It’s Good When Liberals Notice Anti-White Racism

It doesn’t matter if they don’t offer the proper solutions. Our own side can’t figure out that part either.

Everyone is talking about Jacob Savage’s Compact essay “The Lost Generation.” The article exposed the insidiousness of anti-white racism and how it harmed the career prospects of young white men. It’s gone viral, with many voices declaring it the essay of 2025. Savage combines his own story of losing out on opportunities due to his race and gender with tons of data and tales from other discriminated white men to reinforce his point.

It’s worth reading the entire thing.

A much-discussed essay is bound to draw criticism. It’s no surprise that leftists would attack it, but plenty of right-wingers have found fault with it as well. These rightists believe the article doesn’t go far enough in its conclusions, with some arguing it’s cowardly or even a “limited hangout” (an espionage term that is now used on the internet to imply anyone who disagrees with you is “controlled opposition”).

Jeremy Carl, a State Department nominee who wrote a book on anti-white racism, offered the most clear criticism of the Savage article. Carl praises it for highlighting the discrimination against white men, but felt it was insufficient. In his opinion, it’s too focused on millennials, too liberal, too short-sighted, and too weak to “cross the Rubicon” in terms of solving the problem. Carl rightfully notes that a lot of these liberals Savage interviews still submit to the order that discriminates against them because they’re too afraid to back the Right.

He particularly castigates Savage for failing to acknowledge that others saw these problems long ago and paid the price for it:

I claim no special honor here—many braver and higher-integrity White men than I were drummed out of “polite” professional society years before I was because they stood up to the institutional left rather than, like the men that Savage profiles, sucked up to it. In contrast, the people Savage interviews people are usually just as much part of the problem as part of the solution.

Carl believes Savage and other discriminated liberals need to be men and stand forthrightly up to the Left to enact real change.

As one of those young white men who suffered the consequences for speaking out against this problem, I find this criticism off-the-mark. The article is not meant to be a BASED manifesto urging people to take up illiberal authoritarianism against leftism. If it were that, very few would read it. It’s better that it comes from a liberal-ish perspective. That makes it more persuasive to the unconverted. This is a personal essay reflecting the experiences and views of disenchanted Yuccies. Of course, it’s not going to be far-right.

There’s too much concern here with “getting it.” After witnessing the Online Right turn into an insane asylum over the last year, I’ve come to realize that fully “getting it” comes with its own downsides. Plenty of posters are forthright in calling out the trends and ideas that led to the prevalence of anti-white racism. But their solutions are usually not even solutions at all. The sphere is currently consumed with extreme levels of blackpilling, conspiratorialism, delusional ideas, and retreats to fantasy. Some of these guys who apparently “get it” now want to see Trump impeached and the Left take total control in the mistaken belief that it will accelerate America into a far-right dictatorship. Many of the people who “get it” completely ignore the concrete actions the Trump administration is doing to combat anti-white racism in favor of viewing the 47th president as the worst ever. We can’t even get the Online Right to acknowledge who really killed Charlie Kirk.

If the Online Right is crossing any Rubicon, it’s apparently a river separating them from the short bus.

It’s hard to fault Savage for not failing to offer solutions when our sphere crashes and burns when trying to come up with proposals.

It’s also hard to fault Savage for not having enough “courage” to forthrightly attack the Left when the Online Right sounds like Denethor on a daily basis. Unnecessary blackpilling is more cowardly than writing a widely-read article on anti-white discrimination.

(Video of your average RW influencer reacting to any current event.)

If being fully “redpilled” just means you lose your mind, constantly doompost, turn against people making actual change, and think everything is a false flag, then maybe it’s a bit overrated.

Savage’s article connected with people because it described the real-world experiences of ordinary people. Everyone can relate to it and bring up their own anecdotes to prove it. He’s not some extremist or a crank. He’s a liberal who drank the Kool-Aid and realized it was poison. Even someone like him gets screwed by the new anti-white norm. Along with great writing, that makes it a compelling piece.

Too much BASED and redpilled writing is geared towards the craziest members of our audience and exists in a fantasy world. It offers little that relates to the common experience and is only meant for the super-converted. It too often resembles Maoist struggle sessions on proper ideological belief rather than engaging writing. It can’t connect with a broad readership, which is why it’s ignored in favor of Savage’s essay.

Carl is worried that Savage, whose politics still deserve skepticism, could become the chief spokesman against anti-white racism. That’s unlikely. He has no social media presence and his internet blueprint is just his essays. He doesn’t have what it takes to be a personality in the new media environment. He’s just a mere writer.

In any case, our own side has elevated so many dubious types–ranging from barely reformed Never Trumpers to obvious scam artists–that it makes that concern seem trivial. We already have plenty of horrible people representing our cause to the world.

It’s fine to critique the Savage essay. Carl is right to needle it for holding its punches on who’s responsible for this mess. The essay also glosses over on how boomer and Gen X managers seem to prefer female employees and goes far easier on them compared to their male peers. It also does fail to go into the history of this trend and how it didn’t suddenly emerge in the 2010s. But it is already a very long essay and reading it doesn’t prevent someone from further exploring the topic. You can still read Carl’s book and Jared Taylor’s work if you want to know more.

It’s good that some liberals are waking up to the menace of anti-white racism. It’s only going to get worse as America becomes less white. A positive response to the Compact essay should be seen as a white pill that people won’t just go along with it. They view it as a problem and want it stopped.

One should never make the perfect the enemy of the good. Small steps in the right direction is still progress.