While it appears that the initial Alt-Right enthusiasm for Andrew Yang’s presidential campaign has waned significantly, I believe it is still worthwhile to offer some further criticism of UBI and its popularity on the far right.
Many of those on the Alt-Right who joined the “Yang Gang” undoubtedly did so purely for the lulz and the joy of trolling, but others offered more substantial arguments for their support. Andrew Anglin at the Daily Stormer commented that most of our current political problems are at root a result of the disruptive influence of industrialization on human society. There is certainly some truth to this, however, as I pointed out before, Yang’s UBI program would do nothing to fix our current problem, as it would allow for the further concentration of political and economic power in the hands of the Silicon Valley technocrats.
Hunter Wallace at Occidental Dissent has probably made the most thorough, sustained case in favor of Yang’s UBI plan. However, the arguments made by Wallace are unrealistic and show a lack of understanding of what actually motivates both the technocrats who rule us.
Wallace seems to suggest that once a universal basic income meets everyone’s immediate economic needs, social harmony will come about automatically:
“If you gave everyone Universal Basic Income, abolished wage slavery and simply gradually increased UBI as robotics and artificial technology automate the economy and put people out work, then you could unscramble America’s historical demographics and change everything without a violent civil war.
The people who wanted to live among other blacks could do so. The people who wanted to live among other Whites could do so. The people who wanted to mix could do so. The people who wanted to live with other Hispanics could do so. Everyone would steadily grow wealthier and live in peace over time as the benefits of capitalism are harnessed and redistributed to advance our general welfare and reconstruct our historic cultures. Why hasn’t this ever occurred to anyone?”
Wallace seems to be arguing that human conflict and political tyranny are the result of individuals wanting to fulfill their personal desires. Nothing, I believe, could be further from the truth. Consider the men who control Silicon Valley, Hollywood and Wall Street. These executives have enough money to fulfill every single extravagant personal desire imaginable. They could retire and enjoy a life of limitless luxury and gratification, but instead they decide to continue their quest to control the lives of others out of a pure desire to make themselves godlike masters of humanity.
In his work Notes from the Underground Dostoevsky perfectly describes this sinful tendency in fallen men:
“Now I ask you: what can be expected of man since he is a being endowed with strange qualities? Shower upon him every earthly blessing, drown him in a sea of happiness, so that nothing but bubbles of bliss can be seen on the surface; give him economic prosperity, such that he should have nothing else to do but sleep, eat cakes and busy himself with the continuation of his species, and even then out of sheer ingratitude, sheer spite, man would play you some nasty trick. He would even risk his cakes and would deliberately desire the most fatal rubbish, the most uneconomical absurdity, simply to introduce into all this positive good sense his fatal fantastic element.”
This fatal element is none other than the original sin of Adam and Eve to set themselves up as judges of morality and to become like God. All of the descendants of fallen Adam have the same tendency to rebel against God and declare themselves to be autonomous masters of reality. No amount of economic redistribution can eradicate this innate sinfulness that we all possess. Yang’s proposed UBI would simply concentrate power further into the hands of those technocrats who fancy themselves to be gods.