Diversity leads to a loss of social capital.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 21, 2007, 01:03 AM | #

People like Putnam, I suspect, know exactly what’s going on.  Certainly people like Stephen Jay Gould do:  Gould knew perfectly well there were races having different inborn aptitudes and he certainly was conscious of the fact that his own imbecilic race-denial was part of the never-ending Jewish quest to keep the goys down and nothing but that.  All the race-denying Jews know the same thing.  I think men like Putnam are in this group of academics who know perfectly well what’s going on but are simply conforming.  These are dishonest opportunists.  (In fact, PC is mere “intellectual opportunism,” as Tomislav Sunic has said:  nothing more or less than that.) In his new log entry up tonight Jim Kalb talks about this type of academic as it is seen in the world of the neocons:

A while back I noted the oddity of Catholic neocon George Weigel praising Philadelphia in the 50s as “a town of ethnic neighborhoods in which Catholic kids unselfconsciously identified themselves by parish … dang, it was great” and in a few lines without explanation attacking those who wanted to maintain ethnic and religious boundaries in Philadelphia. Now there’s a short but rambly piece at the First Things weblog in which the author (a Southern Catholic girl who went on to become a German lit professor at Columbia) that comments positively on the moral life of the 50s and negatively on “the segregation and hermeticism that characterized American life then.” Such pieces are part of what lead me to view neoconservatism as the view of ambitious and upwardly-mobile careerists (the First Things writer appears to have achieved a career beyond her intelligence) who now identify with those who rule the world, and thus denigrate particularities that obstruct the power of their new class, but remember fondly the local and communal life of their childhood and so look for rhetorical or programatic ways to support certain moral and social aspects of that life under conditions of enforced liberal universalism. It is truly conservatism as the politics of nostalgia.  [Emphasis added.]

Putnam, though no neocon of course, is nevertheless the kind of academic Kalb describes there.  For one thing, no “studies” were needed to ascertain that forced race-replacement ("diversity" in FedGovSpeak) would result in lower mutual trust and all the other adverse consequences Putnam “discovered through his interviews of people subjected to it.” No studies were needed to find that out, any more than studies are needed to find out if kids like ice-cream or if people prefer being smart, healthy, rich, and good-looking to dumb, sickly, poor, and ugly.  He knew going in that the “study” would produce exactly the results it did because he, along with everyone else, knew the effects of race-replacement before doing the study.  So he’s dishonest:  1) What was the purpose of a study that purports to seek to know something as obvious as whether the wind blows or the sky is blue or water wet?  One could speculate on his hidden purposes, all of them dishonest; 2) not only didn’t he simply speak out against forced race-replacement rather than doing his phony “study,” but even now after he has his “results,” he refuses to speak out against it.  What’s he doing?  Again, we could speculate as to the answer, speculations that aren’t flattering to him.

This man is an odious slime ball.  The honest academics aren’t opportunists like Putnam who know all to well which side their bread is buttered on but men who don’t appear to have a clue, such as Drew Fraser, Kevin MacDonald, Richard Herrnstein, Greg Cochran, and Arthur Jensen. 

As far as I’m concerned Putnam can flush his “studies” down the toilet.  No one needs them.  This guy makes me ill.  You don’t pretend to “do studies” to find out if two plus two equals five.  You take one look at the ones who claim it does, and you join the opposition.  That’s what you do.

Posted by Bo Sears on August 21, 2007, 01:47 AM | #

“First, he claims that immigrants into the United States throughout Europe assimilated eventually into a single White ethny.”

My disagreement is with Putnam who literally lies when he makes the point alluded to above. While the entire Putnam slip-and-slide analysis is target rich, I just want to point out that the claim that we Americans of European origins have no interior diversity is one of the top four major negative stereotypes pushed into the marketplace of ideas (and memes) every day by the media and corporate entertainment world.

There is not a shred of evidence to suggest that we have become assimilated into a single White ethny. We did become assimilated for the most part into being Americans, but that is a wildly different thing than the claim made by Putnam above.

For more on the topic of the four principal negative stereotypes, including the one telling us we lack diversity, go to:

http://www.ResistingDefamation.org/sub/stereo9.htm

It is one of the most devastating negative stereotypes visited on our children and our grandchildren because it sets up cognitive dissonance in their thinking. They can look around and see our differences, but in school they are told these differences do not exist. That’s not just a lie, that’s a recipe for mental and emotional imbalance...a kind of child abuse on the meme level, if you will.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 21, 2007, 02:35 AM | #

You do studies to find out things people don’t know, not things everyone knows.  You don’t pretend to do “studies” to “find out” if grass is green, birds fly, or fish swim, yet that’s the equivalent of what Putnam has done here:  there’s not a person on the planet who couldn’t have given him the “results” of his “research” beforehand with one-hundred percent accuracy. 

So, what’s going on? 

Well, what’s going on with Alon Ziv?  The Jewish line for a hundred years has been “there are no such things as races so every Euro has to marry a Negro,” yet Ziv, a Jew, comes along now and says there are races and every Euro still has to marry a Negro.  What’s up with that?  What’s up with it is the Jews are afraid the knowledge that there are races is so widespread now that Euros may balk at being told they must marry Negroes, so to cover all the bases the Jews, while continuing to deny there are races, simultaneously admit there are but add that it’s best nevertheless if Euros marry Negroes, for such-and-such phony reasons ("better-looking offspring,” “more intelligent offspring,” “healthier offspring,” and so on — this stuff should theoretically be sufficient, by the way, to get Ziv nailed for fomenting genocide the way Julius Streicher was at Nuremberg).  The Jewish aim is always, first and foremost, to get Euros to marry Negroes, not to deny race.  Whichever way they can manage that goal they’ll adopt as a strategy:  if it’s by denying race, they’ll adopt race-denial as their strategy; if it’s by admitting race but claiming mulatto kids are better in this and that way than Euro kids, they’ll do that.  The fundamental Jewish aim is getting Euros to marry Negroes. 

That’s Ziv.  But Putnam is doing the same:  as Ziv had to admit race because race-denial has been so thoroughly debunked now that if you deny race today you become a laughing stock, Putnam has to admit the downside of race-replacement ("diversity" in PC-speak) because too many are onto it and can’t be fooled:  people know now the downside of forced race-replacement, so denying it, like denying race, won’t fly any more.  Race-replacement’s downside has to be acknowledged but, like Ziv who acknowledged race then told Euros to marry Negroes anyway, Putnam acknowledges race-replacement’s downside but tells them to undergo it anyway, for this and that phony reason.  Putnam is a loyal soldier for the class he sees himself as belonging to just as the female academic was in Jim Kalb’s log entry.  That’s all that’s going on with Putnam, I suspect.  He’s a slimeball of the first magnitude trying to shore up the other side’s crumbling defenses.

Posted by Lean, Melancholy and Beardless on August 21, 2007, 11:22 AM | #

I’m just reminded of that rude and cheerful little boy in Hans Christian Anderson’s excellent fable ‘The Emperor’s New Clothes’.
As we all know the emperor’s tailors (who do they remond you of?), were very clever people who could make clothes out of the very best, most sumptuous cloth - but with the proviso that only ‘clever’ people could actually perceive this gorgeous, intricate brocade cloth of gold.
Putnam, perhaps inadvertantly, plays the point of the rude, cheerful, innocent litle boy, who rather spoils the party somewhat by ‘pricking’ pomposity by speaking the unsophistacted truth of the guileless unpretentious babe - ‘but he’s naked!!!’- he cries.

Only in this case the crowd still believes the emperor is wearing the most gorgeous clothes.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 21, 2007, 12:59 PM | #

“PC is mere ‘intellectual opportunism,’ as Tomislav Sunic has said” (—my first comment above)

Here‘s where Prof. Sunic referred to PC as the opportunism of the intellectuals (hat tip to the Occidental Dissent blog).  This Sunic interview is slightly dated (it first appeared at the Pravda web-site in 2002) but is still well worth reading in its entirety.  (I disagree almost completely, by the way, with Scimitar’s critique of nationalism in this particular log entry of his over there which I’ve linked as a hat tip, but that’s another topic.)

Posted by James Bowery on August 21, 2007, 03:36 PM | #

Putnam has a book, website and “movement” called ”Better Together” that vectorists quickly point to as evidence that Putnam doesn’t believe in his own conclusions about so-called “diversity” (really heterosity).  Like Putnam’s tacked-on addition to his paper “E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-first Century”, “Better Together” is a bunch of prose designed to cover up the fact that he and his coauthor, the predictably named “Lewis Feldstein”, are recommending a military regimentation of the nation under a theocratic rule of inquisitorial political correctness in order to emulate the organizations within which social capital appears to be maintained despite heterosity.  Never does it seem occur to these men that perhaps individual liberty—including the right of individuals to chose their associates—is something that should be cherished more than their over-arching vectorist commitment to heterosity.

Posted by Guessedworker on August 21, 2007, 04:13 PM | #

We are living in the age of minority rights, these minorities being those by whom power in the form of ownership of the future has been monopolised.  The rest are divided into two camps: the single source of threat to the aforementioned minorities; and the tools which can be used to destroy that threat.

Accordingly, the daily dance of destruction is the life experience of all non-elite, non-leftist peoples of European descent and of all non-Jewish ethnic minorities, the one thrown to the other as a Christian to a lion.

Individual liberty, incidentally, is a base the power elite and its janissary Jewish intellectuals have covered.  Freedom of association as ethnic rights is eclipsed by the the pursuit of the unfettered will into a state of atomisation.

Posted by Slippery Slip on August 21, 2007, 04:43 PM | #

“We are living in the age of minority rights, these minorities being those by whom power in the form of ownership of the future has been monopolised.  The rest are divided into two camps: the single source of threat to the aforementioned minorities; and the tools which can be used to destroy that threat.”

Tammy Bruce, a bisexual/lesbian, former Los Angeles NOW Chapter President, feminist, Democrat… explains in detail what you are describing best in her book: “The New Thought Police.” Isn’t it ironic, that a person with her political and social background, is one of the only White people in public life with enough “balls” to stand up to the Anti-White leftists?

http://www.amazon.com/New-Thought-Police-Inside-Assault/dp/0761563733/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_b/002-8299943-7549643

P.S. Check out ‘search inside’ in the link.

Posted by James Bowery on August 21, 2007, 06:20 PM | #

Freedom of association, as ethnic rights, is eclipsed by the the pursuit of the unfettered will into a state of atomisation.

This statement is central to much of the disagreements within the participants here and the paradoxical definitions of “conservative”.

I think the evidence is on my side here.  Peter Brimelow documents, with stark demographics, “the flight from diversity” as the defining characteristic of the domination of individual liberty by the vectorist theocracy of Holocaustianity.  If left unmolested by the Leviathan state, people naturally will associate within their ethny.  It is the Leviathan state’s social intercourse equivalent of rape upon which the power elite relies.

Posted by James Bowery on August 21, 2007, 07:30 PM | #

Peter Brimelow’s (previously referenced) book “Alien Nation” is now downloadable. See the map on pages 70 and 71 for the graphic illustration of the flight from the vectorist Holocaustian Leviathan’s rape of the pioneer ethny that brought carrying capacity to sufficient heights to support themselves—unlike subsequent waves of immigrants.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 21, 2007, 09:56 PM | #

If left unmolested by the Leviathan state, people naturally will associate within their ethny.  It is the Leviathan state’s social intercourse equivalent of rape upon which the power elite relies.” (—James Bowery, 6:20 PM)

This is also one of the central truths about what’s going on.  Race-replacement isn’t happening spontaneously but is being forced.  That needs to be understood by people, especially the working-class and lower-middle-class folk who, together with their children (those few they manage to have despite all the heavy birthrate-lowering pressures deliberately exerted on them as a class), are bearing the brunt of the disastrous social and economic dislocations being imposed on society:  it is all being methodically, singlemindedly, extremely aggressively forced on the population by central governments here and in Europe and the Antipodes.  People have to understand that Leviathan is doing this to harm them on purpose for his own reasons which he refuses to disclose but which we’re figuring out little by little.  None of it is inevitable, all of it is undoable, which is precisely why the other side gets so hysterical when anyone even vaguely implies it may not be ideal and may need to be reconsidered:  if it were inevitable, no need for hysteria as there’d be nothing to reconsider — the inevitable can’t be avoided.  Their hysteria at the slightest hint of opposition betrays their perfect knowledge that it’s being imposed and is not inevitable in the least, and they’re worried someone might come along and thwart all their plans by simply stopping and reversing it, the easiest thing in the world and they know it perfectly, these same moral lepers who claim it’s happening all by itself and cannot be stopped.  Their hysteria itself gives the game away:  who gets hysterical when others talk of trying to stop a hurricane or an earthquake?

Posted by birch barlow on August 22, 2007, 03:39 AM | #

Hmmm...I wonder how much the increase in distrust due to “diversity” is largely a function of differentials in IQ, class, crime rates, etc.  Somehow I doubt this effect is nearly as severe in say, Silicon Valley or Irvine as say, parts of greater Los Angeles.  My prediction: the greater the mean IQ and lower the overall crime rate, and the less diversity in IQ and crime rates, the less distrust there is between ethnic groups and people in general.

Posted by Steve Edwards on August 22, 2007, 04:10 AM | #

“My prediction: the greater the mean IQ and lower the overall crime rate, and the less diversity in IQ and crime rates, the less distrust there is between ethnic groups and people in general.”

Why did you need to construct an INCREDIBLY convoluted, and potentially unfalsifiable, counter to a whole books worth of data? (or perhaps that question immediately begs another - is it because you love race replacement?)

For falsifiability’s sake why don’t we make a very simple, easily confirmed or refuted, prediction, such as: Ceteris paribus, an increase in diversity will increase distrust (as Putnam admits). That’s all. There is no need for a whole litany of auxiliary arguments to prop up the protagonist’s desire for race-replacement.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 22, 2007, 04:16 AM | #

Birch is saying is whites and Negroes of comparable socio-economic status won’t feel alienated from each other, and that their mutual alienation comes from different socio-economic status, not different race.  Run the experiment in Africa, Brazil, Mexico, or Papua-New-Guinea, Birch.  Not here:  we don’t want race-replacement.  Anyway, you’d think Putnam would have controlled for this in his study.  It must’ve at least partly compared whites and Negroes of comparable socio-economic status, so you may be wrong in your conjecture, Birch.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 22, 2007, 04:18 AM | #

I agree totally with Steve’s reply to Birch, which I didn’t see till after I’d posted my own reply.

Posted by Steve Edwards on August 22, 2007, 04:24 AM | #

Here is a quote from Birch Barlow:

“I tend to think that a “proposition nation” united by ideas is actually less abstract than one united by some unknown pieces of information (genes).”

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/other_folks_believe_in_ethnic_nepotism_we_though_must_not/

Very clever, isn’t he? So why doesn’t BB disown his biological family, which which he only has “some unknown pieces of information” in common, and go form a “proposition family” with some likeminded ideologues? According to BB it will certainly be a “less abstract” gathering than simply hanging out with the folks. This is, of course, the inevitably denouement of liberalism, consistently applied.

Posted by Steve Edwards on August 22, 2007, 05:35 AM | #

“which which” should read as “with which”

Posted by Top on August 22, 2007, 10:14 AM | #

“In the long run immigration and diversity are likely to have important cultural, economic, fiscal, and developmental benefits. In the short run, however, immigration and ethnic diversity tend to reduce social solidarity and social capital.”

Am I correct in understanding that he spends his whole book proving the second point?  So where on earth does he get off saying the first point?  Has anyone read this book?  How many studies has analyzed about the ‘long run’ and diversity????  Because, honestly, if he has I want to know.  And I mean that - I want to know!  Let’s hear about those long term studies!!

What amazes me is that so many people today are just too dumb to catch that - or are they?  Here is where I have to disagree with Fred a little bit.  While this study is common sense and essentially trivial - it does serve a function.  Why - because it gets published.  And anything that gets published and even remotely questions our new diversity religion cannot be all that bad.  It gets the convesation going.  Am I totally satisfied with that - no - but heck next time I am at a family gathering and my brother in law (for example) makes some stupid remark about how vibrant Toronto is (even though he moved out) and how boring small white Ontario towns are (even though he lives there) I will say the following:

“You know there was guy who studied diversity for along time and came to some startling conclusions.  The more diverse a society the less trust we have in each other, the less friends we have, the less we give the charity, etc.  There was a lot of discussion about it on the Internet.... I found it interesting.”

I won’t say anything more than - I’ll just let it sit.  I mean at this point I am looking to make small dents in people’s cognitive models.  We are WAAAYYY ahead of the curve with what we talk about here.  Majority of the population (while certainly sympathetic) are just too terrified of many of these topics.  You can only take small steps.  Let them go on the internet - let them find our type of sites.  It’s like a game of snake and ladders.  And my job is to put them on the right ladder.

So yeah it’s a silly study - but does it help me at the Pub?  Certainly!!

Posted by Steve Edwards on August 22, 2007, 02:07 PM | #

It’s amazing how he concludes his research with a blanket, utterly unproveable, assertion about the “benefits” of “diversity” and “immigration” in the “long run”, particularly as he states that in the short run diversity essentially takes a sledgehammer to all notions of community. Noticeably, he offers absolutely no argument to show how the “short term” might seamlessly transform into the “long term”. There is no “long term”.

On his own logic, CONTINUED immigration must CONTINUALLY reproduce the same “short term” woes on the host society. There can be no such thing as the “long term effects” of immigration if it is STILL HAPPENING, today, tomorrow, and into the future. He won’t admit this, but his “argument”, such that it is, is that immigration hasn’t worked, it has frayed societies, and “reduced trust”, but if we continue immigration indefinitely then some dy it will turn out fine. That is quite possibly the dumbest thing ever said by an ostensibly serious person - in fact, it is positively juvenile.

It’s rather akin to saying that leaving the bathtub tap running full blast has flooded the bathroom floor (why THANKS, professor, for telling us that!), but if we CONTINUE to leave the tap on full blast then it’ll be dry by tomorrow.

Posted by Steve Edwards on August 22, 2007, 02:09 PM | #

“some dy” = “someday”

Posted by birch barlow on August 22, 2007, 03:14 PM | #

The bottom line is that skilled immigration is good for the economy.  Studies on immigration have shown, that while immigration has little NET economic impact, that high-skill immigration is a clear and substantial benefit.  Yes, those who are pushing for mass low-skill and illegal immigration for the “economy” are full of crap.  But I think it’s hard to deny the benefits of high skill immigration.

Bashing non-whites who are successful is a clear sign of irrationality.  The 1950s are not coming back.  America is facing an aging population in addition to its already substantial underclass (thanks in part to mass low-skill immigration).  High-skill immigration is crucial to the vitality of America.

Posted by Steve Edwards on August 22, 2007, 03:29 PM | #

“Bashing non-whites who are successful is a clear sign of irrationality.”

Who on earth is bashing non-whites? Oh, that’s right, opposing race-replacement, in your eyes, is identical to bashing non-whites. Why do you hate whites so much, Birch?

“High-skill immigration is crucial to the vitality of America.”

This sentence can only be read to mean that America’s vitality cannot be a fact without high-skill immigration. This is pure propaganda. Japan, China, South Korea and, in the process of catching up, India, Vietnam and countless others are doing (and will continue to do) perfectly well without ANY high skill immigration (outside of an utterly insignificant, percentage-wise, non-permanent expat community). There is no reason why the United States, a country with massive natural resources and plenty of educated people, “needs” any high-skill immigration.

Posted by William on August 22, 2007, 07:12 PM | #

Each year the Western nations transfer billions of dollars in scarce capital to the third world in the form of foreign aid. In relation to the amount sent, the amount of economic development achieved is small for reasons set by Lord Bauer. An additional reason—a reason Lord Bauer didn’t deal with—is that these same Western nations have been importing the skilled and educated from these same third world countries. Without their educated elite, these nations lack people with sufficient IQ to make a success of the projects our billions have funded. A suggestion: we keep our money and they keep their people. In the long run, we will all be better off.

Posted by birch barlow on August 23, 2007, 12:31 AM | #

“Who on earth is bashing non-whites? Oh, that’s right, opposing race-replacement, in your eyes, is identical to bashing non-whites. Why do you hate whites so much, Birch?”

Immigration is “race-replacement?” How ridiculous.  If 500,000 skilled (only) came a year, that would only be 25 mil through 2050.  That’s not even 10% of the current U.S. population.  Even at 1 mil/year skilled immigrants, the number that would come through 2050 would only be 15% of the current U.S. population.  This hardly constitutes “race replacement,” even if one believes that this is a bad thing (I don’t--generally, the more skilled immigration, the better).

“This sentence can only be read to mean that America’s vitality cannot be a fact without high-skill immigration. This is pure propaganda. Japan, China, South Korea and, in the process of catching up, India, Vietnam and countless others are doing (and will continue to do) perfectly well without ANY high skill immigration.”

Japan is not doing all that well--they have found ways to mechanize low-skill jobs, but their overall economy is fairly stagnant.  China has a growing economically but is still very poor.  In any case high-tech workers are an asset to a growing, technologically based economy like that of the USA.  The fact that the benefits of high-skill immigration are largely overshadowed by the costs and ugliness of mass low-skill immigration hardly makes high-skill immigration non-beneficial, much less a danger to America.  (Oh no, dem slanty eyed orienuls er goin’ to gang up an’ destroy “real” Americans).

Posted by Steve Edwards on August 23, 2007, 01:00 AM | #

“Immigration is “race-replacement?” How ridiculous.  If 500,000 skilled (only) came a year, that would only be 25 mil through 2050.  That’s not even 10% of the current U.S. population.  Even at 1 mil/year skilled immigrants, the number that would come through 2050 would only be 15% of the current U.S. population.  This hardly constitutes “race replacement,” even if one believes that this is a bad thing (I don’t--generally, the more skilled immigration, the better).”

You neatly refused to countenance the fact that these “high-skilled immigrants” will also have children. Furthermore, why stop at 2050? Why didn’t you extend the timeframe out to 2100? Whether you like it or not, you are still endorsing the transformation of the United States (on some timescale) into a non-European nation. And all us sound-minded folks want to know is, why?

Posted by fgh on August 23, 2007, 01:21 AM | #

Who do you speak for Bo - itself a ‘supremacist’ act?

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 23, 2007, 01:48 AM | #

Who’s bashing non-whites, Birch?  In this thread, I mean.  Are you referring to any of my comments?

Steve’s rejoinders are entirely correct.

Questioning forced race-replacement isn’t bashing.  Some do bash because not everyone splits hairs and lots are getting fed up thanks to your crowd’s intransigeance so are even less inclined to split hairs and make fine distinctions.  I happen to split hairs and make fine distinctions (to the extent I’m able, at least), Steve does, GW does, James Bowery does, but when the crunch comes you’ll find a lot of angry people suddenly involved in this mess who’ll be in no mood for that.  Put emphasis on the word angry.

Posted by Steve Edwards on August 23, 2007, 02:29 AM | #

This blog has no edit function - “enforced enforced” should be just one “enforced”.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 23, 2007, 05:34 AM | #

John O’Fjordman O’Sullivan can’t bring himself to mention race. In a new American Conservative piece on immigration he mentions (1) English-language preservation, (2) opposition to bilingualism and multiculturalism, (3) economic interests, (4) “cultural and economic grounds” but not race:

“For almost three years I had argued that immigration was the wrong issue on which to hang the wider cause of protecting America’s national identity [...] (the so-called National Question). [...] I judged that (1) [English-]language [preservation] would be the best [issue for that].  But I changed my mind under two influences.  First, I realized that unchecked immigration was (2) fueling the support for bilingualism and multiculturalism. [...] My second reason [...] was (3) economic.  [...Immigration’s] impact on native-born Americans as a whole was modest, and it actually imposed serious economic costs on the low-paid.  So there was a strong case against unchecked immigration on (4) both cultural and economic grounds.”

(Hat tip for the O’Fjordman O’Sullivan link goes to iSteve.com.)

Posted by Al Kayder on August 23, 2007, 12:45 PM | #

Birch Barlow,
Perhaps you are a sub-Con, or perhaps not.
Anyway my objection to non-White immigration is self-exapantory - wholly and soloely because it’s non-White.

Any other explanation is a mere waste of words.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 23, 2007, 01:38 PM | #

You’ve got exactly the right idea, Al Kayder.  Not wanting to be race-replaced, whether race-replaced in whole or race-replaced in part, is something that needs no justification.  Maybe you’re, let’s say, a Latvian young man and you simply like the way Lativan girls look, talk, and act better than the way Nigerian girls do.  That perfectly normal, legitimate reason (no, not “racist,” not “prejudiced,” not anything else “negative") all by itself is sufficient justification for you to resist the forcible replacement of all the Lativan girls in Latvia with Negro girls from Nigeria brought in expressly for replacement purposes because some shallow, weak-minded, immoral élites with plenty of Jewish backing have been determined behind closed doors since something like the mid-70s to reduce all Euro majorities to minorities wherever they exist in the world.  That the other side is acting as if we have to justify our preference not to undergo race-replacement is without importance and can be ignored:  it’s merely a tactic of theirs, one among a great many aimed at getting us as swiftly as possible before the fait accompli:  while we’re wasting time arguing against their endless sophistries thrown up by them purely as tacks in the road to slow us down, they’re charging ahead full-steam with getting us race-replaced.

Just don’t fall for their shitty sophistries any more or waste time arguing against them (which were never advanced in good faith anyway but solely as tacks in the road to slow us down):  don’t fall for “there are no such things as races,” or “if you question the replacement of Latvians with Negroes you’re prejudiced and racist,” or “Mulatto kids are more beautiful, healthy, and intelligent than Euro kids,” or “Euros are the cancer of history,” or any of it.  All of it — all of it — is aimed at one thing:  getting Euros race-replaced.  Are the Jews as a group behind much of it?  Yes.  Are they the only ones?  No.  They have allies.  Are they a sufficient factor by themselves?  No but no single factor ever is with anything.  (Causes of great change always turn out to have been multifactorial.) That they’re a necessary factor as Prof. MacDonald puts it is sufficient for major culpability.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 23, 2007, 01:47 PM | #

Birch Barlow, Perhaps you are a sub-Con, or perhaps not.” (—Al Kayder)

Barlow is what’s called a white extended phenotype of the Subcons.  That’s why GnXp makes use of him.  He’s a half-wit.  David B and Arcane over there are two others.  To my knowledge, David B has never said if he’s Jewish or not.  If he is it would explain his particular case.  Arcane’s an odd duck and a wise-ass who claims to be white but is devoting his life to service as a Subcon extended phenotype the same as Birch.  Their extended phenotype behavior is the sole reason any of them is permitted by GC to hang around that site.

Posted by Slip Mahoney on August 23, 2007, 03:27 PM | #

“Are the Jews as a group behind much of it?  Yes.  Are they the only ones?  No.  They have allies.  Are they a sufficient factor by themselves?  No but no single factor ever is with anything.  (Causes of great change always turn out to have been multifactorial.) That they’re a necessary factor as Prof. MacDonald puts it is sufficient for major culpability.”

What the hell are WN-Euro-whites supposed to do if most Euro-whites, themselves, are willing participants in their own destruction?

http://globalpolitician.com/articledes.asp?ID=3293&cid=1&sid=104

Posted by birch barlow on August 24, 2007, 03:08 AM | #

“PS - If you’d also called for importing, say, 50 million “high-skilled immigrants” into Vietnam, regardless of race, I’d be as vehemently opposed as I am to your absurd ideas vis-a-vis the United States.”

There’s no reason for Vietnam to import tons of high-skill immigrants right now--it’s a poor country with few opportunities for high-tech workers.  That said, if Western countries went down the tubes from mass low-skill immigration, irresponsible spending, and radical multiculturalism, and East Asia pulled ahead, I might want to move there with the beautiful East Asian wife I hope to have.

“Barlow is what’s called a white extended phenotype of the Subcons.”

Hmmm...don’t you think it’s possible that I have a real disagreement here (i.e. I value economic growth and productivity more than some quasi-religious concept of “ethnic genetic interests")? 

***

In any case whitey is going down the tubes.  There’s no sign that mass low-skill immigration (including mass low-skill Muslim immigration in Europe), irresponsible spending, low birthrates, etc. are going anywhere.  The white liberal and pseudo-conservative elite is too in love with poor Mexicans, poor, crazy, violent Muslims, and all the world’s losers.  Because of the dominance of PC and fetishization of stupidity, ugliness, insanity, and anything a well-adjusted person would say is bad, whites are a dying breed.  Live with it.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 24, 2007, 04:52 AM | #

Birch shows his true colors:

“In any case whitey is going down the tubes.  [...] whites are a dying breed.  Live with it. [...] if Western countries went down the tubes [...] and East Asia pulled ahead, I might want to move there with the beautiful East Asian wife I hope to have.”

First, Birch, a man can prefer an Oriental wife for himself and still admit that forced race-replacement of Euros is wrong, just as a Jap, Korean, or Chinaman who preferred a Euro wife for himself could admit that race-replacement of Japan, Korea, or China was wrong.  But you can’t seem to manage that.  (Have you a character flaw or something?) That’s why GC permits you to hang out at his anti-white e-rag.  He’s got you pegged as a reliable extended phenytype.  Do you imagine GC would for one second let a self-respecting white hang around that site?  Such a white would be out on his ear in a microsecond.  Have a bit of wit, Birch:  what do you think your purpose is over there?  Give that some thought.  Second, don’t you have any shame?  Can’t you see you’re being what amounts to a race-traitor?  Or is it useless even to talk of such things to the likes of you?  The only reason one tries is a sense that you, unlike the ultra-moronic David B over there, have gotten beyond your race-denial stage so at least are able to see Jewish race-denial for the sophistry it is.  David B of course is an utterly hopeless case I wouldn’t waste two words on.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 24, 2007, 05:28 AM | #

“are able to see Jewish race-denial for the sophistry it is.” (—my comment, above)

Speaking of which, here‘s an utterly typical example, among billions:  the words of a certain Prof. Mark Goldblatt:

every discussion about “race” should begin with the observation that it’s fundamentally a perceptual category, not a biological one. There’s more genetic variation within the most common racial groupings than between them. Even the narrower term “ethnicity” is ill-defined, based on long-forgotten tribal relations; sorting hundreds of ethnicities into arbitrarily drawn color-coded umbrella groups like “white” or “black” or “brown” or “yellow” is, to say the least, anthropologically dubious.

Can it be believed? What’s going on is race-denial is part of the Jewish religion, as creationism is part of the Christian.  No, race-denial isn’t explicitly in the Hebrew Bible:  that’s not what I’m saying, obviously.  But it’s viewed by many Jews as, in effect, part of their ethnicity, their religion.  They cling to it for dear life and will not let it go no matter how transparent, no matter how laughable, is the sophistry trotted out in desperation to “support” it.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 24, 2007, 05:33 AM | #

“Speaking of which, here‘s an utterly typical example”

A typical example of the sophistry, I meant, not of seeing through it.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 24, 2007, 05:43 AM | #

Mark your calendars with the date August 20, 2007, everyone:  it will go down in history as the date Fjordman published an explicit defense of the white race against forced race-replacement complete with the word “genetic,” not limiting himself to just the word “cultural.” Fjordman, comrade, welcome to the good fight!  You’re home!  You’ve finally come home!

(Hat tip goes to Slip Mahoney’s comment a few above this.  This landmark Fjordman piece was also posted as an entry over at The Civic Platform blog.  I don’t know which was first; I noticed Slip’s first.)

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 24, 2007, 06:00 AM | #

“What the hell are WN-Euro-whites supposed to do if most Euro-whites, themselves, are willing participants in their own destruction?” (—Slip Mahoney)

Slip, each of us who does see has to stand like a rock, in whatever station in life he finds himself in.  Use common sense of course, and don’t do anything foolish, but each must take his stand individually in whatever way he deems most appropriate to his life situation.  Each of us is manning a part of the battlefront, some a bigger part, some a smaller.  Each man at the front has to stand like a rock, never bend.  Each man’s contribution is crucial, indispensable, necessary for victory.  As for specific further details, each individual must work those out for himself, comrade, at this stage.  With all of us standing like a rock the other side can never hope to prevail in the end.  Yes we’ll sustain damage.  We’ve already sustained some because they attacked us unawares.  But we’ll come out of this alive as a race and our grandchildren’s grandchildren will carry on thanks to what we do today.  If we bend, we lose all.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 24, 2007, 06:13 AM | #

It’s not going to be quick, Slip Mahoney.  Don’t lose heart if it doesn’t happen overnight.  Lots do:  don’t you.  Resolve in your head that you are and will remain committed to the goal no matter what else happens, no matter how long it takes.  Never deviate.  With you doing your part and each of us his we will prevail.  What’s your part?  It is to stand like a rock in whatever station in life you find yourself in.

Posted by Steve Edwards on August 24, 2007, 07:29 AM | #

“ “In any case whitey is going down the tubes.  [...] whites are a dying breed.  Live with it. [...] if Western countries went down the tubes [...] and East Asia pulled ahead, I might want to move there with the beautiful East Asian wife I hope to have.” “

As you clearly relish the destruction of the West, I’m not sure what more we have to discuss.

Posted by Guessedworker on August 24, 2007, 07:48 AM | #

Certainly, Fred, our Nordic friend has put his foot on the important, next rung of the ladder.  Now, if he can move further past Islamification on the one hand and “the left” on the other, he will find the next rung.

Posted by Steve Edwards on August 24, 2007, 08:30 AM | #

The interesting thing about Birch Barlow, is that after all the sophistries fell away, all he was left with was that the West is being destroyed and that we must live with it. In other words, that is the sole argument left standing. Seeing as it took at least two days to get there, he has clearly wasted his time (and ours) by coming onto a site that opposes the destruction of the West and its peoples, and saying, in so many words, that he supports said destruction. It makes as much sense as spamming the Daily Kos with mindless pro-Bush propaganda, and not even bothering to defend it.

Posted by Guessedworker on August 24, 2007, 09:22 AM | #

Steve,

There are two possible reasons why Birch might come here:-

1) He enjoys throwing stones at our survivalism for the same reason that he enjoys the destruction of his own people.  This reading re-casts him as Psycho-Birch.

2) Somewhere inside his own head he is ill at ease with his destructivism, and comes here in the hope that, by defeating us, he can defeat the little angel at his shoulder.  This reading re-casts him as Schizo-Birch.

Either way, he’s nuts.

Posted by Scipio Americanus on August 24, 2007, 09:56 AM | #

“In any case whitey is going down the tubes...whites are a dying breed.  Live with it.” (Birch Barlow)

Hmm, such a sneering tone leads me to conclude that Birch Barlow is one of Yahweh’s Own.  Indeed, your sneering at our obvious impotence at this point just underscores your own suicidal, self-inflicted blindness, my befuddled minded Hebrew.  To quote Yogi Berra:  “It ain’t over till it’s over.” Obviously, you have underestimated the spirit and vitality of the white race, Birchy.  We’ve split atoms and sent men to the moon.  Sure, we’re down but not for the count.  What you fail to understand is that without the white man, the rest of the world goes down the tubes with him, including G-d’s Holy Vampires.  But that isn’t going to happen. In the immortal words of the late classicist and white race patriot Revilo P. Oliver:

“The instinct of racial loyalty lies deep in men. And though it may be crushed over with sophistic blabber, although it may seem to have disappeared under the powder of words sprinkled over it, it remains dormant in the flesh, dormant in the soul and it will awaken when that crust is broken.”

And trust me Birchy, that crust is starting to break.  What you don’t understand is that the white man is like a slumbering 1500 lb Alaskan Kodiac that’s deep in hibernation.  He’s just beginning to awaken from his long winter slumber to notice a pack of mud-colored wolves nipping at his tail.  When the bear is fully awake, there’s going to be HELL to pay.

What you also fail to understand is that there is such a thing as a collective spirit at work here.  At some point, the survival instinct of that collective mind will come to the fore.  It will take over but only when it’s time.  No one knows when that time will arrive, but the realignment of feeling and thinking will come with startling rapidity and force. Literally overnight we whites will see through our own lowlife preening and see what our enemies - especially the Jews - have wrought. A terrible fury will seize our minds.  A very fine day it will be.  Indeed, ITZ COMING!

Posted by Slip Mahoney on August 24, 2007, 02:41 PM | #

“Hat tip goes to Slip Mahoney’s comment a few above this.”

SM: Thank you, Sir. And may I compliment you for being a very generous and astute man.

“It’s not going to be quick, Slip Mahoney.  Don’t lose heart if it doesn’t happen overnight.”

SM: It could very well happen overnight. Things CAN change direction in the blink of an eye. Besides, I can’t lose heart. My racism and determination springs forth from my DNA;I can’t shake it; I’ve tried my hardest to become a liberal but I just can’t do it! Life would be so much easier to go along with the crowd and become a self-hating-white-liberal. After all, the vast majority of whites (>90% in my estimation) are on the anti-white left side of the political spectrum--or at least feign that posture. Of course, most of them are witless victims of the radical-leftists that coercively intimidated and brainwashed them. One thing is certain in my very limited mind: Sooner or later “Divine Justice” WILL prevail.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 24, 2007, 10:44 PM | #

Thank you, Slip.

By the way, here are some thoughts by Jim Kalb on rebuilding what’s been lost since WW II’s end.

Posted by birch barlow on August 24, 2007, 11:27 PM | #

“Hmm, such a sneering tone leads me to conclude that Birch Barlow is one of Yahweh’s Own.”

I have zero Jewish ancestry, as far as I know.  Almost all N. European...Irish, German, Scots-Irish, a tiny bit of American Indian (about 1/16).

“The interesting thing about Birch Barlow, is that after all the sophistries fell away, all he was left with was that the West is being destroyed and that we must live with it. In other words, that is the sole argument left standing. Seeing as it took at least two days to get there, he has clearly wasted his time (and ours) by coming onto a site that opposes the destruction of the West and its peoples, and saying, in so many words, that he supports said destruction.”

I don’t want the West destroyed.  But with current American and European policies (such as “conservative” Republicans barely stopping amnesty for illegals) I don’t see much hope.  I also don’t see any point in ranting about Jews, “Subcons,” “Orientals,” etc.  It seems that Jews, “Subcons,” and “Asiatics” or Asian “Americans"* get more negative commentary than Muslims or poor unskilled immigrants here, which makes no sense.  To be clear though, I do support the following:

--Stopping all unskilled immigration
--Stopping, or at the very least, greatly restricting Muslim immigration
--Stopping all immigration if it is more feasable than the above**
--Stopping increases in welfare payments for parents who conceive children while already on welfare
--Making family formation for the middle and upper-middle classes more affordable
--Ending affirmative action (though limited affirmative action for the descendants of slaves and Native Americans would be tolerable)
--Abolishing most if not all anti-discrimination laws, particularly in housing.  Definitely abolishing the “presumption of guilt” for employers who deviate from the racial composition of job applicants (i.e. if 13% of job applicants but 5% of employees are black, actual discrimination would have to be proven)
--Abolishing the Medicare prescription drug benefit pushed by Chimpolean
--Stopping increases in education spending beyond inflation/population, ideally rolling back education spending, as increased spending on education has consumed huge amounts of resources without showing any results.

Many here may see the above platform as too weak, but it’s certainly much farther than any “conservative Republican” is likely to go, save perhaps Ron Paul or Tom Tancredo (and even they would probably have to be pressed to support or admit supporting most of the above).

*Putting “Americans” in scare quotes when referring to Asian Americans is almost a sure sign of being a crank.  Leaving aside the (de)merits of high-skill immigration, such rhetoric will certainly not convince anyone other than the white racialist choir of the need to save the West.

**While I would prefer a skills-based immigration policy, stopping all immigration would be greatly preferable to America and Eurpoe’s current policies.

Posted by birch barlow on August 24, 2007, 11:40 PM | #

I think I should also apologize for getting a little on the trollish side.  But really, not to sound like Nancy Hopkins here, some of the rhetoric about Asians and other nonwhites, and Jews really makes me want to squirm (or at least DL some pics of hot Asian females to feel at peace).  It’s sometimes hard to resist the urge to try to make people here squirm a little as payback. 

Re: the West dying--To clarify, seeing America turn into a big buch of South-Centrals or Santa Anas is disgusting and scary, though sometimes I think it will be difficult to avoid given the current political atmoshere.  On the other hand, seeing America turn into a bunch of Silicon Valleys or University of California campuses seems swell.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 25, 2007, 12:18 AM | #

“some of the rhetoric about Asians and other nonwhites, and Jews really makes me want to squirm” (—BB)

We’re getting race-replaced by them, Birch!  That’s a pretty big deal, ya know!  Some commenters in the threads here are damned mad, including individuals who under any other circumstances would be as polite and mild, when mentioning race, as your typical third-grade elementary-school teacher.  You know that!  Don’t let the blatantly anti-Euro brown and yellow commentariat GC encourages to vent all they want over at your preferred hang-out get you brainwashed againt your own kind!  As for the harsher stuff one sees on occasion in the comments threads here, GW definitely does not encourage it and doubtless wishes it weren’t posted.  And he does, of course, chastise, sometimes harshly.  But except for the more extreme stuff he doesn’t necessarily feel an obligation to delete it, perhaps because he understands the intense anger and frustration the other side is causing in good folk on purpose, and he wants to afford people an opportunity to vent even when what they say in venting may make him and others wince and wish they’d go vent elsewhere.  Gratuitous racial abuse is not this site’s official policy.  I haven’t been at your site in three or four years but I can say I remember far, far, far worse stuff posted there by sickening anti-white yellows and sometimes browns that not only met with zero disapproval from the monitors but was subtly encouraged, and woe betide any white who stood up against it for his race:  his banning was never long in coming.  That’s why I haven’t set foot there since.

Posted by birch barlow on August 25, 2007, 12:45 AM | #

I think GNXP would be a more lively and interesting site if WNs were allowed to comment, but on the other hand large numbers of WN commentators could make GNXP’s already “racist” reputation even worse.  GNXP is trying to convince mainstream conservatives, and more reasonable liberals, of human biodiversity.  Even as it is, Samizdatista Frank McGahon has accused GNXP of being only different in degree, rather than kind, from “beyond the pale” sites like this one and Stormfront.  GNXP has to walk a fine line if it is to convince mainstream conservative, moderate, and liberal audiences of the insanity of the dominant Marxist modern Western thinking about race, IQ, and related issues.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 25, 2007, 01:03 AM | #

“the insanity of the dominant Marxist modern Western thinking about race, IQ, and related issues.” (—BB)

By refusing to acknowledge the validity ethnic genetic interests and objections to Euro race-replacement GnXp is part and parcel of that insanity.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 25, 2007, 01:06 AM | #

Also I don’t view myself as a WN but an ordinary, totally apolitical normal person.  Period.  Full stop.  End of story.  Un point, c’est tout.  What’s normal doesn’t need a special name.

Posted by Svigor on August 25, 2007, 02:13 PM | #

The bottom line is that skilled immigration is good for the economy.  Studies on immigration have shown, that while immigration has little NET economic impact, that high-skill immigration is a clear and substantial benefit.  Yes, those who are pushing for mass low-skill and illegal immigration for the “economy” are full of crap.  But I think it’s hard to deny the benefits of high skill immigration.

Birch, we’ve been over this.  Cognitive elitism is disastrous.  If you only bring in the brightest aliens, you’re simply restricting the invasion to the most effective enemy soldiers.  Blood will tell, and these elites will work (with elite efficiency) to change their colonies into their homelands.

Just ask the Amerinds.

Then there’s regression to the mean.  As a corrollary - if these elites are so great, why are they fleeing to our territories? 

Bashing non-whites who are successful is a clear sign of irrationality.

How so?  How is pointing out that successful invaders are, nonetheless, invaders “a clear sign of irrationality”?

The 1950s are not coming back.

Let’s put aside the fact that this is a straw man argument (the 1950s led to the 1960s and all subsequent; we don’t want them back); the best way to ensure the 50s never come back is to assert the impossibility and convince people to give up trying.

America is facing an aging population in addition to its already substantial underclass (thanks in part to mass low-skill immigration).  High-skill immigration is crucial to the vitality of America.

Don’t you get it?  We find your cure little different from the disease.  Where do the Japanese fit into your Bizarro World?  Do they live in a pocket universe with different physics?

How did Europe create modern civilization without infusions of alien “vitality” Birch?  You know human nature well enough, surely, to know that alien elite presence in our midst will inevitably lead to exaggerated sympathy in us for aliens in general.  There can be no cognitive elitism, except as vanguard.

Posted by Svigor on August 25, 2007, 02:52 PM | #

Hmmm...don’t you think it’s possible that I have a real disagreement here (i.e. I value economic growth and productivity more than some quasi-religious concept of “ethnic genetic interests")?

Here we get right down to the root.  Birch values the abstract of “economic man.” We value man.  The difference really is that simple - man or mammon?

The idea that things as obvious and primary as the survival and breeding instincts (even if they do need to be dressed up with fancy terms like EGI for the insane fucktards now populating the west) are “quasi-religious” to the Birch crowd is simply laughable to the sane.

We see capitalism as a tool, he sees it as the point.  And he calls us religious!

Either way, he’s nuts.

This is absolutely the case.  I don’t mean this as an ad hom, as an easy way to be dismissive.  But it’s accurate and very helpful to understanding what we face.  And it isn’t something that makes Birch abnormal - to the contrary, it makes him normal; insanity is now the norm in the west.  That is how we have to handle typical Euros, as (one hopes temporarily) insane.

After all, the vast majority of whites (>90% in my estimation) are on the anti-white left side of the political spectrum--or at least feign that posture. Of course, most of them are witless victims of the radical-leftists that coercively intimidated and brainwashed them. One thing is certain in my very limited mind: Sooner or later “Divine Justice” WILL prevail.

The 90% you speak of are herd animals.  The support for our destruction is a mile wide and an inch deep.  Not only will the herd abandon it in a heartbeat if the wind blows the right way - it will also breathe a long sigh of relief.

I don’t like Scipio’s lingo, but I have to echo much of his sentiment.  I hope enough awaken, soon enough, to “git ‘er done” with a minimum of fuss, but I agree that our race has the muscle to shake the pillars of the Earth.  Even if only 10% of us awaken, the globalist game is over; that 10% will take the rest by the hair and drag them to sanity (this is not speculation, but fact; the difficulty lies in getting the 10% awake).

**While I would prefer a skills-based immigration policy, stopping all immigration would be greatly preferable to America and Eurpoe’s current policies.

The sooner you realize your preferred policy is essentially inseparable from the current policy, the better.

On the other hand, seeing America turn into a bunch of Silicon Valleys or University of California campuses seems swell.

As does the idea of 70 virgins awaiting me in Paradise.

Posted by ben tillman on August 26, 2007, 12:05 AM | #

I have zero Jewish ancestry, as far as I know.

What do “you” mean by “I”?  When “you” say “I”, what proposition are “you” referring to? 

I tend to think that a “proposition nation” united by ideas is actually less abstract than one united by some unknown pieces of information (genes).

But…

Almost all N. European...Irish, German, Scots-Irish, a tiny bit of American Indian (about 1/16).

This sounds suspiciously like a reference to genetic material.  “You”, however, have stated that identity is a matter of ideas.  If “your” argument is correct, “you” must recognize yourself as a “proposition person”.

Posted by Rnl on August 26, 2007, 09:29 PM | #

birch barlow wrote:

Japan is not doing all that well--they have found ways to mechanize low-skill jobs, but their overall economy is fairly stagnant

I think you’re missing the point. We are under no obligation to demonstrate that Japan is the world’s most dynamic (non-stagnant) economy. All we need to demonstrate is that first-class economies do not need immigration from the Third World. No one would dispute that Japan is a _successful economy_, and that fact is all our argument requires. One of the wealthiest countries in the world, as a matter of uncontested fact, succeeds economically without importing low-skill diversity from Mexico or high-skill diversity from India. Whether the Japanese economy is insufficiently dynamic is, from our perspective, irrelevant. We know that it is remarkably successful in comparison with the vast majority of the world’s economies. You therefore cannot plausibly argue on economic grounds that America _needs_ Third World immigrants. We can succeed without their assistance, just as the Japanese have succeeded without their assistance.

If a nation doesn’t need racial diversity, why import it?

***

Japan enjoyed one of the highest economic growth rates in the world for 35 years with no immigration whatsoever. Since the existence of a thing is absolute proof of its possibility (as Bertrand Russell once pointed out), this demonstrates that a growing economy is possible without immigration. The trick is achieved by a combination of investment and innovation. Current immigration policy - with its emphasis on bringing in unskilled workers and relatives of recent immigrants - discourages both. It distorts as much as it feeds the economy. It ensures that America is a more unskilled and less automated economy, and a more stratified society, than would be the case with lower levels and different types of immigration. As for Social Security, that argument is a Ponzi scheme and, like all such schemes, would require an ever-expanding arrival of new contributors. After a few generations, this ingenious fiscal policy would run out of human immigrants and the U.S. would have to import aliens from outer space to continue financing its vast entitlement programs now accommodating most of the world.

http://www.amconmag.com/2007/2007_07_30/cover.html

Posted by oops upside ya head on August 29, 2007, 02:17 AM | #

If the attacks on ‘Zivism’ are to be understood as objectively based and without particular ethnic animus, Steve Edwards, listed proudly as contributor to MR would have his contributions moved to the section ‘miscegenation’ and Zivism be retitled Zivism-Edwardsism.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 29, 2007, 02:46 AM | #

One white man doesn’t race-replace the Vietnamese.  Race-replacement is an issue of numbers, not individuals:  numbers of incompatibles and the policies that bring those numbers about.  Hanoi is not about to let forty million white men into the country.

Posted by Lurker on August 29, 2007, 03:10 AM | #

That ‘
g;e’ was meant to be ‘percentage’

Posted by Scipio Americanus on September 04, 2007, 12:48 AM | #

“I don’t like Scipio’s lingo, but I have to echo much of his sentiment.”

(-Svigor)

For the record, Svigor, I was being sarcastic with my “lingo” while simultaneously making the point that all is not hopeless, regardless how things stand at the present moment.  Ultimately, we are the captains of our own destiny.  Please note, I tend to sprinkle my rhetoric with colloquialisms and jargon as garnish when responding to pseudo-intellectual adversaries like Birch Barlow who prattle about “human bio-diversity”, “one-world”, “racism”, “political respectability”, “universal brotherhood”, and other prototypical liberal nonsense.  It’s just my way of pooh poohing these psychologically deranged types ("insane fucktards” as you call them) who incessantly yammer irksome platitudes while denigrating our genetic heritage and scoffing at the vitally important concepts of racial/national survival with self-righteous contempt. 

Indeed, I’ve dealt with these types many times, both face to face and in cyberspace via Internet discussion forums, and I have discovered time and again that it is pointless to declare to them that the sky is blue when they believe it to be otherwise.  They simply will not listen to facts and reason, regardless how academic, professional and well-worded the endeavor.  To these cultists, we are blind because we have eyes, deaf because we have ears and mentally unhinged because we have a cerebral cortex and a functioning rational faculty that has not been rotted-out by Judeo-Liberal dogma. 

Given that I’m new here at Majority Rights, I do not want you and the others to misconstrue my remarks and think of me as a knuckle-dragging troglodyte who is out to stir up trouble by inciting “hatred” of our “betters”.  God forbid such naughtiness!  I was just having a little fun with Birchy, that’s all, while making a very serious point regarding our race’s potential for recovery.

Regarding your responses to B’nai Birch Barlow’s balderdash:  WELL STATED!  While ineffectual in terms of counteracting the poison that has already paralyzed his thought processes, it does present those who have escaped the insidious effects of Judeo-Liberal brainwashing with some highly cogent points to consider. 

Essentially, B’nai Birch and his ilk live in a world of floating abstractions and his arguments regarding race reduce to one simple notion we have heard many times before: “There’s no race but one—the human race.” Sadly, you are right to regard most Westerners as temporarily “insane”, especially given the lessons of history and the calamity race-mixing/race-replacement have wrought.  Are we to face the same fate as the Romans, the Egyptians and the ancient Aryans of India who miscegenated themselves out of existence?

While I am journalistically pessimistic regarding the short-term, I am optimistic regarding our race’s long-term outlook.  After all, we have the most important factor working on our behalf:  REALITY.  In the immortal words of Francis Bacon:  “Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed.” Ultimately, the West cannot maintain a First World economy and standard of living with a Third World population.  Couple this fact with the destructive effects of “free trade” and a credit-based, inflation-prone monetary system, I do not expect the economic good times to roll on indefinitely. 

As our standard of living begins to decline (real wage rates have been declining since 1973 although the effects of this have been temporarily offset by two income households) coupled with an escalation of non-white crime and mayhem directed towards our people, something will eventially break the proverbial camel’s back, be it a catastrophic military campaign abroad, an economic depression, hyperinflation, mass violent outbreaks or some other unforeseen calamity. 

While I deeply resent open hostility towards our race by our implacable enemies, both white and non-white alike, I constantly remind myself that this is one of the most powerful forces that will ultimately drive the viable portion of our people from the suicidal death-cult they currently embrace.  It’s already happening right before our very eyes, albeit much more slowly than all of us would like it to proceed.  In all likelihood, it will be the growing manifestation of non-White hatred of the West coupled with some type of economic or political catastrophe that will act as the catalyst that shakes us from the our apathetic state of mind.  Hence the motto:  BAD.  ITS THE NEW GOOD. 

Yes, I wish it were not so, however, facts are facts, A is A, what is, is.  Once our backs are to the wall, and the myth of “equality” is exposed for the absurdity that it is, our people will have no choice but to respond by fighting fire with fire if they prefer not to be consumed.  The Iron Law of Nature and the instinct of survival will command it.  How long this process takes to unfold I cannot say. After all, I do not own a crystal ball nor do I possess the power of divination.  However, the learned Professor Kevin MacDonald is on record regarding this matter and predicts that it will be the next generation of Whites who will make the stand that will hopefully finish this simmering race war once and for all. 

While I embrace the notion that life is for the living, something deep in my soul yearns for this watershed event to occur sooner rather than later, while we still have the numbers and resources to successfully overcome our nemeses.  I do not know what you and the others feel in your hearts, but I know with clarity that I want to live in a world with exaltation and meaning, not on global plantation in which all hominoids exist to serve their masters in brutish servitude.  Regardless, the time of reckoning is fast approaching.  Which way goest thou, Western man?

Scipio Americanus