Kevin V. writes:

I’ve been following your latest series of posts on this topic with great interest, because, as with much of what you write about, this particular issue is one that transformed me from a leftist to a traditionalist who believes strongly that race does matter.
I remember when I was in college hearing of a Stanford student named Amy Biehl who had been killed by a black crowd in one of the townships in South Africa. She had gone there to help. Since my roommate at the time was a South African graduate student, I had been receiving a great education about current events there. Even though he was a liberal, he explained to me why Biehl’s activities were near suicidal in nature.

It was the television reports that got to me. I remember very clearly watching the ABC News reports on the trial of the men who had stoned and stabbed Biehl to death as she begged for her life. The courtroom was packed with the relatives and friends of the accused, who had to be admonished by the judge over and over to maintain order during the proceedings. The ABC newsman focused on one dramatic event during that day’s testimony. As a witness for the prosecution described in detail Biehl’s begging while a knife was being driven into her chest down to the hilt, the black women in the crowd began to laugh and perform a mocking ululating while a few performed mock begging motions. The black men yowled in glee and the entire courtroom broke out into hysterics as the black crowd mocked this white girl’s final moments.

Sitting in the courtroom, fresh from lily-white and very wealthy Newport Beach, California, were Biehl’s parents, Linda and Peter Biehl. The news report then cut to an interview of the parents after the day’s testimony, in which they declared that understood the anger of the crowd and that their fondest hope was that their daughter’s murder trial would lead to an opportunity for reconciliation and forgiveness. It was seeing this despicable reaction that made me realize that what I was seeing around me in Berkeley was, in fact, true: there is no black depravity against whites that white liberals will not excuse or forgive. We have it coming. Even our own daughters have it coming.

In case you think that this was an instance of shell-shocked parents not thinking clearly, I should note that the Biehls have gone on to form a charity, the Amy Biehl Foundation, which “continues Amy’s work in South Africa.” The website of Beyond Intractability, which describes itself as a site dedicated to finding “more constructive approaches to destructive conflict,” has this report on Linda Biehl from December, 2005:

Eventually, Peter and Linda quit their jobs in California and started a South African organization, running after-school programs and small businesses in the townships.
“We had already determined that Amy was killed during a very violent time, but there was still violence. It was mostly economic-based, there were no schools. We wanted to help make functional young people,” says Linda.

In 1997, Desmond Tutu created the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Created to deal with the horrors of apartheid, the TRC allowed perpetrators of racial crimes to receive amnesty for a full confession. Victims could also receive reparations for the pain they had suffered. The four men convicted of Amy’s murder applied.

The Biehls wanted to be respectful of the TRC process because they knew that Amy would have supported it. They granted all four men amnesty. At the hearing, Peter addressed the Commission saying, “The most important vehicle of reconciliation is open and honest dialogue ... we are here to reconcile a human life which was taken without an opportunity for dialogue. When we are finished with this process we must move forward with linked arms.” However, despite what Peter had said at the hearing, probably nobody expected what happened next.

After they were released from prison, Easy Nofemela and Ntobeko Peni, two of the men convicted of Amy’s murder had come to much the same conclusion the Biehls had about the townships.

“They were shocked to see things hadn’t changed. Things were worse. Their friends were not in school. There was a lot of drinking and drugs,” Linda remembers. The two men started a youth group in their township and they wanted to show the Biehls what they had done. An anthropologist who had been interviewing them offered to contact the Biehls. They agreed.

The Biehls took Nofemela and Peni out to dinner. That night was the beginning of a strong friendship between the four. The Biehls hired the two men to help out with their organization.

[end of excerpt]

She helps the murderers obtain amnesty, she dines out with them, and she hires them, the savages who murdered her own daughter.
Simply put, this is monstrously inhuman. This is liberalism.

If we, as a movement, are waiting for whites to “wake up,” we will fail. The Biehl experience shows that even under such circumstances, liberalism remains a terminal disease.
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/011093.html

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/011093.html

“Ultimately, convergent evolution tends to create not just similar genes but similar genetic correlation structures and it is the genetic correlation structures we seek to preserve.  This remains true even in the case of isolated demes that are brought together for sexual reproduction:  The demes that have more genetic correlation structures in common with each other will be less functionally destructive to each other during sexual mixing than will other demes.” (—James Bowery)

JWH discusses this issue.

Important commentary at Western Biopolitics which everyone should read and understand:  it deals with the thesis that people don’t cherish their society as much, or (which follows from the first) generally see to its well-being as much, when it’s multiracial or even just multiethnic as when it’s mono- either of those (monoracial or monoethnic):

http://westbiop.blogspot.com/2008/08/theory-more-egi8308.html

Though presented (at the link) partly as conjecture, this is a profoundly important topic.

I would also add that Salterism takes away from legitimate research on race and genetics.  Really, you guys are shooting yourselves in the foot, and only giving fuel to the far left. And the Auster/Sailer hating stuff is just creepy.

It is not beneficial to keep out high-IQ, law-abiding nonwhites because they aren’t white.

It is if you understand that “diversity destroys trust.” (An “insight” so elementary and obvious that only highly intelligent people and hapas (and hapa wannabes) can fail to get it.)

Salterism just seems like a highly intellectualized version of white, mid-western blandness, sort of like the kind of people who are always following the lives of boring, plain celebrities like Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan. 

White mid-westerners are the biggest Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan fans?  Now I’ve heard it all.

Herewith is the source article (URL link below) on that surname disclosure by Allan Wall (see my comment above).  Check out the most common surnames in the city of Vancouver, originally a totally white city of course.  Have a look at Toronto too, ditto.  Although the article points out these surname surveys are not scientific, I’m sure they’re highly suggestive of what’s going on, namely methodical government-enforced race-replacement of Canada’s original population.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/name-change/common-surnames.html

This one’s for your, zorn.

Oh and thank you thank you thank you Catholics and Canadian Euro “ethnics” such as Ukes and Italians, who never saw a Jewish race-replacement initiative they didn’t enthusiastically embrace, regretting only they hadn’t been first to think it up. 

Intent can’t be readily inferred from effect.  One isn’t justified in inferring that Paul overeats (consumes more calories than he expends) in order to get fat (the result of overeating); it is much more likely that Paul overeats because he enjoys eating.  Similarly, it’s not right to condemn “Ukes and Italians” for embracing race-replacement since race-replacement is hardly likely to have been their intent. 

Ukes and Italians, like Greeks and Serbs, and any number of other minorities, “embrace” immigration and, to a much lesser extent, multiculturalism, in order to justify their own presence in countries they’ve emigrated to.  That race-replacement is the effect, in the long run, of such immigration is another matter entirely—except for ole fulminatin’ Fred.

zorn, pay attention.  Either what I just said is rational or it isn’t; either it makes sense or it doesn’t.  My own “beliefs” (about race-replacement, or the desirability of it, for example) are irrelevant.