.

Anonymous said...

"One reason we don't have "more millionaires on our side" is that millionaires (ok, really, we're talking about deca- and centimillionaires) usually own businesses, and the promotion of "controversial" political views is bad for business. Left activists will organize boycotts against you. Local, State and the Federal government will find ways to harrass you, or at the very least place you at a disadvantage against your competitors. Moreover, your anonymous contribution today may well be on the front page tomorrow."

This is a very good point. And yes, I am not talking about millionaires but rather centimillionaires for whom funding a stable of intellectuals (at say, 50-100k/year) amounts to a tithe from the business earnings, i.e. not more than 10%. So if their business is worth $100 million, the profits are $10 million per year, a tithe of that is $1 million per year and will fund such an operation.

The business would either have to have a strong financial interest in curtailing immigration, or be the sort of business impervious to assault (think an owner controlled hedge fund, like Buffett's from the Berkshire period onward that does not rely on external investors). Or a trust fund. Or Mel Gibson.

Hunsdon said...

Anonydroid at 3:13 spammed: I say we punish the Israelis for USS Liberty right after we arm the Georgians to re-take South Ostessia.

Hunsdon said: We have been arming the Georgians. Your gibberish is like saying, "We arm the Georgians to re-take South Ossetia right after we arm the Palestinians to retake Palestine."

Hunsdon said...

Anonydroid at 3:13 spammed: You guys all, rightfully in my opinion, opposed the recent intervention in Libya, but Qaddafi openly targeted Americans in the discotheque bombings.

Hunsdon: First off, I apologize for two posts on the same subject. We opposed the intervention in Libya because it was fundamentally opposed to US interests. It wasn't just about revenge. Bygones, bygones, right? Cat-happy turned around and played nice, gave up his WMD programs, gave us intel we wanted, and even if he hadn't, a smart feller could see that, "apres Qudhuffer, the deluge."

You asked what we should do about the supposedly intentional attack on the Liberty? Maybe, I don't know, realize that sometimes the US and Israel have interests that are not 100 percent coterminal?

Anonymous said...

Ed posted in the comments that he's been appointed deputy editor of the Catholic Herald.