Yvain published a very lengthy “Anti-Reactionary FAQ,” which is too long to respond to comprehensively here. I’ll make a few comments, though.

I’ll respond based on the numbering system he uses.

1.1 Suicide. Certain societies have a lot less of it. These seem to be more traditional societies. Ritter (2008):

Furthermore, there is a major discrepancy between whites and blacks with regard to suicide (age group 45-64 shown here):

Why the difference? An obvious guess is greater social connectedness among traditional societies and black communities, compared to more modern societies and white “communities”.

Blacks also tend to have slightly higher self-esteem than whites (n=500,000). From the press release associated with a 2000 study at the University of North Carolina:

Young blacks might experience slightly higher self-esteem overall because they often have a strong ethnic identity, while many young whites do not, she said.

Maybe if whites had a stronger ethnic identity, we would have higher self-esteem and stop killing ourselves so often.

As far as the suicide rate going up or down based on long-term historical trends, my impression is that the suicide rate in traditional societies was relatively low compared to modern societies. I base this statement on the knowledge outlined above. Showing graphs that only go back to 1960 is not very interesting, since the comparison is between 1750 and 2013, not 1960 and 2013. I linked the article regarding the recent uptick in suicides among white men to illustrate that the problem can be acute and sudden. Both acute upticks and long-term trends are worth thinking about and trying to counteract. I don’t think “there’s been a big recession” is an excuse not to try and lower suicide rates. The long recession has effected the suicide rate of white men far more than it has any other group, so that’s concerning. There’s no reason why the suicide rate for white men should not be similar to the suicide rate for black men.

It’s obnoxious that I can’t link a New York Times article without it being returned to me as a zinger, and that it’s implied that I think an article I found in ten seconds is “the whole truth”. I generally link the first article I can think of or find within ten seconds of Googling, because writing these posts takes long enough as it is, and anyone who puts in five minutes of research can probably find better, and should. When you include 20 links in a post, it’s much faster to spend 10 seconds on each link rather than five minutes, even if you know you could theoretically spend more time. A link I find in 10 seconds is not representative of my entire knowledge base on the subject.

1.2. Debt. The first graph overstated the case, I posted it because it was the first graph I found while Googling. As soon as it was brought up that it didn’t calibrate for GDP, I immediately linked to a new graph:

This graph, by the CBO, conveniently leaves out intragovernmental debt. (See definition of “public debt”.) Add that in, and the debt is 104.8% of GDP.

Hundreds of economists have written books on the dangers of federal debt, deficit spending, the coming insolvency of Social Security and Medicare, and so on. Yet, Yvain dismisses the issue of government debt very casually.

For a very simple explanation of our financial system and its deep structural problems, see this video by Mike Maloney.

Overeagerness to take on debt, predatory lending, and the government cultivating unrealistic expectations that everyone should own a house led to the subprime mortgage crisis, a major contributor to this unending recession we find ourselves in.

1.3 Crime. The crime rates in America today are bad. I’ve seen all the same graphs that Yvain posts, but a recent downwards trend in violent crime does not change the base rates, which are much higher than they should be. This especially applies to major cities, large parts of which are war zones.

Reactionaries often mention crime because we have such a strong case. There’s plenty of information out there making devastating points contradicting the Progressive narrative and supporting the Reactionary narrative, which I encourage the reader to seek out.

Yvain’s closing and qualifying sentence in this section, which includes outright hyperbole (“blank check to ruin everything“) indicates the weakness of his position.

High IQ, high-earning whites with mild temperaments, who make up the majority of the readership of blogs like mine and Yvain’s, have a very sheltered view on crime. They advocate policies that have grave effects for the lower-middle and lower classes, such as open borders, because they are insulated from the increased crime and violence that these foreigners bring with them.

1.4 Happiness. This is complicated so I’ll avoid it for now. My only statement is that closeness to family and friends tends to produce greater happiness, and we have less family and fewer close friends than we used to. Internet friendships are not psychologically equivalent to face-to-face.

1.5 Time preference. It’s fairly obvious to me that time preference is increasing. Whites in the United States and Europe are reproducing at substantially lower than replacement rates, and white deaths outnumber white births in the U.S. Households and governments are taking on more debt than ever before, borrowing from the future for luxuries in the present. If refusing to have babies and running up credit cards isn’t high time preference, I’m not sure what is.

1.6 Civic participation. This section of Yvain’s response is highly biased towards his very atypical social position, so I won’t comment.

1.7 International conflicts. This is a huge issue and I don’t want to get very deep into it now. America being an omnipresent hegemon with thousands of nuclear weapons has fundamentally changed the dynamics of the international system. If there was even a 10% chance of global thermonuclear war during the Cold War, a war in which hundreds of millions would have been killed and huge clouds of smoke injected into the stratosphere, that pretty much cancels out the benefits of the relative peace we happened to have. Such a war could theoretically have set back the global economy by 50-100 years, if not more.

1.8 Positive trends. These are all attributable to improvements in technology. They would appear even in a global Communist regime.

1.9 Things are getting worse, not better. This permanent recession is just the beginning. The long-term budget outlook is not good. Medicare is on track for insolvency by 2022 (by some estimates it is insolvent already) and Social Security by 2033. If the U.S. financial system collapses, it will take down the global economy with it.