The Basis for Group Pride

Last month, I came across a hackneyed, but common critique that pertains to group pride. According to Will Menaker (a Left-leaning podcaster),

Molyneux and everyone else obsessed with IQ/Western Culture is just a giant participation trophy program for people who think that by accident of their birth they’ve done something noteworthy and really want credit and respect for it.

I’ve sufficiently addressed the race and IQ field; but now presents an apt occasion to explain the sound underpinnings of group pride.

Alluded to in Menaker’s tweet, is that individuals shouldn’t take pride in what others have achieved: for this is akin to drawing from an unearned, unmerited source of fulfilment.

Now it is obviously correct to assume that individual pride is distinct from group pride; and more specifically, ordinary white people should not take personal acclaim for the work of Aristotle or Wilbur Wright. However, if only individuals can take pride in what individuals themselves have achieved, from this nit-picking paradigm follows the virtually unanswerable: where does exclusively individual achievement begin and end? Hard work is a clear prerequisite in any exceptional individual triumph; but where would most successful people be without loving parents, safe homes, close mentors, modern technology, and good health– most of which were imperative for great individual success? Evidently, contrary to those critics ofgroup pride, any framework that conceives pride through an entirely individualist prism, is anything but airtight.

And for those that surmise people shouldn’t take pride in what arose “by accident of their birth”, what of Lebron James, Gary Ablett, Albert Einstein and Aristotle; whose triumphs would’ve been impossible without their extraordinary, god-given talents?

Beyond the limitations inherent to a wholly individualist approach to pride, the endeavours of great leaders and individuals before us, were often undertaken for the wellbeing of future (often specifically defined) generations. Clearly, the past, present and future do not operate in distinct vaccums, and should not be treated as such.

Consider some of our great forebears. The present was surely no irrelevancy; but Edmund Barton intended his White Australia last in perpetuity to benefit future Australians, whilst Thomas Eddison envisaged his work would benefit future generations when he invented the lightbulb.

Therefore, we can interpret the modern fruits of our ancestor’s endeavours as gifts: things we didn’t work for; but things that were created for us nonetheless. And rather than using their accomplishments as substitute for achieving things of our own; we can make ourselves worthy recipients of these gifts by among other things, honouring our civilisational pact and appreciating their contributions– essentially, expressing group pride in an appropriate, befitting way.

Group pride should be fundamentally viewed as simple a matter as the phrase suggests: one has to establish whether a group exists, then whether they themselves fit within it, then whether that group has made a net positive or net negative contribution; in justifying any subsequent feelings of group pride. Clearly, genetic and cultural similarities make for a clear Anglo and broader white identity that exists; further, my ancestors were of European descent. Moreover, Western civilisation has made remarkable contributions towards modern technology, comforts, economic growth; and has devoted unparralled energy to conservationism, ending slavery and genocide. Western civilisation would overall appear to have made a net positive contribution; subsequently, I feel satisfaction and pleasure to be closely linked to such an eminent entity. Again, my group pride doesn’t reflect an ambition to abrogate personal endeavours; I simply feel pleasure at being intimately connected with such a prestigious civilisation, and satisfaction at what my group has cumulatively been able to do.

These eternally applicable arguments aside, group pride becomes especially significant in our modern context–unremitting attacks of racism, sexism, homophobia, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, transphobia–all aim to demoralise Western people, and uproot traditional loyalties. Given these attacks are being used for said insidious ends, enumerating Western achievement is necessary to gauge what whites have overall done, what they are likely to do in the future, and to accurately answer an all-important challenge that Leftist attacks axiomatically raise: whether Western people deserve their own homelands.