I have to admit a new guilty pleasure: Tucker Carlson. I don’t actually watch FOX News, but I do watch YouTube clips in which he skillfully eviscerates dumb liberals, hack reporters and lying politicians. If you find yourself explaining something to Tucker Carlson and you see this expression on his face, you are about to get “Tucked”:

This week, Carlson spoke with University of Connecticut Sociology Assistant Professor Matthew Hughey, who contends Trump won the election because of his “commitment to White supremacy.” Here’s the exchange:

Of course, it would have to be a tenured White (or possibly Jewish?) liberal college professor from a (public) Ivy League school lecturing us proles on how racist we are. I don’t know what else they are teaching in universities these days, especially now that grades below an “A” are “microagressions” and exams are “triggering” and therefore optional. Plus, who has time for course work when schedules are already jam-packed with activism and protesting? There’s hardly any time left to swing by the safe space and play with Legos.

Carlson makes Hughey look like an idiot (not a terribly difficult thing to do), and Hughey only makes his situation worse by responding with arrogance. Hughey dismisses the idea that Whiteness is under attack, then spends the majority of his time attacking White America. When Carlson points out that allowing non-White immigrants into America is not the behavior of a White supremacist country, Hughey responds “I think it is, and since I study that, that is the behavior of a White supremacist country.”

This is what we call confirmation bias, folks. You start with an assumption or premise, then only look for data that backs it up. Except in this case, Hughey has no facts, he simply declares it to be true in a pompous tautological cogito: I study it, therefore it is. Hughey goes on to recommend Carlson “read books on it, I’ve written quite a few.” As if the fact that he has written a few books somehow lends credence to his claims. I am sure they are as full of shit as he is. The smug, self-satisfied look on Hughey’s face is all you need to know about this pseudo-intellectual phony. I can’t imagine paying to send my son or daughter to any college that would employ a moron like this. Sadly, I suspect he is representative of the kind of professors you will find in pretty much all major universities in the U.S. today.

Hughey asserts that non-White immigrants are “pushed in or pulled in to different nations for economic reasons or political reasons…and the United States trades on using immigrants to do labor that the dominant class often doesn’t want to do.” He is implying that all these feckless non-White immigrants have either been coerced or cajoled into immigrating to the U.S., where they become an underclass of de facto slaves.

I see. So that must be why Trump wants to build a wall. To keep in all these horribly oppressed manual laborers trying to escape to a better life…back in their home country? I wonder if Hughey can name a single majority non-White country where Black or Brown people have a higher quality of life compared to the United States?

I believe people like Hughey are purposefully poisoning the minds of America’s youth with this Marxist claptrap. But even if we give him the benefit of the doubt, he is, at the very least, what Jonathon Revusky calls a HIQI (high IQ idiot):

Now, when it comes to calculus or other academic subjects, we have IQ; we say the higher IQ people do better at school, or at least it comes easier to them. However, the ability to see through the propaganda, bullshit generally speaking, does not seem to have much (if anything) to do with IQ. There are people with a very high IQ who are just completely helpless when it comes to seeing through the propaganda. The technical term for such a person is HIQI, or “high IQ idiot”. The term is not really as contradictory as it seems, since, properly understood, there is another kind of intelligence in play than IQ, that allows people to see through the bullshit. The technical term we shall use for this is BDQ, which stands for Bullshit Detection Quotient. The term “high IQ idiot” does not originate in this essay. A quick google search reveals prior usage here and there, but this essay may be the first to provide a formal definition of the concept:

A “high IQ idiot” is somebody with a combination of high IQ and very low BDQ.

Whether willfully deceitful or simply misguided, Hughey clearly has no business “teaching” young people anything, other than serving as a risible example of questionable sartorial taste.

As Carlson points out in his introduction, Hughey argues that “modern America is built on a bedrock of core racial assumptions, those assumptions include the belief that ‘Whiteness is under attack in America and that non-Whites are fundamentally dysfunctional.’”

To be clear, I do not believe that all non-White people are fundamentally dysfunctional. To a certain degree, dysfunction exists within all racial communities in America. So we need to ask ourselves: Do we see the same type of dysfunction in non-White countries (Africa, Latin America) that we see among the diaspora of those countries in America? In other words, do dysfunctional Black communities in the U.S. have anything in common with majority Black nations in Africa? Do dysfunctional Latino communities in the U.S. have anything in common with majority Latino nations in Latin America? Do those countries have the high levels of poverty, crime and violence we see in many majority Black and Latino communities in the U.S.?

If the answer is yes, then this dysfunction is clearly not exclusive to non-Whites living in America. If dysfunction exists in African and Latin American countries, it may say more about those people than it does about the way Whites treat them (Consider: Are sanctuary cities are more violent?). I imagine Hughey would counter with something like “those countries are dysfunctional because they were colonies, or because they are exploited by American banks and corporations.”

By the way, no one ever mentions dysfunction in Asian communities, because for the most part, there isn’t any. In fact, people like Hughey seem to deliberately avoid any discussion of Asians in America. But if White supremacy oppresses minorities and causes their dysfunction, why don’t we ever hear Asians complaining? Why are Asians invisible?

This thought experiment reminds me of the following anecdote: Jared Taylor of American Renaissance tells a story about taking a taxi across a border between two African countries. To paraphrase, the country where he got into the taxi had working infrastructure, it was orderly, safe and developed. But when the taxi crossed over into the neighboring country, the difference was stark. It was dirty, disorganized, run down and dangerous. Jared asked the driver why there was such a marked difference between the two countries. The taxi driver replied “It’s simple: this country was never colonized by Europeans.”

How about that? An African implying that colonization was actually beneficial. Here’s a similar notion from an article titled India—On a Downward Spiral, by Jayant Bhandari:

…Indian institutions were designed to be run by the British. With them no longer at the helm, these institutions have mutated over the last 70 years to accommodate the underlying irrationality, tribalism, and superstitions of India. They have slowly but surely crumbled away, decaying and becoming degraded.

Indian democracy today is simply mob rule, its educational system little but propaganda, and its citizens are mere cogs in the service of the State. Indian institutions, including the Supreme Court, are far from independent. They are yes-men to India’s prime minister, the demagogue Narendra Modi.

India never properly assimilated the concepts of reason, liberty or individuality. When these concepts were offered by Europeans free of cost on a plate, Indians completely failed to take notice. All they saw and copied was the facade of western lifestyle: clothing, music, cinema, food, etc.

Under Modi, India’s degradation has picked up pace. Today the country is a full-fledged banana republic. However, all of this had to happen eventually, with or without Modi. India is fated to disintegrate into tribal fiefdoms at some point. That is the direction it has embarked on.

All of this can be said to apply to almost every country in South Asia, the Middle East and Africa. What has slightly differentiated India—at least in the eyes of the international media, if not in reality—was the possibility of free speech at the margin.

India’s diversity—and the internal conflicts resulting from it—delayed the onset of full-fledged institutional totalitarianism. Alas, rising Hindu nationalism (Hindutava) is now rapidly weaving these heterogeneous groups of people into a totalitarian whole.

And now, India is rapidly losing one of the most important institutions introduced by the British: freedom of speech.

Imagine that. The idea that India is struggling because of what Indian people are doing now, rather than what colonization did in the past. The British were in India for 190 years, but it has taken the Indians only 70 years to reverse all their accomplishments.

I don’t think it is unreasonable for a nation to reflect the character and values of the men who built it. Thus, Hughey’s lecture thesis “Make America White Again” is curiously derisive. Since the Hart-Celler Act of 1965, White America has been on a steady decline. Given current birthrates among White people, compounded by ongoing non-White immigration and rampant illegal immigration, even if President Trump halted all legal and illegal immigration from here on out, Whites are still set to become a minority in the country they built by 2040. The same goes for many countries across Europe. Whites are not replacing themselves, while non-Whites are having 3–5 children per family. Demographics is destiny, as we are often told. So the reality is, sooner than later, it will not be possible to make America White again. Ever.

I am sure that would please our quackademic bow tie-wearing Professor Hughey. He seems quite certain that, when Whites are an absolute minority, he will be lauded as one of the Good Ones. He can look back on a career spent vilifying Whites while teaching young White people to hate themselves and reinforcing the victim mentality among “people of color.”

I wonder if Hughey would reconsider his claim that White supremacy drove the Trump victory if he knew that Black (8%), Latino (29%), Asian (29%) and mixed race (37%) Americans also voted for Trump? Or that massive numbers of White Americans voted for Obama in 2008 and again in 2012?

Alas, I doubt facts like these rise high enough to reach his ivory tower.