The White Man’s Burden, and modern politics.

The White Man’s Burden.

Ever since Rudyard Kipling’s famous poem about America and the Philippines, this firecracker phrase has stood as the premier example of self-righteous and greedy European imperialism. Progressives throughout the Western World use this phrase as a jumping off point for a discussion about how bad the world used to be under colonialism, and before they were able to change society for the better. But in this article, I will make the argument that in the culture war between progressives and the alt-right, it is not progressives who most fundamentally reject the concept posited by Rudyard Kipling all those years ago.

The world view that Rudyard Kipling and other proponents of colonialism believed in was one in which the white man was the guardian and protector of the planet and its people. Plenty of imperialists barely pretended to follow this maxim anyway, with probably the most famous example being King Leopold’s rape of the Congo, the effects of which, when finally discovered were a shock to the Western World. Although to this day those events which occurred in the depths of Africa are not as well-known as they probably should be.

Some people feel as if the whole philosophy of the White man’s burden was cynically and pragmatically created as an excuse for Europeans to plunder technologically inferior people.

But I feel like it is a mistake to always ascribe economic and politic motivations to people and movements. When the ancient Crusaders cut a path toward Jerusalem in the name of God I believe it would be insulting and condescending to say the driving factor was merely material wealth. In the same way when a middle-class Muslim leaves his safe home in the U.K to fight for ISIS I think it would be foolish to assume that economic factors and discrimination were the main culprits.

So, acknowledging the fact in some cases European colonialism was a selfish evil ordeal, I am going to be working of the assumption that those who claimed to be working toward the ideals summarised in Rudyard Kipling’s poem were being honest. Let’s dissect the Poem in order. I am going to divide the Western Worlds perspectives on the ideals put forward by each of the parts of this Poem into two main sections. The Progressive/Marxist view and the Fascist/Alt-right view. (Oh, and a quick note, I am using a shortened version of the Poem so I don’t end up writing a novel!)

Take up the White Man’s burden —

Send forth the best ye breed —

Go send your sons to exile

To serve your captives’ need

To wait in heavy harness

On fluttered folk and wild —

Your new-caught, sullen peoples,

Half devil and half child

For the progressive minded individual, this part of the poem would seem to represent the worst aspects of a white supremacist mind-set, believing it is your righteous duty to insert yourself into other people’s nations where you are not welcome, and then view the natives as sullen and childish for not appreciating your “help”. However, the most famous white supremacist of all time, Hitler, had a different perspective.

The following quote is taken from Hitler’s Table Talk. (Admittedly a document with some aspersions as to the accuracy of the translations)

“What stupidity of our people there to teach the natives our customs — which to them must seem vile and strange. It’s only after the Germans have put clothes on a native that he realizes nakedness is some sort of ‘shame’. The idea of hygiene only makes the Africans ashamed of their previous bathing customs. What’s the use of that? Our worst mistake was to send missionaries to the colonies. Imagine what the natives must have made of Christian sin! They, who are used to living in a state of nature with no God to punish them.” (TABLE TALK)

Here we can clearly see that Hitler believes it is wrong to impose your cultural, religious or hygienic standards on others.

The following quote is also taken from Hitler’s Table Talk, so remember to take it with a grain of salt.

(in reference to the English): “They worked for three hundred years to assume themselves the domination of the world for two centuries. The reason why they’ve kept it so long is that they were not interested in washing the dirty linen of their subject people. What ‘we’ would like to do, on the other hand, would be to rub a negro until he becomes White — as if someone who feels no need to wash himself were to want to let himself be soaped by somebody else!

Dirt shows on Black people only when the missionaries, to teach them modesty, oblige them to put on clothes. In the state of nature, Negroes are very clean. To a missionary, the smell of dirt is agreeable. From this point of view, they themselves are the dirtiest swine of all.” (TABLE TALK)

No matter what spin you put on Adolf’s words there, it seems plain that he would not be in agreement with the racially parental sentiment of the Poem so far. Let’s move on to the next part.

Take up the White Man’s burden

In patience to abide

To veil the threat of terror

And check the show of pride;

By open speech and simple

A hundred times made plain

To seek another’s profit

And work another’s gain

The disparity between what the Progressive thinks the White nationalist believes and what he truly does now becomes more apparent. One of the main themes White nationalists focus on is of pride, and the importance of maintaining healthy pride in your culture and heritage. But Kipling’s entreaty to check the show of pride almost sounds like a modern entreaty to check your privilege.

And for the Alt-right the feeling that they seek another’s profit and work another’s gain is exactly what is wrong with the new diverse Western world, as pleas to help the developing world through economic integration are viewed by the Alt-right as excuses to impoverish the first world and exploit the third. Sir Oswald Mosley gives the Fascist reasoning against “helping” non-white countries.

Take up the White Man’s burden —

And reap his old reward:

The blame of those ye better

The hate of those ye guard —

The cry of hosts ye humour

(Ah slowly) to the light:

“Why brought ye us from bondage,

“Our loved Egyptian night?”

This description of the world is going to cut deep for any white advocate. Whether it is BLM blaming the white majority for their problems, or Black South Africans hating the White minority despite the better standard of living they provided. The part about bringing primitive people out of their bonded and captive state and into the light also has a modern parallel with the invasion of Iraq, and how America tried to humour Iraq into the light of Democracy, but a lot of the Iraqi people said they preferred their loved Egyptian night.

Take up the White Man’s burden-

Have done with childish days-

The lightly proffered laurel,

The easy, ungrudged praise.

Comes now, to search your manhood

Through all the thankless years,

Cold-edged with dear-bought wisdom,

The judgment of your peers!

This passage should actually be very inspirational to most members of the Alt-right, as a movement very inspired by martial ideals and manly virtues, the call to stop being a wuss and man up shouldn’t have any serious detractors. The difference comes with the idea of the ultimate reward being the admiration of peers. Any member of the Alt-right had to furiously swim against the current to get to where they are now, and most certainly doesn’t want the admiration of mainstream society which is corrupt and degenerate. Even the respect of their fellow Fascists is suspect, and always secondary to the goal of a glorious future for the European people. Your mates patting you on the back for helping the coloured man succeed seems like a crappy prize when you feel as if your people should have been helped first.

The European Imperialists viewed the White Mans role in the world as that of a Father. Treating the sicknesses of the more child like races, feeding and clothing them, and all the while never expecting or getting thanks, but instead getting the lot of so many Fathers, the scorn and blame of their thankless children.

The modern progressive, Black, White, or any other race, also sees White men as a father figure, but one who physically, mentally and sexually abused them, worked their fingers to the bone and hit their mother in a drunken rage. And for his crimes he has now forfeited the right to be leader of the household and has been exiled. But he must still pay child support and be constantly reminded of his sins so that he never forgets them. The analogy of that of parent is a good one because undoubtedly the history of colonialism is full of ‘parents’ who perpetrated horrible abuse against their ‘children’. And yet in the progressives mind the correct evolution of these roles is not abandonment of the parent/child dichotomy at all, but simply the adapting of it so that White people now possess all the responsibility but none of the power. This can be seen from affirmative action, to calls for reparations for slavery, or apartheid.

But for Fascists yesterday, or the Alt-right today, the mantle of guardian of the World, Payer of its debts and bearer of its burdens is far too heavy a load too lift, and not one they feel responsible for carrying.