Whites on Welfare

Scott Greer:

He got pushback because he generalizes all whites who may go on welfare for legitimate reasons as moochers. In an attempt to go viral with a catchy-one liner, he lumps in many whites who are good people but on welfare. This is a problem inherent with Twitter: brevity is the soul of virality, except when it misfires and you find yourself having to backtrack or your followers turn on you. So in writing a longer tweet to prevent being misunderstood or misconstrued, the trade-off is less virality compared to a snappy one-liner.

On the other hand, social programs are funded by taxpayers, so there is nothing shameful about availing oneself of such services if applicable or on hard times, as you, the taxpayer, already paid for it.

Scott expounded on his views in a follow-up article. He says it would not work:

Even if people did do this for BASED reasons, it would have no real effect. There are not that many dedicated white nationalists. The government would not be bothered if a few hundred guys impoverished themselves so they could be eligible for SNAP. This isn’t going to strain the regime of its resources. All it’s going to do is ensure that none of these morons have any money left over for their cause and alienate them from the rest of white America. Ordinary people don’t want to join a movement of government assisted deadbeats. People would rightfully recognize this is something exclusively for losers.

He’s moving the goalposts or arguing against a strawman. The welfare argument is that if ALL whites did this, the system would fail. Obviously, being that white nationalists are a tiny percentage of the population it would not do anything if they all went on the dole. No kidding.

But to entertain the hypothetical of a mass-defection by whites in the labor force, there is case study: the Covid lockdowns. It would be like that but worse due to longer duration, at least initially. It would be devastating in the short-term, but the US economy is remarkably adaptable. Ironically, it would backfire by leading to mass immigration of non-whites to fill the acute labor shortfall. Desperate for workers, a defacto open borders policy would be implemented. Tech companies increasingly rely on non-whites, such as Hispanics for Uber/Doordash delivery, and higher-ranking roles filled by Asians and Indians. The US economy has demonstrated remarkable imperviousness at anything thrown at it.

The particular kind of white nationalist who valorizes welfare wants to model his identity after blackness. These types believe that blacks offer the real path to power in our society. They want to have a white Al Sharpton, a white Kwanzaa, a white history month, a white studies department at the university, and, most importantly, gibs for whites. This will never happen because white Americans operate completely differently from blacks. We don’t want handouts. We want to be in control of our own destiny. Blacks may have their racial identity indulged by the regime, but it comes at the expense of any real autonomy. Black nationalists wanted to have self-sufficient communities that were independent of white America. Black leaders abandoned that vision in favor of complete dependence on the regime. But at least they got Kwanzaa out of the deal.

We need a better white identity.

To say that whites need an identity–but that whites, unlike blacks, reject the concept of racial solidary–is contradictory. In arguing against welfare he inadvertently also makes a case against white identity.