Loveless marriages are the mechanism of tribal distinctiveness

Posted by James Bowery on October 23, 2005, 02:01 AM | #

Sailer has a point that companionate mating and individualism is a trait of ours—one worth preserving and defending. But what he doesn’t get is this is precisely why we must prevent access to our territory by those who do not share these traits.  Continual expansion of the definition of “we” isn’t necessary for fulfillment of our nature.

Posted by Freddy on October 23, 2005, 02:30 AM | #

The dichotomy that Sailer is trying to posit between arranged marriages and ‘free for all’ mating is quite false. One can of course have free choice WITHIN an endogamous pool of mates.

Posted by Svigor on October 23, 2005, 03:47 AM | #

One can of course have free choice WITHIN an endogamous pool of mates.

Duh.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on October 23, 2005, 04:49 AM | #

Discouragement, restriction, or outright prohibition of racially, ethnically, culturally, or religiously mixed marriages whether on a familial, clan, religious, or societywide level isn’t at all the issue (as I see it) of concern to WNs.  The issue is forced race-replacement. 

A thousand Seals coming into Germany and marrying a thousand Heidi Klums is none of anyone’s business but a thousand Seal-Klum marriages aren’t going to change Germany’s race.  Millions of them are, and that’s everyone’s legitimate business and, furthermore, is clearly not wanted by the people but governments aren’t listening. 

Do I give a good god damn if a white girl marries a Mexican man in California?  No, I’ll wish the blessed couple every happiness and success in their future life together.  I agree completely with Steve—they ought to do what they want and, like everyone else, marry the one they are in love with. 

But people don’t want their communities disrupted by huge influxes of incompatible races being brought in and they have many legitimate reasons for this, none directly related to race-preservation—the average person doesn’t think about broad questions of race-preservation though if you explicitly put the question to him he’ll vote in favor of it.  Well, although the average person doesn’t think in terms of race-preservation, if average people are listened to on immigration the young women and men in their communities will, as a natural consequence of reasonable controls on incompatible immigration which they want anyway, find spouses of their own race so everything has a way of fitting together and there’ll be no unwanted alteration of traditional demographics which the average person also doesn’t want though the average person doesn’t explicitly plan that out in his mind. 

That mixed white-Mexican couple in California isn’t going to singlehandedly change the race of the United States and no one would dream of objecting in the slightest if they met, fell in love, and married.  That, which seems to be what Steve is talking about, is not at all the question at issue. 

Now, I do object if successive massive assaults on the white race in this country in the form of the 1965 Immigration Holocaust bill followed by a Bush-Clinton-Bush-administration open-borders policy forced on an unconsulted U.S. population that doesn’t want it but is deliberately ignored brings literally several tens of millions of Mexicans and other racial incompatibles into this country, disrupting white communities, changing whole cities, sending whites fleeing to other states, and lowering their birth rates as California and Texas are race-replaced with several others next on the “imminent” list and no end in sight.  Yes, I give a good god damn about that, yes that’s my legitimate business, but it is a completely different question from whether or not two lovers of different race should have everyone’s blessing to get married, which is what Steve seems to be talking about. 

That young California couple getting married and having kids or Klum and Seal getting married and having kids aren’t going to singlehandedly change the race of a whole country.  What’s going on now with Bush, Blair, Chirac and the rest of them is:  two entirely different issues.  One’s our legitimate business, the other isn’t.

Posted by Mark Richardson on October 23, 2005, 05:51 AM | #

Not one of Steve’s better arguments.

You don’t need arranged marriages to preserve your own ethny. There are other formal measures like immigration controls and then many informal influences, such as the role of popular culture (how romance in portrayed in books, films, TV), as well as normal, healthy “prejudices” against interracial mating.

Our problem is not the absence of arranged marriage, but that our political class has put all the other mechanisms in reverse - our political class is determined to act against the survival of the European races.

Posted by J Richards on October 23, 2005, 06:26 AM | #

Damn, Steve Sailer is suffering from premature dementia.  He had the following to say recently about Razib of Gene Expression blog:

Razib offers a philosophy of science for the 21st century at GNXP in “Extremism in defense of precision is no vice.” This kid is well on his way to being the Popper and Kuhn of this century, although he strikes me as wiser than either.

Damn!  Razib is hardly capable of terse expression, is unnecessarily verbose, writes a lot about very little, barely expresses himself coherently and his spelling and grammar skills are a nightmare for a linguist.

Now, no scientist worth his name would be half impressed with the philosophical rants of Popper or Kuhn, and with his poor writing, Razib is not going to be ranked anywhere among prominent philosophers of science.  However, I am fairly positive that Steve Sailer is not being sarcastic above.

More to the point, we all know what the stance of Razib and Godless Capitalist is toward the ethnic genetic interests of whites, and fool Steve Sailer has no problems accepting their like as co-citizens!

Since Fred Scrooby has mentioned the miscegenation between Heidi klum and the extremely disgusting-looking Negro Seal, here is a pictorial depiction of the consequences:

A mentally ill white female + pockmarked ugly Negro…

= an ugly freak-of-nature offspring:

Steve Sailer, I don’t know about you, but I would rather not have my descendents look like the low IQ ugly freak you see above, who is getting darker by the day (babies take a while to attain their final color).  Goddamn, wake-up man!

Posted by Andrew on October 23, 2005, 06:48 AM | #

This topic is a good platform for identifying the differences between Polygamy and monogamy, Polygamy is Multiple wives as we know, and Arab or Islamic Cult’s promote this, The Husband in the forefront has little regard for the children, as there is a multitude (Welfare in the West) of them, and the inability of the children of such relationships to garnish the love and care kids need, thus Islamic kids are some what dislocated from normal Western societies, as they never experience this normal Monogamist family love and participation, at close quarters with a mother and a father and have never or could ever experience that emotion, as the Islamic nature and cult status dictate, could never or will ever exist in Polygamist environment. Brainwashing and inculcation of hate is achieved at early ages in Islam,(Liberalised West also) they breed for missions not love.
Has anyone else observed this, as well as liberalism doing its bit to poke a spanner in the spokes of Monogamist Societies, I just read a senior Islamic Scholar’s interpretation of Islam, It is near word for word for what the Intellectual philosophers of Antitheses aspire to describe Universalism’s God is everywhere and everything. Hmmm, I told you they were flippant, or chronically mentally Ill. Islam and the left Is a State of Mind and not a matter of Metaphysics .

Posted by stari_momak on October 23, 2005, 12:41 PM | #

Is is just me, or does Seal junior look like a little Manuel Noriega?

Posted by Svigor on October 23, 2005, 04:34 PM | #

Discouragement, restriction, or outright prohibition of racially, ethnically, culturally, or religiously mixed marriages whether on a familial, clan, religious, or societywide level isn’t at all the issue (as I see it) of concern to WNs.  The issue is forced race-replacement.

I agree, in a way.  WN is about white tribalism.  The way to maintain a tribe isn’t to go around forcing members to conform, but rather expelling members who don’t.

Posted by Svigor on October 23, 2005, 04:35 PM | #

Posted by Mark Richardson on 10/23 at 05:51 AM

That says it all, with concision.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on October 23, 2005, 05:57 PM | #

“The way to maintain a tribe isn’t to go around forcing members to conform, but rather expelling members who don’t.” (—Svigor)

I think banishment is exactly what needs to be done to members of a community who agitate repeatedly for that community’s race-replacement.  Kick them the hell out.  Send them if possible to the country whose race they want to replace their own:  if Mexico’s, send them to Mexico; if Nigeria’s, to Nigeria; if China’s, to China, and so forth.  Get rid of them.  Permanently. 

Immigration is one thing.  What we had in the U.S. till 1965 was immigration.  Race-replacement’s quite another.  Race-replacement is what we have now. 

We don’t allow certain things in society, such as child porn, having a history of being in the Nazi S.S. or being a WW-II concentration-camp guard, or advocating the violent overthrow of the government.  Advocating race-replacement should be added to that list of things we don’t allow. 

You’re so much in love with such-and-such other race that you think it should replace ours?  Good.  Get the hell out and go live there.  Don’t come back.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on October 23, 2005, 06:43 PM | #

“This vast trend means that an ideology of racial separatism, such as Jared Taylor’s white nationalism, is ultimately doomed among white Americans by the enormous value we place upon true love and our discomfort at ostracizing those who find love across ethnic boundaries.” (—Steve Sailer, from the URL given in the log entry)

Jared Taylor doesn’t have “an ideology of racial separatism.” He merely favors reasonable immigration policies that don’t put us on the conveyor belt leading directly to replacement of the traditional white race or its transformation into both a minority and a white/non-white mixture. 

Most whites want their race to stay white, unmixed, and in the majority here.  In the 1960s, fanatical all-out race-war was declared against whites in this country and against that wish of theirs to stay white and in the majority, by fifth-column whites who were renegades and enemies of various stripes, including sickos like June Gordon who posts here, for example, and all the other usual suspects.  Foaming-at-the-mouth white-Christian hatred was a principle motivation for that declaration of war.  Men like Jared Taylor are manning the ramparts in defense of whites against this all-out attack which aims at our extinction.  Such men aren’t advancing “an ideology of racial separatism.” They are defending against (and, where possible, feebly counterattacking) a genocidal onslaught that keeps screaming in our face that we white Christians are unsatisfactory and must be driven to extinction and if we say aught against it that only means we deserve it all the more for not being repentant. 

There’s an awful lot of daylight between having “an ideology of racial separatism” on the one hand, and on the other, merely not wanting one’s race to be made extinct. 

If all that was going on was finding true love, what was that sudden 1960s declaration of war all about?  Was the pushing-through of the 1965 Immigration Holocaust bill aimed at finding people true love, or at something else? 

No one ever kept anyone from boarding a plane or ship and traveling to foreign places in search of a non-white spouse.  Jared Taylor never breathed a single solitary word against anyone doing that, or marrying anyone of his choosing.  But when someone agitates for bringing the whole non-white world here into our white country in order ultimately to replace or partially replace whites and change our whole society for the worse, it’s legitimate, and no sort of “ideology of racial separatism,” to question that. 

Our race has a right to preserve itself.  So does every race.

Getting back to the quote of Steve’s above, it’s not “the value Americans place on true love and their discomfort at disapproving of mixed-race relationships” that is “ultiimately dooming” the preservation of the white race intact and in the majority in this country.  It’s the government’s policy of excessive incompatible immigration that’s dooming it. 

And that policy is being forced against the people’s wish.  I just saw a reference in WorldNetDaily.com to a Zogby poll not long ago that found 81% of Americans opposed to the race-replacement policies being shoved down our throats.  I don’t think those 81% have any desire whatsoever to oppose “true love” or to frown on mixed-race relationships that are none of their business. 

But their country’s race is their business.  Damn right it is. 

Two completely different things.

Posted by Guessedworker on October 23, 2005, 07:09 PM | #

Excellent comment, Fred.

I think JW is essentially right about Steve.  There is an agenda to his writings which is not our agenda.  It is nearer Razib’s agenda. 

This idea, for example, of reifying true love as productive of race-mixing is hogwash.  Courtly love flows from the chivalric tradition and is a direct consequence of our inate individualism and Western spirituality.  Yet for eight centuries, perhaps, it simply did not produce the racial changes Steve suggests.  Only since the post-war era have blacks and browns begun to live among us, and racial change is a product of that proximity + media encouragement + the anomie of an advanced liberal society.

Sorry, Steve.  It’s a neat enough idea.  But it’s too simplistic and doesn’t deserve the attention you are giving it.

Posted by Goon Jordan on October 24, 2005, 11:20 PM | #

Who is Comrade Richards calling “mentally ill”? (It’s an old Communist tactic, doncha know, doncha know?) Ms. Klum seems quite happy and well-adjusted to me, not to mention unmentionably beautiful. The baby may look a bit odd right now, as most babies do, but chances are it will grow up to be above-average in both the looks and musical talent departments.

Posted by Goon Jordan on October 24, 2005, 11:44 PM | #

I do agree with Richards’ comments about that annoying twit Razib, however.

Posted by JB on October 25, 2005, 06:45 PM | #

Fred Scrooby:
“Do I give a good god damn if a white girl marries a Mexican man in California?  No, I’ll wish the blessed couple every happiness and success in their future life together.  I agree completely with Steve—they ought to do what they want and, like everyone else, marry the one they are in love with.”

You should give a damn, as if she was your daughter or your sister. We’re not living in an era where we could in theory not be bothered by a race-mixer here and there. Race-mixing propaganda is broadcasted 365 days a year and every new case encourages the less independent minded and the emotional to join the trend.

“It’s my personal choice !” would be the reply the thousands or millions of whites who are pushed into miscegenation or attracted by it for some reason or another would spout to those who object to their behavior.

Posted by J Richards on October 26, 2005, 06:32 AM | #

Goon [removed],

Heidi Klum is a manly-looking woman:

She has flattened buttocks, broad shoulders, large feet and other manly features (her breasts are probably fake).  If you find her unmentionably beautiful, are you queer?

Heidi Klum was married to a much-older hairstylist (Ric Pipino) before.  Male hairstylists are often queer, and one wonders if Ric Pipino happens to be queer, given how manly Heidi Klum looks.  Many Negroes live the down-low lifestyle, and if I were as manly-looking as Heidi Klum is, I would be concerned if I had a Negro partner. 

Besides, what mentally normal white woman breeds with a Negro?  White women who breed with Negroes are typically low status women, but a woman of Heidi Klum’s financial status has to have something wrong with her mind to breed with a Negro, which I suspect to be the case given her previous marriage with a queer-type person.  Don’t be misled by her happy looks; the mentally ill can look happy. 

I don’t know about what talents the Negroid baby will grow up with, but manly-looking mother plus ugly Negro father is highly unlikely to lead to a good-looking person. 

You have chosen a cool name, by the way.

Posted by Dahlia on September 03, 2006, 09:42 PM | #

who ever is stating that Klum,(the victorian secrets model) is manly/or ugly i think you are insane,and you easily have issues yourself to pick on other people and claim that they are ugly,maybe your the one that is mental,that was a horrible think to say,and you should get a life and stop worring about other people’s problems and looks and figure out what wrong with you first,you should go see a theripist!

Posted by Mary on October 15, 2006, 10:00 PM | #

You have no right to say that.  Just because yoiu are a low class racist person who probablt has issues of your own, doesnt mean that you have any valid right to say thata white woman cannot “breed” with a “negro”.  Nobody uses those bullshit words anymore.  It is people like you who start fights and anger.  So if you would stop being so racist, maybe you could keep your thoughts to yourself and GET WITH THE TIMES.

Heidi Klum is a beautiful woman and looks nothing like a man, regarding ther fact that so many women out there (even models) would kill for her looks.  Your opinion on her appearance really highlights your obsolete perception of how you think a woman should look like, which is completely media based and false.

And if you waste all your time trying to start arguements and disagreement with the whole world, (who with their opinions, are completely against you) you will get many disagreeable comments opposing your bullshit opinions.  It makes me sick to see and adult like you who has the most childish opinions about something that should not concern you.  I am only a 16 year old high school student, and by reading this trash written about someone you are clearly jealous of, I am disgusted and wonder whether or not it is you, ignorant person, who has a SEVERE mental illness.

Posted by Northerner on October 16, 2006, 04:06 AM | #

Mary, let me guess: you’re an unattractive, overweight celebrity watcher from a household of low-to-middling means who stumbled on this nasty site while searching for the latest on the beautiful Heidi Klum and her wonderful biracial family.

Your belief that failure to regurgitate perceived mainstream opinion marks one as “low class”; starts “fights and anger”; and shouldn’t be allowed, is duly noted.

However, you seem to be getting some memes confused when you accuse a previous poster of disliking “supermodel” Heidi Klum due to “your obsolete perception of how you think a woman should look like, which is completely media based and false.” This line is applicable when men reject you in favor of height-weight proportionate women ("anorexic barbies"), not when a man expresses distaste for a celebrity model.

Posted by Hoppy The Rabbit on November 24, 2006, 02:07 PM | #

They should both be taken to have the rest of their faces chewed off by walruses and seals.  And they should be made to eat that offspring for next thanksgiving.  And then they should hit a pole at 90 MPH in a small car on July 4th.  And DIE.  FUCK THEM BOTH.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on November 24, 2006, 03:26 PM | #

Fred Scrooby [wrote]:

“Do I give a good god damn if a white girl marries a Mexican man in California?  No, I’ll wish the blessed couple every happiness and success in their future life together.  I agree completely with Steve—they ought to do what they want and, like everyone else, marry the one they are in love with.”

I’ve changed my mind on that, JB (and on some other things as well). 

I stand by this, though (from my signature slogans):

”Our concern has nothing one way or another to do with the member of any race or group considered as an individual.  Our concern has to do with numbers, not individuals:  numbers of incompatibles and the policies that bring those numbers about.”—F. S.

On the subject of why women do what Heidi Klum is doing, by the way, I wonder if this sheds any light?  (Miss Klum, incidentally, is not exactly what you would call the brightest bulb on the tree.  I’ve seen her hosting a TV show, a competition aimed at giving young fashion designers “a start” in the business, and she appears somewhat ... dull, would be an appropriate word ... .  This is not a bright woman ...)

______

- “All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.”—Enoch Powell

- Moratorium-plus-Repatriation!

- Balkanization is better than Brazilianization!

- “The beauty of the most attractive whites cannot be enhanced by the absorption of non-whites among whites, but will be undermined.”—J. Richards

- The 1965 “It’s Good For The Jews” White Genocide Immigration Act:  the gift that keeps on giving!

- Diversity is death!—Nick

- What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the usual suspects!

- “White fellows fight back and we fight back hard; it is in our genes, being Anglos.”—Andrew

- Stop genocide!  Long live the Afrikaner Volkstaat!

- Long live Free Padania!

- Long live Free Flanders!

- “The discussion of race and intelligence is being actively repressed on campuses as I write these words. But intellectually, the battle is over: Race realism has won.”—Prof. Rushton

- “Our concern has nothing one way or another to do with the member of any race or group considered as an individual.  Our concern has to do with numbers, not individuals:  numbers of incompatibles and the policies that bring those numbers about.”—F. S.

- “General Wesley Clark on why the aggressive war against Serbia was undertaken by NATO: ‘There is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states. That’s a 19th-century idea, and we are trying to transition into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multi-ethnic states.’ That is quite simply the most disgusting thing I have ever heard in my life.  I feel rather ill.”—Steve Edwards

- The New World Order’s official motto:  “To the extent we can manage to commit genocide, there’s hope.”

- “The message we’re always given relative to 3rd-world-ization is, ‘Give up, surrender, your cause is hopeless,’ just like war propaganda.”—John Bolton

- “The male/female game is the game of opposites:  the male instinct is to compete (maximizing fitness) while the female instinct is to conspire (raising the cost of sex, enforcing monogamy).  Applying this simple yet powerful and, most important of all, accurate model, the male instinct is to be racist (because it is males who fight to protect territory and to retain the racial integrity of the tribe), so therefore the female instinct is to be ‘anti-racist.’

“If their behaviour is unlimited, females are capable of, firstly, making their own males into an underclass, for example by their wholesale preference for alien males, as can readily be observed in areas with high immigrant populations.  Secondly, they are capable of taking their race to the brink of extinction if not beyond.” (—Simon Sheppard)

Posted by Tiffany on November 03, 2008, 07:18 PM | #

I can’t even believe what i’m reading. This attack on two people who you probably don’t know is completely ignorant. I am a biracial person and i love my ethnic background. I’m proud to be part “negro” because it connects me to something greater that myself, a struggle and perserverance of a race of people who were oppressed because of their alleged inferiority. Note that “Negroes” aren’t the only race to have gone through such a struggle but they are the race that you chose to point out. Seal and Heidi Klum have beautiful children together and will continue to be happy because they love each other not for the color of their skin but because of the content of their character. It sadens me to know that there are such foul and evil people still around today...how callous can you be to pick on their children? That’s blatant disrespect! All i can say is that God blessed them in their union and with their children, and who are you to question what God has done?

Posted by Bob J on April 30, 2009, 12:44 PM | #

How about tiger woods and Ellen Nordegren? Thats even more repulsive, if you ask me.  Miscegenation is being promoted by the mainstream media as something positive, beautiful and progressive, and anyone who objects, even with moral basis, is refuted as “ignorant”, “bigot” , and even “racist”.  The divorce rate of today has reached unprecedented levels.  Hopefully this social fad will fade away and people will return to their moral principles and the natural order of family structure.  It offends me that mongrels are often the first to support miscegenation and to point fingers at anyone who objects (the reason being they are a product of it) This marriage is offensive not only to white men, but to many black woman!!!  A world of a single mongrelized race of people indistinguishable from one another will be a dull one, indeed, and quite frankly I will oppose it anyway I can.  We should preserve who we are, our ethnic and racial identities.  It’s just wrong and offensive for such a beautiful white woman w/ blonde hair and blue eyes to give birth to black children!!!  It’s fratricidal and if you can’t see whats wrong with it your either ignorant, dense, or a mongrel yourself.  Diversity is perversity.  It’s immoral, unnatural, perverted, and disrupts the natural order.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on April 30, 2009, 12:53 PM | #

I agree with every word of Bob J’s comment above.  Five years ago I wouldn’t have.  I’d even have been shocked by large parts of it.  No more:  I’ve been shocked way more by the repulsive, unacceptable, evil reality around me and now see the light and the real moral issues far better than I used to.  Light and morality are on Bob J’s side, I now realize.  Totally.

Posted by Dira Lion on November 30, 2009, 03:25 AM | #

fred scooby, go to hell,
if not let your children do it for you.
the rest of you defiantly blind idiotic fools who comdemn reality you are not worth of existence.