Utopian idealists against the nation and the people
by David Hamilton
We are led to believe that mass immigration is a blessing to us, and that only Enoch Powell and a few narrow-minded and prejudiced people have ever seen danger in it. All decent folk of good will, we are told, have embraced this break in our national continuity as a sign of enlightenment progressing to a higher state of civilisation - that of a one-world utopia made up of coffee-coloured persons. It also has been presented as an ideological battle between left and right. But actually it is between people of common sense and, at best, utopian idealists.
Most ordinary people relate to the world by common sense. So the impracticable dream of a multi-racial utopia has had to be socially engineered, which requires totalitarian methods. The Utopians see immigrants as essentially good, and if we are nice to them they will be nice to us.
This utopianism does not engage with human nature, and does not need to. Actually, we find people being brought in as cheap labour, with all the idealism a mere smokescreen. If the high-minded ones are so benevolent and moral, why have their plans been underhand ... and why public infamy for those who foresaw the danger in just letting it happen?
Multi-Racialism follows on from the French Enlightenment in trying to create a society on rationalist principles and ignoring human nature as was the Soviet Union too. Those who wished to preserve our traditional way of life knew how human nature works from their experience of how people treat each other and what they are capable of doing to each other. They learnt from history how different ethnic groups have vied with each other for power and territory and looking at the world around them see that in practice immigration is not assimilation, but the colonisation of our territory. Conversely, Multi-Racialists never describe reality but appeal to a vague future utopia, not facing that if we have been cruel to them in the past then these newcomers could be cruel to us in the future. Further, people from all walks of life have now given warning of the practical consequences which shows the British people as essentially conservative. Some have made crude remarks but most bring common sense to an irresponsible series of idealists who just let things happen with no control. All have suffered and some have been openly persecuted.
Two days after the Empire Windrush docked on the 22 July 1948 with 790 west Indians, J.D.Murray and ten other Labour MP’s wrote to Labour Prime Minister Clement Atlee, asking for legislation to prevent an influx. Atlee replied, that he thought they would “make a genuine contribution to our labour difficulties at the present.” There had been racial battles in 1948 between 31 July and 2 August in Liverpool, in Deptford on the 18th July; and Birmingham between the 6th and 8th of August 1949 but the idealists ignored them as they had in 1919 when after the racial battles in Liverpool and Cardiff Lord Milner wrote a Memorandum of June 23rd “On the Repatriation of Coloured Men.” ”I have every reason to fear, that when we get these men back to their own colonies they might be tempted to revenge themselves on the white minorities there…” ( Panikos Paranyi (ed) “Racial Violence in Britain in the Nineteenth Century.” (Leicester University.1996).
The first actual debate on immigration was in the House of Commons on the 5th of November 1954 in a thirty-minute adjournment debate called by John Hynd Labour M.P. for Sheffield (Attercliffe). “One day recently 700 embarked from Jamaica without any prospect of work, housing or anything else.” He also said the colour bar in Sheffield dance halls because of knife fights was justified. Both Hynd and another Labour M.P. James Johnson called for a committee of enquiry to be set up and speakers repeatedly asked the Government to take action but Henry Hopkinson(c), Minister of State at the Colonial Office fobbed them off by telling them “the matter is receiving urgent attention.” He did admit that he had received many letters from worried M.P.’s on both sides. In March 1955 Frank Burden(L) in the debate on National Service asked the Parliamentary Secretary at the Ministry of Labour why immigrants did not have to serve in the armed forces as native-born youngsters did.
Winston Churchill battled in cabinet against appeasers of Commonwealth leaders but was old and ailing. He wanted the Conservative party to adopt the slogan “Keep England White” in 1955. If Sir Winston had been well we would not know be suffering gun killings, knifings and muggings or Muslims bombing our people. Harold Macmillan entered in his diary for January 20th 1955, “More discussion about the West Indian immigrants. A Bill is being drafted - but it’s not an easy problem. P.M. thinks ‘Keep England White’ a good slogan! The bill was not ready till June 1955, two months after Churchill had stood down.
(Peter Hennessy, ‘Having It So Good - Britain in the Fifties’ (Allen Lane, 2006) p 224
Hennessy’s reference is: Peter Catterall (ed.), ‘The Macmillan Diaries: The Cabinet Years, 1950-1957’ Macmillan. 2003 p 382. People have tried to keep this aspect of Churchill’s beliefs quiet.)
Documents at the Public Records Office show the fifth Marquess of Salisbury trying, “I should not be satisfied with the legislation which you suggest. I feel that it would only be tinkering with what is really becoming a fundamental problem for us all, though it is only beginning to push its ugly head above the surface of politics. The figures which we have been given make it clear that we are faced with a problem which, though at present it may be only a cloud the size of a man’s hand, may easily come to fill the whole political horizon …With each year that passes, and with the general improvement with methods of transportation, the flow increases. Indeed, if something is not done to check it now, I should not be at all surprised if the problem became quite unmanageable in twenty or thirty years time. We might well be faced with very much the same type of appalling issue that is now causing such great difficulties for the United States. The main causes of this sudden inflow of blacks is of course the Welfare State. So long as the antiquated rule obtains that any British subject can come into this country without any limitation at all, these people will p[our in to take advantage of our social services and other amenities and we shall have no protection at all.” Letter to Viscount Swinton March 1954.
These records also show Oliver Lyttleton (later Lord Chandos) trying to bring common sense to bear on the matter. In a letter to Swinton 31/3/1954 wanting deposits of £500 to be put down by immigrants, “ if there is to be means of controlling the increasing flow of coloured people who come here largely to enjoy the benefits of the Welfare State.”
He had a list of all restrictions imposed on Britons by other Commonwealth countries who refused to accept “persons who are likely to become a public charge,” illiterates”, those deemed “undesirable” had “unsuitable standards or habits of life” many had quota systems and even dictation tests. Jamaica prohibited those likely “to become a charge on public funds by reason of infirmity of body or mind or ill-health or who is not in possession of sufficient means to support himself or such of his dependants as he shall bring with him to the island”.
Thirty–nine territories had entry permit systems or required prospective residents to first obtain permission.
We look back to the time of Salisbury’s illustrious ancestor Lord Burleigh advisor to “Good Queen Bess” and see coming alive our tradition of practical wisdom and how idealists are trying to destroy it. It was Elizabeth1 who in 1601 had the “Blackamoors” expelled from her realm. As we move forward we find David Hume, the great Scottish philosopher, write in “Of National Characters”, “There are moral causes that tend to transform whites from a barbarous nation to a civilised one, whereas nature does not allow this to happen to blacks.” His near contemporary Edward Gibbon, the great historian of the Collapse of Rome, warned of a time hence when minarets would sprout amongst the spires of Oxford. Farther on, we come to G.K.Chesterton who predicted a war with Muslims in England in his novel The Flying Inn (1912). Nearer still Enoch Powell refined his views in a speech to the Southall Chamber of Commerce on 4th November 1971, “Yet it is more truly when he looks into the eyes of Asia that the Englishman comes face to face with those who will dispute with him possession of his native land.”
On 20th January 1955 when immigration from Jamaica was 11,000 a year, Conservative Cyril Osborne(later knighted) had written to the London Times,” But the present West Indian and West African invasion is a mere trickle of what we must expect, because as the law now stands everyone born in the Commonwealth is entitled to come to this country. What shall we do when the millions living in the bigger areas decide to emigrate?” The open entry to anyone was not brought under any control until the Commonwealth Immigration bill (1961).
At the second reading Osborne warned “that the world’s poor would swarm to Britain’s welfare honey pot. We have neither the room nor the resources to take all who would like to come.” Both sides of the House laughed at him and called him Fascist.” We are seeing this now with boats leaving Africa for Europe.
Churchill was replaced as P.M. by Internationalist Anthony Eden who answered Osborne in the House of Commons, “There is no question of any action being taken to control immigration and in any case most were from Eire.” In May 1958, 3 months before the racial battles of Notting Hill and Nottingham, Osborne had written to Labour leader Hugh Gaitskell who contemptuously handed it to his secretary to reply, “The Labour Party is opposed to restriction of immigration as every Commonwealth citizen has the right as a British subject to enter this country.”
He instigated a Commons debate on the 5th of December 1958 3 months after the racial battles when Labour spokesman Arthur Bottomley replied, “We are categorically against it (restrictions).” Seconding the motion Martin Lindsay said, “We must ask ourselves to what extent do we want Britain to become a multi-racial community. If that is our desire and we decide to make it a matter of deliberate policy, well and good, but let us at least consider where we are going and make up our minds that is what we want, and not simply drift.” Simon Heffer relates in his biography of Enoch Powell “Like the Roman” that in 1958 Osborne pleaded with the Conservatives 1922 backbench committee to consider the future consequences of mass immigration. When they refused to listen this genuine and sincere man broke down and wept. In March 1965 he told the House,”Our children and grandchildren will curse us for our moral cowardice.”
Supporting Osborne in December 1958 Labour’s Frank Tomney, remarked on elected representatives ignoring their constituents. “We have been sent here by the electorate to give expression to issues which concern them.” Fellow Notting Hill MP George Rogers (L) told the Daily Sketch of 2/9/58,” Overcrowding has fostered vice, drugs, prostitution and the use of knives.” James Harrison (L) from Nottingham also supported controls. Mr Tomney was a practical man of humble origins and understood his people, “I have come directly from the benches of a factory to the benches of the Commons”. In the Guardian of 20/3/01 Andrew Roth slotted him into a standard stereotype, “the crusty old far-right Labour MP.” In the late 70’s Militant, the ideological group in the labour party, tried to de-select him.
Norman Pannell Liverpool (Kirkdale), who had served in the Nigerian legislature and lived in Africa for over 10 years proposed a motion at the 1958 Tory conference for reciprocal rights of entry with other Commonwealth countries, for the U.K. had an open door policy and let anyone in. “When I visited Nigeria two years ago as a Member of Parliament without ultimate responsibility for the affairs of that country, I was given an entry permit valid for 14 days and renewable subject to good behaviour.” He also addressed the 1961 conference on the perils of admitting criminals and the sick. The debate was stage-managed to stop Cyril Osborne speaking who stood outside in the rain handing out off-prints of a letter of his from the morning’s Daily Telegraph. Mr. Pannell stated that though Home Secretary Butler had disagreed with limiting numbers he had agreed with his suggestion of deporting immigrants who commit crimes but nothing had been done.
In a letter to the Times of 13th December 1960, Harold Gurden wrote, “On the health question we find the middle ring of the city (Birmingham), where immigrants are mainly concentrated, heavily peppered with dots of tuberculosis incidence. It is the opinion of medical officers that at least some immigrants are suffering with this disease before entering the country. We have a duty to our constituents.” In the winter of 1961-62, a young Pakistani girl entered the country with smallpox and caused an epidemic. In January 1962 two Pakistanis were in hospital in Birmingham with smallpox Mr.Gurden wrote to the Minister of Health urging medical checks on immigrants. In 2005 we were told that we now have a record number of TB cases and there are more in London than the usual breeding grounds of the disease abroad.
Peter Griffiths Smethwick called for health checks on immigrants when he responded to a question in the local paper the “Smethwick Telephone”, “Immigration should be limited to those of sound health who have jobs and living accommodation arranged before they enter.”
This was prescient as there was an outbreak of Typhoid in Smethwick in April 1965.
In 1964 there had been uproar over the general election at Smethwick which Griffiths won against the trend on anti-immigration (as did Wyndham Davies (C) in Birmingham,Great Barr). The loser was shadow Foreign Secretary Patrick Gordon-Walker who lived at leafy Hampstead Garden Suburb. Mr Griffiths lost this seat in 1966 to Andrew Faulds who lived in Stratford upon Avon! Several well publicised events made this West Midlands industrial town world famous. A slogan used during his election campaign was “If you want a N***** for a neighbour vote Labour.” The town council wanted to buy the remaining houses in Marshall street to stop it becoming “a coloured ghetto”. Prime Minister Harold Wilson described Griffiths as a “Parliamentary Leper” on television. A bomb was planted outside Griffith’s home on 26th October 1965 because of the way he had been de-humanised by press and politicians.
A series in the Times in January 1965 “The Dark Million” showed what the official attitude was. The author wrote: “Back in June (1964) a senior civil servant talked to me about a particular aspect of the problem that has since taken some people by surprise. I had asked why figures were not available to give a nation-wide picture of the problem. I was told: “We haven’t tried to find out. It may be as things get more critical, and they are getting more critical, it will be decided that should do so. It will be a political decision. One of the things about statistics is that people asked what they are, then again in three months time what they are, and then you have a problem on your hands. People start to keep the score, and you have a crisis. If, as, a result, they know that such-and-such is happening in Wolverhampton, they say what is the Government doing about Wolverhampton. It is a matter of judgement as to when you start taking that line and say something should be done. It is a matter for central Government.”
In the House of Lords debate on the renewal of the Commonwealth Immigration Act of 1/12/1964, Lord Elton took the long view,” I take the view that we are laying up for ourselves, our children and grandchildren, problems - economic, political, social and moral -and that there is no evidence that we can solve them. The brake should therefore be put on more firmly”
On the 5th of March 1965 Patrick Wall (later knighted) spoke against the multi-racial ideal,”We must for the moment reject the multi-racial state not because we are superior to our Commonwealth partners, but because we want to maintain the kind of Britain we know and love.”
In the debate on the 1968 Race Relations Bill Ronald Bell (later knighted) argued that the bill was “very deep and damaging encroachments into the proper sphere of persons decisions.” (Hansard, 23/3/1968). In a speech “This Sceptred Isle” to W.I.S.E. at the National Liberal Club in 1981 was concerned at the nascent totalitarianism in the multi-racialists attitude, “The very word discrimination itself has been grossly abused. It used to be a good word: a discriminating person was someone to be admired. People have been brainwashed into thinking that it is a bad word except when native inhabitants are being handicapped. That is now called positive discrimination, and is deemed a good thing. We are well on the road back to “presentment of Englishry”, when in the days after the Norman Conquest that it was a defence to show that the injured person was only an Englishman.”
Sir Ronald had constant difficulties with his constituency party chairman who wanted him de-selected.
Harold Soref had to flee a mob of unworldly students that tried to break into the Oxford Union and attack him while he addressed the University Monday Club on immigration on 10th May 1974. He should have accused them of anti-semitism!
John Stokes MP wrote to The Times on 27th May 1976, “The question is not one of simply maintaining good race relations here, but of preserving our national identity. What sort of people are we to become? Surely not a hotchpotch of all kinds of peoples whose first loyalty is found to be to their own homelands and who we know will never truly integrate with us. What an end to a thousand years of glorious history for our nation! The intellectuals, the intelligentsia and some sections of the media (middle class to a man) expect our English working class to absorb these alien peoples in ever increasing numbers.”
He was mocked by the Mirror as “the member for the 17th Century.”
Warren Hawksley (C) Wrekin, told Oswestry Conservatives in 1981,”You may have read in the National Newspapers of the 12 or so back-bench Conservative M.P.’s who had a meeting, during the summer, with the prime minister to put our fears that Mr. Whitelaw (Home Secretary) was letting us down by not implementing our election pledges with speed and enthusiasm.”
In the same year Tony Marlowe MP in Northampton told the Oxford University Conservative Association, “Hordes of exotic invaders have flooded the continent (Europe) wishing to help themselves to the luxuries of Western living. Nowhere has the pressure been greater than in the United Kingdom. No country has been less prepared to stem the flow than our own. In this land which proclaims free speech free discussion has been stifled by humbug and by the censorship of an establishment unwilling to contemplate the radical cures which alone can reverse the tide.” “What would be unacceptable and should not under any circumstances be tolerated is a policy of suppression and inaction for no policy can be more calculated to bring about the racial holocaust which we should all so earnestly strive to avoid.”
K. Harvey Proctor addressed the 1983 Conservative party conference ,but no senior party member sat on the platform apart from a glum looking John Biffen who only clapped sparely. Mrs Thatcher was not present. Just two years previously Proctor had announced a plan by the Monday club Immigration and Repatriation Committee to repatriate 50,000 immigrants a year. The forward to the document was by Sir Ronald Bell. Mrs Thatcher rushed to assure Asian leaders that they have a right to be here. Just two years previously she had won power by stating on TV that the British people feared “being swamped.” At a Monday Club dinner in early 1984 guest of honour Enoch Powell revealed that the Conservative party had threatened to not speak to Proctor for his belief in repatriation which would have been the first time in their history they had sent one of their MP’s to Coventry!
In 1993 the grandson of Sir Winston Churchill, also called Winston, warned that in the north of England half the population was now Muslim and If our prime minister(Major) believes that 50 years hence “spinsters will still be cycling to Communion on Sunday morning” he had best think again. Rather, “the muezzin will be calling Allah’s faithful to the High Street mosque” for Friday prayers. The Times (London) attacked him for a ‘tasteless outburst,’” a leading Labour Party politician described his remarks as ‘putrid and racist.’ Michael Howard, the Conservative Home Secretary, denounced “any intervention which could have the effect of damaging race relations”; Downing Street stated Conservative Prime Minister John Major agreed with Mr. Howard.”
Mr. Churchill was viscously shouted down on BBC Radio Four’s Today programme by presenter John Humphrey’s in what was a despicable attack on an elected politician. Another M.P. to be bullied by his party leader(William Hague) was John Townend(C) who wrote in 1991, that Government “ministers wanted to turn the British into a “mongrel” race and the Commission for Racial Equality should be abolished.” In 1989, he suggested deportation of Muslims who opposed Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses, “England must be reconquered for the English”.
Another of Sir Winston’s grandsons, Nicholas Soames commented in the Commons. On July 17th 2007 he said, “foreign immigration is now 25 times higher than it has ever been in the past, even at the two peaks. Talk of Britain as a nation of immigrants is absurd. It would be much more accurate to describe us as a nation of emigrants. Indeed, the number of emigrants exceeded the number of immigrants until the 1980s. Net immigration is a new phenomenon and initially was quite small. Between the mid-1980s and the mid-1990s, it hardly exceeded 50,000 a year. Since 1997, however, it has quadrupled to some 200,000 a year. Even that number makes little allowance for immigration from eastern Europe. In 2005, it was assessed as a net inflow of 64,000—a figure that today looks remarkably low. None of those numbers include any allowance for illegal immigrants, who are believed to comprise at least half a million people.
“The sharp increase in immigration is no accident. To suggest, as Ministers do, that it is all a result of the fall of communism or of globalisation is, frankly, bizarre. The numbers point clearly to a massive increase since the present Government came to power in 1997. Part of the increase is due to their failure during their first five years in office to get a grip on asylum claims, of which more than 60 per cent. were eventually judged to be unfounded. Another part is due to their decision to allow a massive increase in work permits, which have trebled since 1997. At the same time, their decision in June 1997 to abolish the primary purpose rule has led to the number of spouses admitted to Britain doubling from 20,000 to 40,000 a year.”
He was accused hysterically of getting his information from the BNP!
In 2005 Lord Tebbit former chairman of the Conservative party told e-politix website , “Islam is so unreformed there have been no real advances in art, literature, science or technology in the Muslim world in 500 years, and multiculturalism was in danger of undermining UK society. In the 1980s he disputed the loyalty of immigrants who backed cricket teams from their countries of origin. He claimed if he had been heeded it might have stopped the London bombings. A leading Muslim group said he was “misguided”. After the Muslim bomb attacks in London he declared that Enoch’s prophecies of racial civil war were right.
Charles Moore, former editor of the Daily Telegraph, produced Salisbury Paper 9 in 1981,”The Old People of Lambeth”. It was an empirical research into the real living conditions of “whites” rather than another abstract academic study. One elderly man told him, “…its our Queen and our country, why should we be afraid to go out?” Another former Sunday Telegraph editor Sir Peregrine Worsthorne has written “even Hitler would not have treated ordinary people with such cruelty.” In 1991 the Conservative party tried to impose a black candidate on its party in Cheltenham. A local party member Bill Galbraith expressed his indignation in crude language and was pilloried by the media and hounded by the Race Police and this persecution led to his death.
Eminent legal minds were concerned. Viscount Radcliffe, former Lord of Appeal in Ordinary was concerned about the preferential treatment being accorded to immigrants above that given to the natives, “ I cannot for myself, imagine how juridical notions can be founded on such vague conceptions. The conduct of human life consists of choices, and it is a very large undertaking indeed to outlaw some particular grounds of choice, unless you can confine yourself to such blatant combinations of circumstances as are unlikely to have any typical embodiment in this country. I try to distinguish in my mind between an act of discrimination and an act of preference, and each time the attempt breaks down.”(Immigration and Settlement: some general considerations”, Race, vol.11, no.1, pp 35-51.)
In a case against squatters, Judge Harold Brown commented,” It seems curious that if a landlord closes the door on a coloured applicant merely because of his colour he might well get into serious trouble. But if he closes his door on white people with children merely because they have children, he is under no penalty at all.” (Guardian, 2 August 1969.)
In 1995 retired judge, James Pickles, told a literary luncheon in Leeds, “Black and Asian people are like a spreading cancer… There are no-go areas in Halifax, where I have lived all my life, where white people daren’t go even with their cars… All immigration must stop… The country is full up. We don’t want people like that here. They have a different attitude to life. They are not wanting to adopt our ways of life” (India Mail 02.03.95). Bradford M.P., Max Madden, described Judge Pickles as a “repulsive old buffer” who had “plumbed the depths by his remarks which will cause widespread offence to people of all races and nationalities"/ Liaqat Hussain of the Bradford Council for Mosques called for Judge Pickles to be prosecuted under the Race Relations Act.
In 1982 Lord Denning, widely regarded as the twentieth century’s greatest judge, published — What Next In The Law and the publishers withdrew 10,000 copies because of some inaccuracies, wrote: “The English are no longer a homogenous race. They are white and black, coloured and brown. They no longer share the same standards of conduct. Some of them come from countries where bribery and graft are accepted as an integral part of life: and where stealing is a virtue so long as you are not found out.” Lord Denning had been a benefactor to young people from the Commonwealth and was expressing common sense.
In 1976 Rock guitarist Eric Clapton advised his audience that Enoch was right and that Britain was overcrowded. This raised a profoundly important point about culture and Multi-Racialism. Those of us who were brought up on Black music as I was, have a great respect and admiration for those blues and soul singers who developed a deep, expressive music. Clapton had black musicians in his band but understood a human truth - that enjoying different cultures and having friends from other ethnic groups is good: but that does not mean that we should try to force them together and destroy both.
There have also been scholars. Dr. John Casey who read a paper to the Conservative Philosophy Group which was also printed in the first issue of The Salisbury Review in Autumn 1982. “There is no way of understanding British and English history that does not take seriously the sentiments of patriotism that go with a continuity of institutions, shared experience, language, customs, kinship. There is no way of understanding English patriotism that averts its eyes from the fact that it has at its centre a feeling for persons of ones own kind.” Dr.Casey was persecuted for this and recanted. Marxist professor Terry Eagleton held rival English lectures, the usual campus rent-a-mobs demonstrated as well as refusing to go to his lectures and the Sunday Times of 1st December 1991 printed a photograph that made Dr.Casey look like a wizened crow!
Conservative philosopher Roger Scruton was quoted in “The Opinion Journal” of December 10th 2002, “It is a tautology to say a Conservative wants to conserve things; the question is what things? To this I think we can give a simple one-word answer, namely: us. At the heart of every conservative endeavour is the effort to conserve a historically given community.”
For years we have been told how evil we are and how morally superior the multi-racialists are but now we see that a main motive for importing immigrants is for them to have cheap labour. Eminent economist Professor Ezra Mishan exposed immigration as being about cheap labour in the Salibury Review in 1988, “Frequent claims that the new immigrants have in fact reduced the labour shortage in particular sectors of the economy – in particular, the apparent shortages of labour in transport, in nursing, and in what are popularly to be the more menial and less attractive occupations- are naïve. Managers of public services in Britain who, along with some private firms, sent agents to the West Indies in the 1950’s in order to recruit labour were only acting as good capitalists would in such circumstances – attracting lower-paid labour from outside their area in order to prevent wages from rising within it. If it was not for that wages would have risen.”
Professor Bob Rowbotham in the London Sunday Telegraph of 2 July 2006, referred to the motives of the elites, who were creating what Marx called “A reserve army of labour.” In November 2006 it emerged that the Government were advertising for immigrants to come here.
A Foreign Office pamphlet declares: ‘Multicultural Britain - A Land of Immigrants’. It encourages immigrants to move here because of the preferential treatment they get under the Human Rights Act and well-paid jobs. The Foreign Office put it in embassies across the world.
In a book review for the Salisbury Review of Spring 2003 Sir Alfred Sherman, former senior advisor to Mrs Thatcher and leader writer on the Jewish Chronicle, recalled a friend in race relations had asked him to take a look at the reception areas of Deptford and Southall in the mid 60’s, “ I was horrified. My natural vague sympathies for the immigrants, strangers in a foreign land, was replaced by strong but hopeless sympathy for the British victims of mass immigration, whose home areas were being occupied. I was made aware of a disquieting evolution in “Establishment” attitudes towards what they called immigration or race relations and I dubbed “colonialisation.” The well-being and rights of immigrants and ethnic minorities had become paramount. The British working classes, hitherto the object of demonstrative solicitude by particularly the New Establishment on the left, but the working classes had acquired new status as the enemy, damned by the all-purpose pejorative “racists.” The transformation of Southall was brought about by Wolf’s rubber factory encouraging workers from India.
Since New Labour took office in 1997 there has been such a massive increase in immigration that even middle-class Liberals are now worried. The veteran Liberal broadcaster Ludovic Kennedy wrote in a book review for The Oldie , in January 2004, that there ”are too many black faces on TV, political correctness has got completely out of hand.” The preferential treatment given to immigrants over that to our own elderly caused Sir Patrick Moore, the world renowned astronomer to remark “The more asylum seekers get the less there is for us.”
Early in 2005, Welsh film star John Rhys-Davies who played Gimli in Lord of the Rings told “World magazine ”the Muslim birthrate is a demographic catastrophe, I think that Tolkein says that some generations will be challenged. And if they do not rise to meet that challenge, they will lose their civilisation.” The same month in the Radio Times film star John Hurt praised Enoch, “I think he was just saying: We can’t afford to have any more.”
The Socialist intellectual David Goodhart in Prospect (march 1998), quoted Conservative M.P. David Willetts on the Welfare State: “The basis on which you can extract large sums of money in tax and pay it out in benefits is that most people think the recipients are people like themselves, facing difficulties which they themselves could face. If values become more diverse, if lifestyles become more differentiated, then it becomes more difficult to sustain the legitimacy of a universal risk-pooling welfare state. People ask, ‘Why should I pay for them when they are doing things I wouldn’t do? This is America versus Sweden. You can have a Swedish welfare state provided that you are a homogeneous society with intensely shared values. In the US you have a very diverse, individualistic society where people feel fewer obligations to fellow citizens. Progressives want diversity but they thereby undermine part of the moral consensus on which a large welfare state rests.”
Prof. Goodhart reflected, “Thinking about the conflict between solidarity and diversity is another way of asking a question as old as human society itself: who is my brother? With whom do I share mutual obligations? The traditional conservative Burkean view is that our affinities ripple out from our families and localities, to the nation and not very far beyond. That view is pitted against a liberal universalist one which sees us in some sense equally obligated to all human beings from Bolton to Burundi - an idea associated with the universalist aspects of Christianity and Islam, with Kantian universalism and with left-wing internationalism.”
In an echo of Enoch’s warnings on “racial civil war” The Sunday Times(London) June 11, 2006 reported that Rear Admiral Chris Parry, one of Britain’s most senior military strategists has warned that western civilisation faces a threat on a par with the barbarian invasions that destroyed the Roman empire. He said future migrations would be comparable to the Goths and Vandals while north African “Barbary” pirates could be attacking yachts and beaches in the Mediterranean within 10 years. Europe, including Britain, could be undermined by large immigrant groups with little allegiance to their host countries—a “reverse colonisation” as Parry described it. These groups would stay connected to their homelands by the internet and cheap flight. The warnings by Parry of what could threaten Britain over the next 30 years were delivered to senior officers and industry experts at a conference. The result for Britain and Europe, could be “like the 5th century Roman empire facing the Goths and the Vandals”.
“Globalisation makes assimilation seem redundant and old-fashioned … the process acts as a sort of reverse colonisation, where groups of people are self-contained, going back and forth between their countries, exploiting sophisticated networks and using instant communication on phones and the internet.” Lord Boyce, the former chief of the defence staff, welcomed Parry’s analysis. “Bringing it together in this way shows we have some very serious challenges ahead,” he said. “The real problem is getting them taken seriously at the top of the government.”
Frank Field(L) has also spoken out on cheap labour. In August 2006 was questioned by the panel on the BBC Radio 4’s Moral Maze and asked why he has only raised the issue now and was it because the mass of current immigrants are white (from Eastern Europe). His answer was, “The sheer numbers and the attempt to close down the issue.” He took the side of the poor natives and talked about this influx pushing down wages and people having to compete for homes. He commented that the panel are well-heeled and the ones who are getting cheap labour.
Former Conservative MP George Walden told of how we are being replaced in Time to Emigrate (Gibson square Books). Writing in the Times of 5th November 2006 wrote on how he had been attacked by historian Tristram Hunt. The previous day the Office for National Statistics (ONS) had announced some startling new figures: Britain was taking in 1,500 immigrants a day, while 1,000 Brits left, “Which rather confirmed the central premise of my book: that more people were moving out as well as in, and that a growing number of emigrants — by no means necessarily racists — were quitting because of the numbers coming in.
Earlier in the week Mervyn King, the governor of the Bank of England, had complained to a committee of MPs that it was hard to manage the economy when nobody knew how many people were in the country. Unmoved by any of this, Hunt denied there was a problem, real or potential. In one sense he was right: for the well-born, expensively educated liberal elite he represents, there isn’t. I doubt that the Hunt dynasty (he is the son of Lord Hunt of Chesterton) will be inconvenienced too much by immigration and its social, economic and educational consequences. Less privileged folk of his generation, for whose fears about the future he clearly has a patrician contempt, will pay a heavy price if our unprecedented experiment of mass immigration goes wrong.”
David Hamilton writes the Philosophy Blog for the Conservative Democratic Alliance, the leading voice of British Conservatives who straddle the divide between loyalty to kin and loyalty to the Conservative Party, with a marked leaning towards the former.
Posted by Guest Blogger on Friday, December 21, 2007 at 08:44 PM in British Politics
Comments (204) | Tell a friend
Comments:
Posted by Guessedworker on December 21, 2007, 10:12 PM | #
It is interesting to see the history of mainstream resistance to mass immigration laid out in this way. Of course, the reason it has failed is because it is scattered in place and time. What has been lacking is organisation to draw the effort together, to encourage it, and to target the attack upon the weak points of the enemy - their abuse of the rights of the people, and their totalitarianism.
I wonder, though, whether basing opposition on the race issue would ever have been enough. I recall reading some time a passage from one of the books of Andrew Roberts, the neoconnish historian. In it there was a report of one of Churcill’s cabinets towards the end of his final premiership. The subject for discussion that day was opening the valves to let in much larger numbers of immigrants, this time chiefly from Asia.
The discussion in the Cabinet Room was extremely tense and difficult. At the close at least one of the loyal Ministers was brought to the point of tears.
Now, what could it be that reduced a senior Tory politician to tears? Not a technical statement to the effect that Asian immigration would be needed to maintain economic growth and competitiveness. Not a safe, politically anodyne description of a limited intake of specialist workers for the cotton and wool industries. Not that at all, obviously.
My guess, perhaps perfectly wrong, is that other things were said, other things revealed about the future that Britain “must” have ... a future of such dramatic difference to the known world, it came like an earthquake, and with the same irresistible power, to some around that table.
I suppose we will never know.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 22, 2007, 04:04 PM | #
One thing that stands out glaringly on reading this important piece is that the current state of affairs has been forced. It nowhere says it but that’s inescapable on reading it. Had things been conducted the normal, decent way, people’s wishes would’ve been taken into account and forcible replacement of the British race by the government never would’ve advanced much beyond those first boatloads of Jamaican Negroes between 1948 and the early 1950s.
What’s less clear from the piece is the exact identity of the agent behind the force, the agent controlling government policy. We all know, nevertheless, that agent is an alliance of powerful selfish interests exerting control over the government, and we know which ones (capitalists for example, seeking cheap labor; socialists with the E.U.-style one-coffee-colored-world mentality; Jews out to settle ethnic scores real or imagined; and others). And we know lots of detail about lots of facets of the crime, but the main thing imparted by this log entry is, again, that official government policy of race-replacement didn’t just “happen” but was forced every step of the way on an unconsulted, unwilling populace starting right after World War II.
What do we do now? We stop the bastards and put things back the way they used to be. How? By enough decent folk agreeing: once enough agree they’ll take the first step to get us out of this and to implement measures to keep it from ever happening again — to keep anyone from ever again using the machinery of the British people’s own government to bring about their extinction and replacement by alien peoples.
Posted by WLindsayWheeler on December 22, 2007, 04:37 PM | #
I have also stumbled upon information of how we got to this multiracialist state by studying Communism. Communism preached “All the workers Unite”. Communist is known by it other name “International Socialism”. Communism seeks a One World that wants no borders.
Multi-Racialism follows on from the French Enlightenment
I don’t think so. Rousseau, a child of the Enlightenment is said to be the founder of the Socialism and Nationalism. I might be wrong, but where in Enlightenment thought is de-racination? or multiculturalism? Rousseau points in the opposite direction and is the forerunner of national socialism---not International Socialism.
I trace Multiculturalism to the Communism and hence to the Jews that preached tolerance, multiculturalism and the end of nationalism! Not to the Enlightenment. The Enlightenment was Atheist and New Order--it seems to me that it was the Jews that hijacked and then added deracination to the Enlightenment mix.
In this regard, Winston Churchill’s mother is Jewish. Winston Churchill, friends with Bernard Baruch, familiar with the Fabian Society advocated a “United States of Europe”. Winston Churchill did more to cause WWI and WWII thus destroying the Old Order and ushering in Multiculturalism and political Correctness. Winston Churchill is a Judas Goat and that he wanted a “white England” very strange.
De-racination or multiculturalism is a Jewish idea---not an Enlightenment idea! It is Socialist and Communist.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 22, 2007, 05:42 PM | #
“I trace Multiculturalism to the Communism and hence to the Jews that preached tolerance, multiculturalism and the end of nationalism! Not to the Enlightenment. The Enlightenment was Atheist and New Order--it seems to me that it was the Jews that hijacked and then added deracination to the Enlightenment mix. [...] De-racination or multiculturalism is a Jewish idea---not an Enlightenment idea! It is Socialist and Communist.” [Emphasis added.] (—Lindsay Wheeler)
To me this sounds fundamentally right. Whenever the Jews put their stamp on things, it includes something like the following: “ethnoracial identity for the Jews good, ethnoracial identity for all others is to be eradicated!”
“Winston Churchill’s mother is Jewish.”
Forgive me but there was never evidence of this, and in fact unless I’m mistaken it’s been disproven (his mother’s Jerome-family genealogy has been traced, if memory serves). It’s the same sort of thing as calling Franklin Roosevelt and Dwight Eisenhower Jewish: strictly tinfoil-hat stuff.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 22, 2007, 05:53 PM | #
Also, why let degenerate Euro élites (like Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt and the entire Bush family) off the hook, as a group? Degenerate Euro élites are a plague in their own right, and shouldn’t be permitted to escape group condemnation, whether by thinking, “Oh, they must be Jewish to act like that,” or through some other excuse. Are the Kennedys Jews? If our verbal counterattack is all cockeyed it’s not going to serve much purpose.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 22, 2007, 09:29 PM | #
Here’s a tiny fraction of the horror our masters are forcing on us. It’s infinitely worse — this isn’t even the ten-thousandth of it.
Pray God we don’t stand for it much longer.
And pray God when the time comes for a reckoning, those responsible will be ........... called to account ....................
Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 22, 2007, 09:34 PM | #
(The guy being savagely beaten up and stomped in that first video is 76 years old. He had earlier asked the two “youths” to put out their cigarettes.)
Posted by birch barlow on December 23, 2007, 04:20 PM | #
Mass low-skill immigration is obviously insane (and even high-skill immigration can have its downsides, especially in the case of market-distorting H1B visas and the like). Unfortunately there are a lot of vested interests supporting this pure insanity--businesses using low-skill labor, and of course the Dems and multi-cultis who want more constituents.
Perhaps more importantly, it is so crass to say that we should allow a young beautiful 5’-9” East Asian female with a 1500 SAT score over a poor, ugly overweight Mestizo(a) with a 5th grade education who could barely register on the SAT (even if given in Spanish), or worse yet a Somali refugee type. Even taking out the explicit racial element (which is almost impossible, since a merit-based system would shift the balance of immigration away from Mestizos and towards East/South Asians and even white Europeans), saying I would want a beautiful 5’-9” Mestiza with a 1500 SAT (to the extent that there are Mestizos who can score that high or even anywhere close to that high, say over 1100) over the poor, ugly overweight, low-IQ one is only slightly (it at all) better.
I love how the far-left, granola eating, NPR listening types would call someone a philistine for having no interest in say, opera, yet at the same time support policies that disfavor intellect and beauty (and for that matter, the kind of high art that they enjoy--how many poor Mestizos are there at an opera?). Of course it’s not just the far left either, “moderates,” “conservatives,” and especially religious right types would tend to find my POV, at least when stated as explicitly as I stated it, to be incredibly crass.
Posted by danielj on December 23, 2007, 05:36 PM | #
Wheeler makes a point that is fully elaborated in the more than worthwhile read titled “Fire in the Minds of Men: The Origins of the Revolutionary Faith” by James H. Billington.
Posted by larch harlow on December 23, 2007, 08:55 PM | #
“young beautiful 5’-9” East Asian female “
Get your hand out of your pants, birch.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 23, 2007, 09:14 PM | #
Somehow I don’t think Birch and BraveBlondeGirl would see eye to eye on dating .... hey that’s just a hunch, correct me if I’m wrong ........
Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 23, 2007, 09:24 PM | #
Birch you’re not still pining over that Chinese girl in your biology class are you? What’s it been, around three years now? Have you gotten up the courage to ask her out yet? Hey if you need more time no problem, man — was just curious .... Anyway BraveBlondeGirl says all the Oriental girls in the Bay area are targeting white guys for husbands — yellow meat doesn’t do it for them apparently .... (are you anywhere in the Frisco area? .... you could hit the jackpot if you are ....)
Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 23, 2007, 09:32 PM | #
If you wanna score big though, Birch, Braveblondegirl posted a comment by an Oriental gal listing the turn-offs white guys are apt to blurt out: don’t say, “I wonder what it’d be like to f*** an Asian girl,” never use “Oriental” when referring to her race, only to things like Ming vases and stuff, and oh yes, one of the worst turn-offs for yellow girls is when a white guy suddenly says he “likes Chinese food” right in the middle of a meal, apparently. They really don’t like that. Hey, good luck out there! And come back and let us know how you make out! (No pun intended, really ...... no, honestly ......)
Posted by Alex on December 24, 2007, 01:53 AM | #
That’s quite an excellent article.
Yes, these elites have indeed built a utopian vision based upon the exploitation of many millions upon millions of people in that variant of slavery known as ‘cheap labor’, as expressed in the unfortunate ideology of multi-culturalism. With huge numbers of persons being preyed upon as cheap labor, ‘exported’ and ‘imported’ in this modern day slave trade, peoplehood is nearly impossible to maintain, indeed, is in the way of the obtainment of the huge profits to be had, and thus one sees its supression. Rather than face squarely the hard facts of what it was they were doing, ie the greed, the extreme self-centeredness, the moral error driving this exploitation, and the massive social destruction directly resulting to the peoples of the world that make up humanity, and thus doing the proper thing and ceasing, they instead have told themselves, and anyone who might listen, tall tales and fables.
From an article published in the very late Victorian era in the United States, circa 1899, about the time of the formation of the ‘special relationship’ between the US and UK. The writer states ‘racial distinctions are in many respects beginning to break down’ due to ‘intermingling of peoples’. He does not state the why of this destruction of distinct peoples, likely figuring it is a given that far more than the invasions and destruction of war which the peoples of the world have rightly tried to avoid whenever possible, it was the exploitation of people as cheap labor by way of ‘mass immigration’ that was resulting in this ‘breaking down’ of ‘racial distinctions.’
Then as now, they were quite aware Europeans in many instances tend to have quite recessive genes, and also quite aware sub-Saharan Africans tend to have the least recessive. In other words its in no way by chance that sub-Saharan Africans are being ‘imported’ into Europe to be exploited as cheap labor, and as the 95% bogus asylum seekers to provide a fig leaf for the same, and crude and offensive to most everyone, to be breeding stock. Those who adopt and advocate the ideology of multi-culturalism are crude and offensive, so that ought not to be surpising. The article speaks of these recessive genes, a part of many European peoples as well as that of others identities, as ‘adventitious* and unessential’ to be ‘throw[n] off most completely’.
When reading this, one ought to bear in mind that the push for that variant of slavery known as cheap labor, typically acquired by way of mass immigration, and the primary cause of the ‘intermingling’ the article speaks about, is driven by the incredible profits to be had, four times those of the already lucrative chattel variant of slavery as effectively calculated by the former US treasurer and slave speculator Robert Walker when writing from London in 1863.
What a shame it would be if the wonderful physical and cultural differences that once existed between the distinct peoples of the world, and that the multi-cultists claim they care about but don’t in reality, only caring to use that ‘diversity’ so as to pit people against people to break up largely homogenous peoples to ultimately create sameness, were no more as they had been...sold.
From the article
‘Along what lines the movement toward this general world government will take place it is not easy to forecast, except in a general way...’
What people are seeing today has been in the works a very long time. The self deceit and deceit of others is the same today as it was then...tall tales and fables indeed.
League of Nations“We said that the great cause had found voice in Boston, and had also found a book. It is a singular good fortune by which at this precise moment appears Dr. Trueblood’s book on “The Federation of the World.” Dr. Trueblood’s services in America for the cause of peace and international fraternity have been immense. “The Advocate of Peace,” which he edits with such distinguished ability, ought to be every month on the table of every thoughtful man in the country, whatever else is there or is not there. His pamphlets on the history of arbitration and related subjects are the best which there are. No other translations of Kant’s “Eternal Peace” is so good as his. But in this little book (Houghton, Mifflin and Company, Boston, $1.00) he covers the whole ground in brief. The ten chapters treat: The Solidarity of Humanity, Solidarity Unrealized, The Causes of the Disunity, The Development of the War System, The Influence of Christianity in restoring the Federative Principle, War Ethically Wrong, War Anti-Federative, The New World Society, The Growing Triumph of Arbitration, and The United States of the World. An appendix contains the Czar’s rescript, calling for the conference on reduction of armaments; and seven pages are given to a bibliography of the most important publications relating to the federation of the world. We wish that it were possible to illustrate here, by passages from sucessive chapters, the broad range, the wisdom and the vitality of this timely book; but this is not here possible. One pregnant passage from the striking chapter on “The United States of the World” we give, as an interesting forecast of the steps by which the better organization of the world may ultimately come about:
“Along what lines the movement toward this general world government will take place it is not easy to forecast, except in a general way. Two or three courses are open, any one or all of which may be followed. The United States of America may in time become really such. The very name seems to be prophetic. Canada, Mexico, and Central America may some day of their own accord, ask to be admitted into a federal union with the United States. In time a great South American republic of republics may be formed, through some movement or groups of movements akin to that already taking place among the Central American states and the British Australian colonies. Then may follow a federation of the two American continents. The United States of Europe, so long dreamed of and written of by European reformers, seem today but the shadow of a name; but whoever remembers the history of the consolidation of France and Italy, or Germany, or the still more remarkable history of the consolidation of the Swiss cantons composed of peoples of different races, speaking different languages, into a coherant national federation, will not say that a United States of Europe is an impossibility. On the contrary, the whole course of the modern history of nation building foreshadows a European federation. The continent of Asia may some day have a like transformation; and that of Africa, too, renewed at last by a Christian civilization; and that of Australia before either of them, if one may judge from the federative tendencies already showing themselves between the colonies there. If this should prove to be the way in which the world state is to work itself out, the islands of the sea will group themselves in with the continental federations where they naturally belong. At last these continental federations will flow together into a great world federation, the final political destiny of humanity, where all the larger hopes of love and fellowship, of peace and happy prosperity lie. I do not pretend to assert that the actual order of movement will be as here outlined, but only that this is a possible, perhaps a probable order in which the federation of the world will come, at least in part. This forecast is in harmony with actual historic processes now working, and having for generations worked, at several points in civilized society.”
United Nations in New York“Another course is possible. A great racial federation, as of the Anglo-Saxon people, may come first, with its centres of agglomeration in all parts of the world, which will gather to itself by an irresistable moral gravitation all other peoples. Racial federation is already playing its part very powerfully in the processes of civilization. Several races, it is true, are exhibiting, in greater or less degree, kindred phenomena. But racial distinctions are in many respects beginning to break down, because of the intermingling of peoples in all quarters of the globe. What may be styled the universal human characteristics, those belonging to the one race of man lying at the basis of all sub-races, are destined thus more and more to come to the front as against those whose which have marked off one portion of mankind from another. That race, whichever it may prove to be, which develops these general human characteristics most fully and most rapidly, and throws off most completely all that is adventitious and unessential, will, in the nature of the case, prove to be the nucleus or furnish the nuclei about which civilization in all parts of the world will crystallize. Men will not care at last by what racial name they are called, or what language they speak, provided their higher interests of every kind are served. They will feel it more noble to be men and to speak the one universal language of men than to be Englishmen or Germans or Frenchmen, and to speak any of these great tongues. Whatever race shall prove itself fittest to lead in this federative process, whether the Anglo-Saxon, as now seems possible, or some other, will itself be modified, purified, and strengthened for its work as the final world race by what it receives from the races which it draws to itself, and even from those which through weakness shall finally be eliminated.”
Dr. Trueblood’s book is the book of books for the crusade which is now being inaugurated among us; and it should be circulated by the thousands. It is a book of hope and confidence. After all the long and dark survey of history and sober estimate of present facts, the last word is the word of one to whom the federation of the world is already in sight; and we can close with no better word: “The great idea of a world federation in some form has gotten clearly into men’s minds. It is too powerful, too attractive and inspiring to be resisted. All obstacles to its realization will be broken down, if not tomorrow, then afterwards. How soon, will depend largely on the purpose, the intelligence, the heart, which those already possessed of the great idea shall put into the work of reconstructing and reorganizing humanity on a world basis.”
* adventitious [adjective] Not inherent but added extrinsically
A link to the full article in the April 1899 issue of The New England Magazine pg 258-259
Posted by Alex on December 24, 2007, 02:22 AM | #
From the same writer as that of the article excerpted from above and published a few months prior, Dr Benjamin Trueblood, president of the American Peace Socieity, and an attendee at Czar Nicholas II’s Hague International Peace Conference of 1899.
That money is the center of what this is about is made clear. And this has not changed. Can anything good come out of world driven by greed and with a strong element of slavery, ie ‘cheap labor’, as they appear to be proposing?
‘Steam and electricity have so mixed peoples up, so run together all civil and commercial interests, that men have clearly seen all the horror and folly of war, all the wisdom and beauty of peace. By repeating with every possible variation, that labor and exchange are the law of the world, that therein only are found the happiness of peoples and the greatness of states, economists have everywhere propagated ideas promotive of peace.
A link to the August, 1899, edition of New England Magazine pg 651-668
Posted by Alex on December 24, 2007, 03:11 AM | #
A pretty good summation of the ideology of cheap labor/institutionalized divsion, aka multi-culturalism, from the 1907 foreward to the book ‘The War-Time Journal of a Georgia Girl, 1864-1865’, published in 1908. The writer gives the figure that about 97 out of 100 Southerners did not own chattel slaves....yet those non-slave holding Southerners had to suffer under the burdens of those who did. I would submit it’s probably a similar figure regarding the exploitation of people as cheap labor, and that an extremely self-centered and greedy few are making incredible profits at most everyone else’s expense. So expensive are these relative few to everyone else, they are expecting the peoples of the world to give up their identities as peoples, so they can pursue their profits.
I seem to recall something somewhere about what good is gaining the world if it cost the person their soul.
‘...the rise of the modern industrial system made wage slavery a more efficient agent of production than chattel slavery.’
Our Southern States, being still in the agricultural stage, on account of our practical monopoly of the world’s chief textile staple, were the last of the great civilized nations to find chattel slavery less profitable than wage slavery, and hence the “great moral crusade” of the North against the perverse and unregenerate South. It was a pure case of economic determinism, which means that our great moral conflict reduces itself, in the last analysis, to a question of dollars and cents, though the real issue was so obscured by other considerations that we of the South honestly believe to this day that we were fighting for States Rights, while the North is equally honest in the conviction that it was engaged in a magnanimous struggle to free the slave.
And now that we have learned wisdom through suffering; now that we have seen how much more can be accomplished by peaceful coöperation under the safe
guidance of natural laws, than by wasteful violence, we are prepared to take our part intelligently in the next great forward movement of the race - a movement having for its object not merely a closer union of kindred states, but that grander union dreamed of by the poet, which is to find its consummation in“The parliament of man, the federation of the world.”
[url=http://docsouth.unc.edu/fpn/andrews/andrews.html]The War-Time Journal of
a Georgia Girl, 1864-1865[/url]
Posted by birch barlow on December 24, 2007, 06:47 AM | #
Fred and “Lurch Larlow,”
OK, I may have made my point gratuitously, but wouldn’t you agree that a major factor making immigration reform difficult is that basing immigration policy on intelligence and other desirable factors seems crass to the vast majority of the population? Maybe replacing “East Asian” with “Scandinavian” would make my POV seem more understandable to you? Not that I wouldn’t go for a hot Nordic or other white female even though generally I prefer E. Asians...well, OK maybe I’m digging the “Birch Barlow is a shallow perv” hole deeper here...maybe I should just quit while I’m ahead, or at least not too far behind.
Posted by larch harlow on December 24, 2007, 10:07 AM | #
“OK, I may have made my point gratuitously...”
Yes.
“...but wouldn’t you agree that a major factor making immigration reform”
“Reform” is what you are promoting. Don’t you know that one of your heroes is already on record stating that the situation in America is so bad that “immigration reform” would be useless - completely contrary to his previous assertions on that matter?
“...difficult is that basing immigration policy on intelligence and other desirable factors seems crass to the vast majority of the population? “
How about making kinship the “desirable factor” in “immigration policy?”
“Maybe replacing “East Asian” with “Scandinavian” would make my POV seem more understandable to you?”
“Understanding” is not the problem. Agreeing is.
“Not that I wouldn’t go for a hot Nordic or other white female even though generally I prefer E. Asians...”
Open mouth, insert foot.
“well, OK maybe I’m digging the “Birch Barlow is a shallow perv” hole deeper here...maybe I should just quit while I’m ahead, or at least not too far behind. “
Yes.
Posted by birch barlow on December 24, 2007, 08:25 PM | #
It looks like JW Holliday is at it again (maybe you’re not JW, but you sound a lot like him, in both his obsession with “kinship” and his rude, condescending tone). There’s more to life than ensuring the world has the maximum number of copies of your genes and the most similar overall genetic structure to you. Darwinism may be a very good way of explaining a wide variety of biological/biochemical, psychological, and social phenomena, but it makes a crappy theology. Hell, Islamic countries seem to do a good job of maximizing their genes, with their high birthrates and extreme hostility to outsiders. But those countries are miserable places.
One could argue that Western/white people must be more authoritarian, xenophobic, and “pro-natal” to compete with Muslims and other authoritarian types, but that’s not the case. The best way to deal with wacko Muslims and other resentful, low-productivity, rabidly anti-Western types is to just not let them in the country, kick out the ones illegally here, and bribe the ones who are citizens to leave.
And yes, I agree that the left-wing views of Asians, Jews, and high-income/educated Latinos and blacks are a concern. However, the high productivity of these groups, in all likelihood, more than counterbalances the harm done by these groups’ support of socialist and multiculturalist policies. Also, if there is less association between being poor and being non-white, racial tensions should be reduced. Race and class are nasty issues by themselves, and to the extent that race (especially “whiteness” vs. “not whiteness") can be decoupled with class, any policy promoting such decoupling (such as high skill immigration) should be encouraged.
The best way to fight extreme-left politics is to expose it for the lie it is. Left-wing politics is nothing more than status seeking competitive altruism, using the have-nots of the world for one’s personal power, and in the case of non-whites tribalism aka bigotry and racism as well. Make people realize they are not sticking it to “the Man” by voting left, but only supporting “the Man’s” twin.
At least in the case of (East) Asians, the biggest problem seems to be their political apathy--they just go with the flow because they don’t want to fall farther in status, similar to white academics in the sciences. I doubt most Asians, other than the loony activist types, really care all that much about poor blacks and Mestizos, other than keep themselves and their wallets as far away from them as possible. Also, Asians are probably turned off by the religious right element of the conservative movement.
Young Asians in particular I would guess are turned off by anything reeking of the old, white, and “white is right” America, as I am. Two cheers for diversity (in the sense of cosmopolitanism, not in the sense importing, glorifying, and ennobling poverty and authoritarianism) technology, outrageous wealth, South Park and its relatives, and “sex, drugs, and rock’n’roll.” I look forward to an America and world in which a 19-year old today will look better at 90 than she does now, where even the best drug high available today pales in comparison to how we feel through gene therapies and psychotropic drugs, without the problems of withdrawal, tolerance, intoxication, and psychotic thinking.
Posted by larch harlow on December 24, 2007, 08:53 PM | #
“There’s more to life than ensuring the world has the maximum number of copies of your genes and the most similar overall genetic structure to you.”
And what’s that? Screwing 5’9” East Asian females? No one says that the end all and be all of life are genetic interests. But it is the most important thing to some of us. No “naturalistic fallacy” here, values play a role.
But here’s the rub: not everyone shares your values. Obviously, people like you don’t share my values either. That’s great, let yourself be replaced. Who needs you?
“Darwinism may be a very good way of explaining a wide variety of biological/biochemical, psychological, and social phenomena, but it makes a crappy theology.”
No, if you want a “theology”, go to GNXP and bow down before the “theology” of making America safe for high-IQ Asian immigrants.
Trying to avoid manifestly maladaptive policies is not “theology.” It’s rational action to promote a value system based upon solid science.
“Hell, Islamic countries seem to do a good job of maximizing their genes, with their high birthrates and extreme hostility to outsiders. But those countries are miserable places. “
Maybe that’s because of the extended phenotypes produced by said “genes?” It’s not the act of “maximizing genes” that is the problem. And no one is arguing for “maximizing copies of genes” per se, but it’ll be nice to avoid non-white immigration, “productive” or otherwise.
“One could argue that Western/white people must be more authoritarian, xenophobic, and “pro-natal” to compete with Muslims and other authoritarian types, but that’s not the case. “
Because you say so.
“The best way to deal with wacko Muslims and other resentful, low-productivity, rabidly anti-Western types is to just not let them in the country, kick out the ones illegally here, and bribe the ones who are citizens to leave.”
I’d like to do the same to “productive” Asians as well.
“And yes, I agree that the left-wing views of Asians, Jews, and high-income/educated Latinos and blacks are a concern. However, the high productivity of these groups, in all likelihood, more than counterbalances the harm done by these groups’ support of socialist and multiculturalist policies. “
What’s the benefit of “productivity?” Is it an end in itself? Or a means to improve the standard of living? We are talking about people here, no? Can’t we then ask *which* people? Of concern to whites is the well being of whites. If the damage to genetic interests and the displacement of whites from high status professional positions outweights the “benefits” of “productivity” than it is hardly boosting white well being.
“Also, if there is less association between being poor and being non-white, racial tensions should be reduced.”
But “racial tensions” are good, if they expose the damage done to whites by multiracialism and if they prevent miscegenation.
Posted by larch harlow on December 24, 2007, 09:00 PM | #
“Two cheers for diversity (in the sense of cosmopolitanism, not in the sense importing, glorifying, and ennobling poverty and authoritarianism) technology, outrageous wealth, South Park and its relatives, and “sex, drugs, and rock’n’roll.”
Thanks for exposing your priorities to us. Most people associated with this blog, however, have a different set of values. Since you claim to oppose “authoritarianism”, certainly you support freedom of association?
Therefore, if some of us reject your Asians as fellow citizens, we have the right to opt out of your cosmopolitan paradise?
“ I look forward to an America and world in which a 19-year old today will look better at 90 than she does now...”
And who or what that 19 year old is doesn’t matter to *you*, but it certainly matters to others. How about looking forward to am America where one can live out their life, at the top of the professional world or wherever they may be, without once ever having to physically encounter an Asian? Now, *that* would be something to look forward to!
“where even the best drug high available today pales in comparison to how we feel through gene therapies and psychotropic drugs, without the problems of withdrawal, tolerance, intoxication, and psychotic thinking.”
Sure, in the “cosmopolitan” nightmare you support, the remaining whites would need to be drugged to make their lives livable. Don’t drug them too much though, or else they won’t be able to do their janitorial duties for their xenophobic, ethnocentric, ethnic nepotistic Asian masters.
Posted by the larch on December 24, 2007, 09:33 PM | #
“It looks like JW Holliday is at it again “
The owner of this blog is Guessedworker, not you. Until such time as GW asserts his property rights and asks me to refrain from commenting here, I will do so at the time of my choosing. And, if you don’t like that, that’s too damn bad.
“(maybe you’re not JW, but you sound a lot like him, in both his obsession with “kinship” and his rude, condescending tone”
God forbid anyone is concerned with kinship. That’s like, you know, an “obsession.” A parent who cares more about his own children than a stranger’s “productive” offspring is, I assume, “obsessed” as well. Better we all sit back and fantasize about sex with Asian females and taking psychotropic drugs, eh?
Let’s assume that the Chinese are more productive than Bengalis, a certainty I would think, and one that is, if anything, supported upon reading Razib’s inarticulate diatribes.
Thus, replacing the entire population of Bangladesh with Chinamen will increase the overall producitivity of that nation state, enhance the standard of living of everyone living in that state, and create a more orderly society. However, that’s not going to benefit the native Bengalis, will it? Well, that’s an extreme example, you say. Very well. Do we then replace half the population? A third? What? Do we import a smaller ruling caste of Chinamen who’ll run the nation in a more “productive” manner, relegating the natives to lower positions, displaced from authority and upward mobility in their own nation? Is the genetic, political, social losses of the Bengalis compensated by the fact that they have a higher “standard of living?”
Is there any people who would really accept a lower relative status compared to an immigrant group in exchange for “productivity?”
Keep in mind that whites are not sub-Saharan Africans and are perfectly capable of creating advanced societies sans Asians. Indeed, it’s the Asians who wish to migrate to white lands.
Why should whites sacrifice their own interests because freaks like you enjoy the “cosmopolitan diversity?”
Posted by Guessedworker on December 25, 2007, 12:17 AM | #
Larch,
Glad to see you back. If that answers Birch’s near-question.
Birch,
As you are fully aware, we are, in our blind man’s way, trying to feel ourselves towards a salvatory philosophy for European Man, at this hour before the final hour. Now, when I started this site my default position on philososophy was a Conservatism-cum-nationalism mixed with some sociobiology, a bit of Durkheim, a bit of Pitt the Younger, and so on. It seemed to me to be a good package, but never a complete package.
Then one day this impossible, passionate, brutally frank, brilliant individual - let’s call him “larch” - hurled genetic interest into the mix. I’m still digesting the consequences. But the first thing I realised is that he had hold of a deeper, more human value than I did. My philosophy sort of started half way up the street, instead of from base, and that wasn’t good enough. That wasn’t going to get the job done.
So I’ve had to take the only option open to me, which was to incorporate that deepest of values, and start over again with the process of logical expansion.
I am a slow worker, so I haven’t got far yet. But I couldn’t have continued on the path I was on before. And that’s the change larch’s ultimate human value should have on you also. You should, if you really understand the crisis in the West, be arranging your views around that value and not, for instance, the wholly man-made values of productivity, prosperity or progress, however you define that.
If you don’t understand said crisis, fine. But then you are indeed a lost soul, and I can only hope you find your way out of your present thrall.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 25, 2007, 02:31 AM | #
Birch, have you said what your race, ethnicity, and family religious background are? Forgive me, I don’t recall.
If the Chinese race went out of existence and it turned out it was preventable would that be a loss in any way, of any significance? Don’t reply that it’s highly unlikely or “it ain’t gonna happen,” or some such. Just answer.
By the way I’d love to see a debate between you and BraveBlondeGirl in the “Does Race-Mixing Make White People Look Better” thread — she’s had it up to here with white guys (I assume that’s you) who prefer Oriental girls.
By the way, Merry Christmas to the comrades in Europe (and, starting in about two hours, the ones over here too)! I’m sipping some eggnog with mace sprinkled on top — couldn’t find nutmeg in the spice cabinet but mace is as good or better, it turns out.
Posted by Guessedworker on December 25, 2007, 08:41 AM | #
Merry Christmas, Fred. And to all. It’s breakfast-time here, and I really shouldn’t be anywhere near a computer screen!
Posted by birchbarlow on December 25, 2007, 09:07 PM | #
“Thanks for exposing your priorities to us. Most people associated with this blog, however, have a different set of values. Since you claim to oppose “authoritarianism”, certainly you support freedom of association?
Therefore, if some of us reject your Asians as fellow citizens, we have the right to opt out of your cosmopolitan paradise?”
Freedom of association does not mean freedom to not see people with non-white skin, any more than it means freedom from encountering people who curse, look at naked or racy pictures of women, people who are homosexual, smoke, drink, use psychoactive OTC and Rx drugs like Vicodin, Robitussin, and Ritalin, use medical marijuana or THC pills, and so on and so forth--in fact, I think most drug laws should be abolished or weakened, and mis-users of substances punished for their bad behavior (DUI, poor work performance, theft, fraud, etc) rather than testing dirty (as is the case for parolees and being fired or otherwise disciplined at some companies) or possession. Essentially, freedom does not end until someone else’s nose or wallet begins. Being offended by simply *seeing/hearing* or *encountering* non-whites, homosexuals, swearing, sexual innuendo, or simple use of drugs including nicotine and alcohol does not warrant the force of law. Remember that laws mean guns, batons, imprisonment, extortion, and ruined lives for those who break them (this is NOT a case for anarchy, just a case for not making laws about petty crap...we do not need a society of easily offended a--holes with guns).
You can certainly chose to make friendships and marry with only whites, and get to the whitest neighborhood/city/county/state you can. In fact, I think it should be legal to not sell a house to someone for any stupid reason, whether it be race or because the seller woke up on the wrong side of the bed that morning.
By the way, GuessedWorker, you didn’t seem so extreme when you were posting at gnxp (maybe a few steps in the white nationalist direction from say, Lawrence Auster), and you were actually quite refreshing at Samizdata (where Frank McGahon et. al. were the uptight jerks). JW Holliday has definitely been a bad influence on you, GW, and probably to a lesser extent on Fred Scrooby...you guys have been reasonable much of the time, if too “old guard” and white-centric
Duty, honor, and pride can be every bit (and more) dangerous than careless overindulgence. The fact that tribalism is part of our nature does not mean that it is desirable, or should be utterly unrestrained. Liking fatty foods is part of our nature--does that mean we should eat a 5-lb cheesecake every day? Perhaps more relevant to our discussion, status-seeking is another base part of human nature. Does that mean we should be encouraging and enabling do-gooder, holier-than-thou, phony multicultural leftists because their status seeking and power grabbing is an unavoidable component of their/our nature?
Posted by larch on December 25, 2007, 10:28 PM | #
“Freedom of association does not mean freedom to not see people with non-white skin, any more than it means freedom from encountering people who curse, look at naked or racy pictures of women, people who are homosexual, smoke, drink, use psychoactive OTC and Rx drugs like Vicodin, Robitussin, and Ritalin, use medical marijuana or THC pills, and so on and so forth--in fact, I think most drug laws should be abolished or weakened, and mis-users of substances punished for their bad behavior”
You really do have a drug hang-up don’t you? Are you writing your comments under the influence? Does that explain it?
What exactly does “freedom of association” mean to you? You have just defined it out of existence. If one is not free to associate with whom one wants, then this is not “freedom of association.” If one cannot escape from corrupt, alien, genetically distant Asiatics, and if one has, by government decree, such creatures forced upon them as “fellow citizens”, filling up national carrying capacity with their genes and phenotypes - how the hell is that “freedom of association?”
Barlow is like those EU and Canadian hypocrites who tell us they are all for “freedom of speech” - before they carefully define for us what we are not allowed to say, and what forms of expression can land one in prison. Barlow tells us that “freedom of association” excludes the right to exclude individuals because of race, sexual orientation, drug use, or other forms of behavior. Well, then, this leaves us with what? That we can exclude people based upon whether they are Red Sox or Yankees fans?
If I must be forced - against my will - to live in the same nation as, and associate with, non-whites or whatever, that is, by definition, NOT “freedom of association.” This guy barlow has got his brains so scrambled at GNXP that he is spouting absolute nonsense, and is redefining fundamental human freedoms in the most totalitarian manner possible.
But, then again, let us remember, he is from GNXP. And at GNXP, all human freedoms, all “progressive” policies, all inferences about human biodiversity absolutely end once some whites begin questioning whether they want to live in the same polity as GC and Razib. That, you see, is the “original sin” at GNXP - and all of a sudden “freedoms” need to be redefined so that escape is impossible.
When it comes to the issue of whites being FORCED to live with Asiatics, then GNXP becomes more stalinist than “uncle joe” himself…
Posted by larch on December 25, 2007, 10:30 PM | #
“Being offended by simply *seeing/hearing* or *encountering* non-whites, homosexuals, swearing, sexual innuendo, or simple use of drugs including nicotine and alcohol does not warrant the force of law. “
Because you say so? How about we don’t want biologically and culturally alien migrants committing genocide by filling up carrying capacity with their odious presence?
“Remember that laws mean guns, batons, imprisonment, extortion, and ruined lives for those who break them...”
That includes “equal opportunity laws”, “fair housing”, forced integration, as well as affirmative action for Asians in the form of “small business subsidies” and other government policies.
“Remember” also that replacement migration is genocide. And that two Asians, using the most naive measures of EGI, equal one “child equivalent” to persons of European origin. Yes, even if those Asians are “5’9’” beautiful East Asian females” that barlow has sweaty nighttime fantasies about.
“You can certainly chose to make friendships and marry with only whites, and get to the whitest neighborhood/city/county/state you can.”
No, you cannot do that because the federal goverment imposes integration by force of law. And as the nation becomes more non-white, these options diminish.
“In fact, I think it should be legal to not sell a house to someone for any stupid reason, whether it be race or because the seller woke up on the wrong side of the bed that morning.”
Note how barlow equates the most fundamental issues of human interactions (race) with “getting up on the wrong side of the bed.”
“By the way, GuessedWorker, you didn’t seem so extreme when you were posting at gnxp (maybe a few steps in the white nationalist direction from say, Lawrence Auster)...”
Hmmm...and the desis at GNXP hysterically delete any and all comments that threaten their ethnic interests....should GW and others here trace their histories regarding GNXP? Should Fred Scrooby describe his interactions with GC? How about GC’s reaction when GW informed him he was setting up MR?
“...and you were actually quite refreshing at Samizdata (where Frank McGahon et. al. were the uptight jerks). “
So, therefore, birch barlow wishes to set the parameters within which GW can express his opinions. Don’t get too radical GW or birch will have a hissy fit. One just cannot exclude his masters at GNXP.
“JW Holliday has definitely been a bad influence on you, GW, and probably to a lesser extent on Fred Scrooby...you guys have been reasonable much of the time, if too “old guard” and white-centric “
You arrogant little snot, who are you to decide what is, or is not, a “bad influence” on grown men such as GW or Fred? Perhaps we can speculate that self-interested alien filth like Razib and GC have been a “bad influence” on you, no? Let’s see if we can ponder what’s more likely to be a “bad influence”: encouraging people to behave in an adaptive manner, or to encourage people to disregard racial extinction and civilizational collapse?
Posted by larch on December 25, 2007, 10:31 PM | #
“Duty, honor, and pride can be every bit (and more) dangerous than careless overindulgence.”
Really, now? Given that the West is dissolving because of the latter, it seems strange that you see the former as the threat. A poster boy for Frankfurt School pathologization of adaptive behavior, are we, birch?
“The fact that tribalism is part of our nature does not mean that it is desirable, or should be utterly unrestrained.”
Idiot. I’ve stated that values play a crucial role in determining policy and not a straight derivation of “ought” from “is.”
“Liking fatty foods is part of our nature--does that mean we should eat a 5-lb cheesecake every day?”
Sweaty nerds liking Asian women may be part of their nature, does that mean we should import genetic aliens just so they can jack off under the desks in their biology class while staring at Suzie Wong?
The point is using rational thought mechanisms to decide what is, or is not, adaptive behavior, once one decides that pursuing such behavior is an important value. A person who values long-term health over immediate taste bud satisfaction will eschew the cheesecake. A person who cares nothing about health but who “lives to eat” will take the cake.
Likewise, white people who value group continuity, genetic interests, and civilizational survival will fight to keep Asians out, while those individuals who think only about satisfying their immediate selfish “pleasure” needs - be they drugs or alien women - will promote racially destructive alien immigration.
Is + values = ought. As I’ve already stated our values differ. These differences are not necessarily objectively equal though.
“Perhaps more relevant to our discussion, status-seeking is another base part of human nature. Does that mean we should be encouraging and enabling do-gooder, holier-than-thou, phony multicultural leftists because their status seeking and power grabbing is an unavoidable component of their/our nature?”
No, and neither should be “enable” desi liars who establish “science” blogs in order to disarm whites in the struggles of ethnic/racial competition.”
Posted by danielj on December 26, 2007, 12:09 AM | #
Rich Barlow’s and Rudy Giuliani’s definition of freedom comes from a speech Rudy Giuliani gave in 1994:
Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do.
Posted by Guessedworker on December 26, 2007, 12:46 AM | #
Birch,
I had read JW’s writings elsewhere before I’d even heard of GNXP. I had not read him on Salter, however, until he requested to post at MR.
Yes, my experience of his work on Salter has had a definite effect on my political thought. That effect is still percolating through, slowly reordering it.
This, it seems to me, is a normal and healthy process. A blog that has an educational and inspirational purpose is hardly aided by its founder being closed of mind and convinced that he alone knows the One True Path.
Let me fill you in a little bit on my GNXP experience.
On my very first fishing expedition to a GNXP thread I made some throw-away, vaguely WN-ish comment of no importance, and was told in no uncertain terms to leave. I waited a while, identified the actors and watched the way things were done. Then I adapted.
The guys couldn’t get a handle on me. “Is Guessedworker a WN?” someone asked GC on the Open Thread. He thought probably not because what I said was mostly pretty reasonable. Actually, he was right. I wasn’t a WN. I was a Conservative English nationalist and just, well, plain middle-class English like David B. They couldn’t sort the nationalist wheat from the English middle-class chaff.
For my part, I had decided that maintaining a position with GNXP was useful. Elsewhere I was arguing for h-bd while possessing not a shred of scientific know-how. Running into the occasional liberalistic scientist was problematic, not because their arguments were any good but because they could so easily throw science dust in my eyes. Politically, I could skin their hides. But GNXP afforded me some cover in the objective truth department.
As for Samizdata, in a political sense it was more in tune with Razib and GC’s ethnic interests than I ever could be. But ... Perry de Havilland and Frank McGahon each, for their own reasons, made the huge mistake of denying h-bd (you will doubtless recall with pleasure McGahon’s wondrous “tools” stratagem in Razib’s thread “Talking past eachother” - and all because the boy loved Milk Tray).
But their h-bd denial meant that I walked in constant danger of being IP-banned from Samizdata threads. I worked pretty hard to keep the ban at bay. But Charles Copeland was a more fearless and extravagent performer and, to be honest, he gave Perry the ammunition to fire. We were banned together for “not moving on”. That means, when the Ideally Free posted something denying reality we two (along, of course, with others) cruelly reminded them about this oversight. We didn’t set out to be obstructive or offensive. We didn’t spam the site. We were simply inconvenient, causing them to waste too much precious time defending what, naturally enough, they could not defend.
Samizdata has since developed into a highly compromised operation, with free expression channelled along the same narrow lines as any typically correct left-liberal site. The moral, which will surprise no one, is that neoliberalism is liberalism. “Left or right” is not a useful taxonomy.
As far as I am aware I was never actually IP-banned from GNXP. At this time GC had started signing himself gc-emeritus or somesuch. His tone changed. He became palpably more dictatorial, and I got into one or two quite interesting discussions with him. Then, in a pre-arranged move, another commenter and I announced that we were quitting the threads. GC over-reacted, and raced to shut the stable door, ordering me never to reference the site elsewhere, no less. A trifle unnecessary, that - not to mention arrogant.
So, Birch, my apologies if you were in any way deceived by me - not that it matters since I am of no importance in this world. Still, to state it plainly…
My real politics were never fully on display at any of the sites I commented at in the time I allotted, perfectly deliberately, to establish a rep as Guessedworker. What you see here is what I am: a questor for, and disseminator of, information of utility to the salvation of my people.
Posted by silver on December 26, 2007, 04:50 AM | #
Birch evidently cares more about other peoples than he does his own. He fails to realize that such care will not be reciprocated. Niggers do not and will not reciprocate; Hispanics do not and will not reciprocate; Muslims do not and will not reciprocate; and neither will the Asians he holds so dear. He is needlessly setting up future generations of whites for endless torment.
Birch, the “old white America” may have been harsh but it was playing by rules no different to which any other people play by. If you wish the values you prize to endure, you must set aside your malcontented wistfulness and, short of complete separation, find a way to ensure America maintains—and, ideally, increases—her white majority.
Posted by Lurker on December 26, 2007, 05:02 AM | #
“GC over-reacted, and raced to shut the stable door, ordering me never to reference the site elsewhere, no less. A trifle unnecessary, that - not to mention arrogant.” Not to mention unenforceable!
Unbelieveable, I didnt know that, is this post still on GNXP?
GC if you ever read this you really are a crown & anchor (get a Brit to explain it to you GC).
A happy Christmas to all - yes and to you GC.
Posted by larch on December 26, 2007, 10:25 AM | #
With mathematical certainty, the other shoe has started to drop.
There was, of course, a reason for my “over the top” insults vs. GNXP in yesterday’s posts.
Posted by barlow is a despicable worm on December 27, 2007, 11:06 AM | #
GNXP seems to be having “virus problems”, and “birch barlow” - in a typically snide and cowardly fashion - wishes to suggest that I had something to do with it while at the same time putting up a front of “plausible denialibility” with respect to the accusation:
“birch barlow
I don’t think it’s very likely this guy is involved, but I just really pissed off JW Holliday at Majority Rights (posting under “larch").
Email | Homepage | 12.26.07 - 7:39 pm | #”
That post by barlow contains links to both one of my MR posts ("this guy") as well as this thread (explaining how he “pissed” me off).
Yeah, barlow, if you really think it is not “very likely” I am “involved,” what’s the reason for the comment to begin with? Can’t stand the heat here, so you have to drag your pansy nerd ass back to your unassimilable Asiatic masters and spread lies about me, eh?
Let me clarify for you:
1. I am in no way “involved” in the “virus problems” at the “please dear god, please accept Razib and GC as Americans” blog, better known as “Gene Expression.”
2. Unlike the biologically and culturally alien founders of GNXP, I don’t believe in censorship, so I certainly don’t approve of electronic attacks against blogs - that is, assuming GNXP’s problem is an attack and not due to Razib’s technological incompetence.
3. If you are so concerned about such issues, why don’t you persuade the desi aliens at GNXP to stop deleting comments that they disagree with and stop banning commentators? How about ending the inter-racial porn links to GNXP from MR and amren?
You really are a despicable little worm, aren’t you birch? But what can one expect from a turd who, unable to connect with women of his own (presumed) race, has to support alien immigration to supply East Asian females for his “pleasure?”
Question: do even *they* give you the “time of day?”
No problem: there is always the “psychotropic drugs” to turn to. Right?
Posted by Guessedworker on December 27, 2007, 12:21 PM | #
birch,
If your only reason for commenting here is to “piss people off”, I will ask you not to comment at all. An apology to JW is in order, I think. Do you have the personal integrity to offer one?
Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 27, 2007, 01:27 PM | #
Birch, that was low. Everyone assumed you were posting here in good faith.
Posted by larch on December 27, 2007, 02:40 PM | #
On the same “GNXP virus thread” we find a new, irrelevant comment by “David B”:
“David B
I’m amused, but not surprised, to see that MR readers are still convinced that Winston Churchill’s mother was Jewish. Bonkers.
Email | Homepage | 12.27.07 - 9:07 am | #”
Several comments.
First, who on MR is “convinced” that Churchill’s mother is Jewish? Has this been discussed recently? If one or a few commentators make such an assertion, how does this reflect on the MR blog as a whole (other than that GW doesn’t censor his blog, unlike Razib)? By saying he is “not surprised”, David B suggests that MR as a whole is “Bonkers” - a term perhaps better applied to the blog for which he serves as a desi-extended-phenotype.
More to the point: what’s the connection to the issue of the GNXP virus? Oh yes, apparently, David B’s comment was meant as a secondary attack added to barlow’s crude attempt at libel.
Please note that before barlow’s asinine comment, it had already been established that the “virus” “attack” had something to do with Israeli scam artists (I thought that Jews were all high-minded cognitive elitists), and Boxenhorn’s analysis, combined with the Israeli connection, makes it obvious that the problem is in no way associated with MR or with any “MR readers.”
That of course, didn’t prevent barlow’s stupidity, followed up by David B’s additional foray into imbecillity. I also note that the censor-happy Razib, who is obviously aware that “MR readers” have no connection to GNXP’s “virus problem,” doesn’t feel the urge to hit the “delete” button with respect to barlow.
That “delete” button gets hit only when a comment is posted which threatens the ethnic interests of GNXP’s founders.
“Everyone assumed you were posting here in good faith. “
That’s a lesson, Fred. GNXPers are of such low character, that you should assume that any posts of theirs is *not* made in good faith.
Posted by larch on December 27, 2007, 02:53 PM | #
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071227/ap_on_re_as/pakistan
South Asian cognitive elitism.
Bonkers.
Posted by Guessedworker on December 27, 2007, 03:15 PM | #
I’ve visited Razib’s thread and offered the following for his “aggressive moderation”.
Razib,
Although censorship is not employed at MR, please feel free to continue your practise of it here in respect to David’s and birch’s comments about MR. Both are, in their respective ways, dishonest and utterly misleading.
Likewise, Razib, feel free to delete the inter-racial porn re-direct you initiated for MR and Amren links to GNXP. Or, if you don’t want to delete it, at least demonstrate your moral stature and elistist intellectual maturity by telling your readers why you put it there in the first place.
Incidentally, any GNXP readers of European descent who are becoming disenchanted with the presence of juvenile, miscegenatively boastful brown people in the West, feel free to visit MR. Likewise anyone here who is still really, really keen on Asians in and can do a more effective job than David B, thusfar, in critiquing EGI. (Did he marry a native during one of his diplomatic secondments to the Sub-Continent.)
Posted by birch barlow on December 27, 2007, 03:17 PM | #
Yikes! This discussion has gotten quite nasty (I’m sure this comment saying that the discussion got nasty will get a nasty remark in return). Note that I said that it wasn’t very likely that JW was responsible for the “attack"--I’m not accusing JW or anyone else here of a damn thing; I was noting an odd coincidence. Mostly, I just wanted to start a discussion on gnxp, which has not been as interesting without Godless (no offense to Razib and other posters). It just so happened that a post I made caused JW to fly off the handle (this was NOT my intention--I do not like dealing with JW...GuessedWorker and Fred Scrooby can at least be talked to sometimes even if I strongly disagree with them...JW, much like like some of the ModelMinority crowd and Abiola, (just to name two) tend to engage in nasty personal attacks (and then have the chutzpah to say that those caught in their line of fire don’t like being flamed because the flamers’ arguments are so damn airtight). PZ “PC” Myers, Crooked Timber(Daniel Davies in particular) and a poster under the name “RedDaniel” also fit this list IMO.
Posted by larch on December 27, 2007, 03:44 PM | #
“Note that I said that it wasn’t very likely that JW was responsible for the “attack"--I’m not accusing JW or anyone else here of a damn thing; I was noting an odd coincidence. “
What a despicable, cowardly, little worm you are.
Right...again, I ask you worm, if you don’t think it was “very likely” I had anything to do with it, why mention it to begin with? Because you wanted to “start a discussion?” Liar.
How is this for an analogy. Readers of Gore Vidal’s historical fiction “Burr” will remember that Vidal’s explanation (which, by the way, is not supported [or refuted] by historical evidence) for the Burr-Hamilton duel was that Hamilton accused Burr of incest with his (Burr’s) own daughter. Let’s assume for a moment that is actually what happened.
Do you think that if Hamilton had said in public:
“It’s not very likely that Aaron Burr is involved in an incestuous relationship with his daughter, but they are really unnaturally close to each other....”
that could be viewed as anything other than a weasely way of just saying:
“Burr is committing incest with his daughter?”
If Hamilton had said nothing, obviously no one would have thought of the accusation to begin with. Likewise, no one at the GNXP thread had any notion to link the “virus” to myself (or anyone else at MR) until the cowardly no-character dishonorable little worm barlow had to plant the idea in their head by saying “it’s not very likely he’s involved, but...”
How convenient, worm. Do you think that everyone is so stupid that they cannot tell your intention was to imply involvement, while covering yourself “legally” by prefacing the comment by “not very likely?”
Coward. Worm. Filthy trash.
“(and then have the chutzpah to say that those caught in their line of fire don’t like being flamed because the flamers’ arguments are so damn airtight).”
No, worm, you’ve implied that I’m a criminal (hacking is a crime), without having the courage to come out and make the accusation without prefacing it with weasel words. Instead of having the integrity to admit your error like a man (which you are not in any sense other then the strictly biological), you then have the “chutzpah” to claim that you just wanted to start a “discussion?”
Are you so dimwitted that you cannot think of any other way of starting a discussion without libelling someone with an accusation of criminal activity, worm?
This worm barlow should be persona non grata here.
Posted by larch on December 27, 2007, 03:48 PM | #
“Mostly, I just wanted to start a discussion on gnxp, which has not been as interesting without Godless”
How about going to the “two blowhards” blog, worm, where your master GC has, relatively recently posted a *very* interesting comment on immigration reform and the future of America - a comment that can be very interestingly compared to some of his prior comments on those subjects.
Posted by Lurker on December 27, 2007, 05:55 PM | #
Which thread is this at 2 blowhards? Ive had a look, cant see GC there.
Posted by larch on December 27, 2007, 06:34 PM | #
Lurker:
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/009206.html
That’s quite interesting. In the past, we’ve heard that:
- WN complaints were paranoid and that the situation for whites wasn’t that bad at all
- that all we needed was some “immigration reform” (similar to “welfare reform") and then things would be “business as usual”
- America was the greatest nation on Earth and all the flag-waving patriotism
- that he was not going anywhere and America was his home, etc.
Now:
- America is finished, primarily for racial reasons
- even in Europe, the most that can be hoped for is that *some* states *may* survive
- immigration reform - even severe reform - will be useless
- and that the future is in the “east” where, apparently, we are suggested to migrate (and I assume he’s implying he may ditch America for Asia himself, if things worsen).
That’s quite a change. One would think that all those paranoid WNs from 3-5 years ago were correct in their pessimism and that “reform” is useless and that the situation for whites, in both America and Europe, was so serious as to justify radicalism.
By the way, some of the controversial comments have been deleted from the GNXP “virus” thread.
I note that GW’s comment there (which has also been deleted) led to the “comment” immediately preceding Lurker’s, at 4:09 PM.
Posted by GT on December 27, 2007, 08:20 PM | #
Godless Capitalist wrote: It [Political Correctness] controls the military, the media, the government, the corporations, and the universities. All of Western Civ has been compromised. You try to fight it publicly, and you will be quickly deprived of a job and (perhaps even more importantly) of access to mates. If you live off the grid (something almost impossible to do nowadays) you are a person of no relevance, while if you live on the grid you are vulnerable. You can’t even go meta and ask who is pushing PC and why. The penalties for asking such questions are even more severe.
Key phrases in the paragraph above are “almost impossible” and “person of no relevance.” Thus GC has just informed us that “living off the grid” is too hard and will result in low status. Assuming this teeny, tiny bit of insight to his character was intentional, I thank him for his honesty.
Godless Capitalist’s foundational conservatism has much in common with the zeitgeist of today’s racial nationalism. So much, in fact, that if it doesn’t change soon in two or three centuries our people’s epitaph will read:
Here lie the defenders of Western Civilization, dead because breaking free of the judeoconomy was too hard and would have resulted in low status.
Posted by birch barlow on December 27, 2007, 08:21 PM | #
larch/JW,
I retract any and all statements even remotely suggesting that you or anyone else running MR could have been responsible for the virus. Really I just wanted to see what other GNXPers had to say about your angry, hateful attitude. Admittedly, I should not be such a masochist and subject myself to the likes of you or your left/non-white counterparts for that matter. My goal was not to be a troll but to try to get some reason into the discussion. Anyway, I know there’s no winning with angry, hateful people; they will always find some way to try to put you down.
Posted by birch barlow on December 27, 2007, 08:33 PM | #
I just want to admit that I made a big mistake in the MR thread and here as well. Trying to talk reason to or worse yet, to please or gain respect from angry, hateful people is stupid and a waste of time.
Posted by Guessedworker on December 27, 2007, 08:38 PM | #
birch,
It’s very, very simple. Just don’t be dishonourable.
Now leave it there, and return for good to the porn king of Patuakhali.
Posted by danielj on December 27, 2007, 09:49 PM | #
GT:
Exceptional point! I enjoy very much when you ground the debate firmly in reality.
Godless Capitalist has confused the attempt to recreate and rebuild the destroyed temple of us gentiles, that is Western Civilization, with a popularity contest or a high school class presidential election.
I am not seeking “relevance,” institutional weight, demarginalization of my viewpoint, redefinition of the terms of debate or popularity. I am at war and will act thusly by not making my camp in my enemies stronghold.
What is absolutely astounding is that he has identified the source of the problem (living on the grid) yet manages to denounce the only solution as impossible since it relegates those who employ the strategy to irrelevance.
Of course it is!
One can not be “civilized” and travel in the hedonistic and destructive milieu of feminized apartment living.
One can not serve both Western Man and Sumner Redstone.
Posted by larch on December 27, 2007, 09:50 PM | #
barlow:
Ah, yes, I’m “angry and hateful.”
Of course, it’s not “angry” and “hateful” to put inter-racial porn links from MR and amren to GNXP, nor “angry” or “hateful” to respond to GW’s comments on GNXP with the posts here that were deleted: inter-racial porn jpg images associated with “Guessedworker’s happy go lucky daughter.”
No, that’s calm and loving objective insights.
It’s not “angry” or “hateful” to call people “terrorists” because such people advocate perfectly legal and non-violent racial activism. No, that’s reasonable discourse, right?
Equating a political scientist with “Jack D. Ripper” from “Dr. Strangelove” is not “angry” or “hateful” either; why, that’s just a logical and relevant argument!
How about this:
“Don Black went to prison because he couldn’t separate fantasy from reality. I can only imagine what happened there 
”
Mocking the possibility that Don Black was raped in prison (there is no evidence that such occured) - is that not “angry” and “hateful?”
That last quote, by the way, is from a quite interesting comments thread, where a particular person makes arguments which are, more or less, completely opposite of those made 11/10/2007 on the blowhards blog.
Barlow, go back to the “amen corner” at GNXP. Only be careful to what your masters endorse - one year they say “X”, several years later, it’ll be “anti-X.” But just like Oceania in “1984”, there is never any correction to the previous set of nonsensical statements.
No, the desis will change course without ever admitting they once uttered completely opposite opinions, and, of course, without every admitting that they were wrong.
They’re counting on “star-struck” fans like barlow not remembering from one year to the next what is said.
Posted by Svigor on December 27, 2007, 10:26 PM | #
The writer gives the figure that about 97 out of 100 Southerners did not own chattel slaves....yet those non-slave holding Southerners had to suffer under the burdens of those who did.
From what I understand, the percentage of white households owning at least one slave was a hell of a lot higher than 3 percent - more like 30 or 40 percent, though what I understand might not be a good source.
On the other hand, the vast majority of slaves were owned by a small class of slaveholders.
Posted by Svigor on December 27, 2007, 11:39 PM | #
OK, I may have made my point gratuitously, but wouldn’t you agree that a major factor making immigration reform difficult is that basing immigration policy on intelligence and other desirable factors seems crass to the vast majority of the population?
Nah. The only major factor is “cuz that’s how massa wants it.” Public opinion could change in short order, right along with the wind. (In fact, I think the only thing giving the anti-immigration movement the legs it’s had to date is the racialism inherent in Americans; in other words, suicide is a tough sell.)
There’s more to life than ensuring the world has the maximum number of copies of your genes and the most similar overall genetic structure to you.
No, not really there isn’t; just ancillaries. The trick is to keep them adaptive.
Darwinism may be a very good way of explaining a wide variety of biological/biochemical, psychological, and social phenomena, but it makes a crappy theology.
I dunno, I think Judaism’s pretty durn functional.
Hell, Islamic countries seem to do a good job of maximizing their genes, with their high birthrates and extreme hostility to outsiders. But those countries are miserable places.
Sorta - the west could annihilate 99% of their populations at will, but on the other hand, we’re busily suiciding as we speak…
Miserable and alive is infinitely better than dead.
And yes, I agree that the left-wing views of Asians, Jews, and high-income/educated Latinos and blacks are a concern. However, the high productivity of these groups, in all likelihood, more than counterbalances the harm done by these groups’ support of socialist and multiculturalist policies.
Let me help you speak MRese: you just said “what’s the harm in dying if you’re well paid for your trouble?”
Also, if there is less association between being poor and being non-white, racial tensions should be reduced. Race and class are nasty issues by themselves, and to the extent that race (especially “whiteness” vs. “not whiteness") can be decoupled with class, any policy promoting such decoupling (such as high skill immigration) should be encouraged.
No. As far as I can tell, cognitive elitism is simply a nerdier invasion. I suppose any delaying tactic is a good thing, but on the other hand I’d prefer simply getting on with the spring cleaning.
The best way to fight extreme-left politics is to expose it for the lie it is.
The best way to fight leftism is with power; that’s all leftism has, and that’s the only way to defeat it.
Left-wing politics is nothing more than status seeking competitive altruism, using the have-nots of the world for one’s personal power, and in the case of non-whites tribalism aka bigotry and racism as well. Make people realize they are not sticking it to “the Man” by voting left, but only supporting “the Man’s” twin.
The only way to end this is to remove the rewards. That means a direct power struggle.
At least in the case of (East) Asians, the biggest problem seems to be their political apathy--they just go with the flow because they don’t want to fall farther in status, similar to white academics in the sciences. I doubt most Asians, other than the loony activist types, really care all that much about poor blacks and Mestizos, other than keep themselves and their wallets as far away from them as possible. Also, Asians are probably turned off by the religious right element of the conservative movement.
The biggest problem is that they’re east Asians! Why is this so hard to grasp? They’re going to turn our territories into east Asian territories. Where’s the mystery in this?
Young Asians in particular I would guess are turned off by anything reeking of the old, white, and “white is right” America, as I am. Two cheers for diversity (in the sense of cosmopolitanism, not in the sense importing, glorifying, and ennobling poverty and authoritarianism) technology, outrageous wealth, South Park and its relatives, and “sex, drugs, and rock’n’roll.” I look forward to an America and world in which a 19-year old today will look better at 90 than she does now, where even the best drug high available today pales in comparison to how we feel through gene therapies and psychotropic drugs, without the problems of withdrawal, tolerance, intoxication, and psychotic thinking.
Unity of purpose is a requirement of (or at least a great boon to) all the futurist stuff you’re alluding to. The homogenous Chinese and Japanese will have it, and the cosmopolitan and “diverse” and authoritarian west will not.
But the first thing I realised is that he had hold of a deeper, more human value than I did.
Goddamn right. The will of the universe, the nature of my place in it, revealed to me through science. Crappy theology my ass. Birch, this stuff will have the hair on the back of your neck standing up, if you’re ever lucky enough to actually think - and feel - your way through it.
Freedom of association does not mean freedom to not see people with non-white skin, any more than it means freedom from encountering people who curse, look at naked or racy pictures of women, people who are homosexual, smoke, drink, use psychoactive OTC and Rx drugs like Vicodin, Robitussin, and Ritalin, use medical marijuana or THC pills, and so on and so forth--in fact, I think most drug laws should be abolished or weakened, and mis-users of substances punished for their bad behavior (DUI, poor work performance, theft, fraud, etc) rather than testing dirty (as is the case for parolees and being fired or otherwise disciplined at some companies) or possession.
I see. Freedom doesn’t mean the freedom to do stuff you don’t like. It’s all so much clearer now!
YES, freedom of association does mean the freedom of disassociation. And even if it didn’t, the right to self-determination does expressly include those rights.
Essentially, freedom does not end until someone else’s nose or wallet begins. Being offended by simply *seeing/hearing* or *encountering* non-whites, homosexuals, swearing, sexual innuendo, or simple use of drugs including nicotine and alcohol does not warrant the force of law. Remember that laws mean guns, batons, imprisonment, extortion, and ruined lives for those who break them (this is NOT a case for anarchy, just a case for not making laws about petty crap...we do not need a society of easily offended a--holes with guns).
Libertarian mumbo-jumbo. Freedom is more a collective right than an individual one - the right of peoples (PEOPLES Birch, PEOPLES - the “s” isn’t a typo) to determine their own future. Individual rights are secondary.
You can certainly chose to make friendships and marry with only whites, and get to the whitest neighborhood/city/county/state you can. In fact, I think it should be legal to not sell a house to someone for any stupid reason, whether it be race or because the seller woke up on the wrong side of the bed that morning.
Yet, by implication, you don’t recognize the right of groups to do the same thing. That’s odd. Or, am I misreading you?
By the way, GuessedWorker, you didn’t seem so extreme when you were posting at gnxp
Free men don’t have to hold their tongues; a melodramatic way of saying GNXP mods are petty net despots.
Duty, honor, and pride can be every bit (and more) dangerous than careless overindulgence. The fact that tribalism is part of our nature does not mean that it is desirable, or should be utterly unrestrained.
No, the fact that tribalism is generally adaptive means that it is desirable. No one but your straw man suggests that it, or any other cognitive module, should be “utterly unrestrained.”
Liking fatty foods is part of our nature--does that mean we should eat a 5-lb cheesecake every day?
How does this relate back to the discussion? Is your point that tribalism, like many other tendencies, should be moderated in a way consistent with flexible strategizing? Right now the white race is experiencing an almost total lack of tribalism. Is this your preferred state? What exactly is your limit, before we have “too much tribalism”? An erg?
Perhaps more relevant to our discussion, status-seeking is another base part of human nature. Does that mean we should be encouraging and enabling do-gooder, holier-than-thou, phony multicultural leftists because their status seeking and power grabbing is an unavoidable component of their/our nature?
If you’re going to belabor your point, maybe you should actually MAKE it first.
Really, now? Given that the West is dissolving because of the latter, it seems strange that you see the former as the threat. A poster boy for Frankfurt School pathologization of adaptive behavior, are we, birch?
I was thinking exactly the same thing. Weird semantic games from Birch. Are they self-deceptive? I wonder. I suspect Birch isn’t really eligible for the particular flavor of self-realization we’re selling. He’s too keen on “diversity” for its own sake.
Posted by GT on December 28, 2007, 01:41 AM | #
Daniel,
I am at war and will act thusly by not making my camp in my enemy’s stronghold.
No genius was required for you and I to realize this. Yet, to my knowledge, in the past 50 years not one “leader” in the racial nationalist camp has made the same observation – at least publicly.
What is absolutely astounding is that he [Godless Capitalist -gt] has identified the source of the problem (living on the grid) yet manages to denounce the only solution as impossible since it relegates those who employ the strategy to irrelevance.
If GC truly believes the solution is too hard and the cost unacceptable, then why does he bother with it? IMO, the answer is he’s a hobbyist.
Posted by larch on December 28, 2007, 10:37 AM | #
Svigor, thank you for that analysis of barlow, which is a good summary of his lack of logic.
“I see. Freedom doesn’t mean the freedom to do stuff you don’t like. It’s all so much clearer now! “
Indeed. That’s similar to the speech issue. Thus, the great proponents of “freedom and democracy” are all for “freedom of speech” and “freedom of expression.” Mysteriously though, these freedoms exclude the right that persons of European ancestry can speak and act to strategize in favor of their racial survival. That’s “hate speech” and “the promotion of racial hatred” and is, in places like the EU and Canada, illegal. You cannot have “partial free speech” - just like you cannot have “partial freedom of association.” There are some freedoms which are not divisable, in that they lose their meaning in the fractional sense. And no, laws against “libel and slander” (which are probably overdone anyway) do not apply, since whites are punished for speaking things that are objectively true. And no, “yelling fire in a movie theater” does not apply either, since that is an act of vandalism without any social or political content; in contrast, speaking about racial differences, or against immigration, or in favor of genetic interests is enriched in social and political content and therefore should be “protected speech” in any society that maintains the pretense it is a “democracy” and has “freedoms.”
“Yet, by implication, you don’t recognize the right of groups to do the same thing. That’s odd. Or, am I misreading you? “
I noticed that as well. He’s just desperately trying to find a formula that would “prove” that he’s not violating our rights of free association, while at the same time ensuring a supply of East Asian females for his tastes. Of course, separate polities cannot be countenanced, because the masters at GNXP have already pronounced their displeasure with that option.
“If GC truly believes the solution is too hard and the cost unacceptable, then why does he bother with it? IMO, the answer is he’s a hobbyist.”
No, GT, he’s against - or at least, was against - everything that MR believes in. Take a look at GC circa 2003:
http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/000756.html
(hopefully that was formatted correctly to avoid the non-"angry" and non-"hateful" porn links)
It’s interesting to compare GC version 2003 with GC version 2007. The former, looking at the comments of the latter, would likely have deemed those comments as
“paranoid” and “delusional.”
GC2007 is much closer to the truth than GC2003, but he still can’t bring himself to admit two things:
1. He was wrong in 2003, and pessimistic guys like Oleg were correct, and
2. More importantly, given his 2007 diagnosis, whites are well justified to be “angry” and “hateful” and, indeed, are perfectly justified in pursuing racial radicalism and racial nationalism. If “America” is “finished” and if the most Europe can hope for is that “some” states “may” survive, if the West is “finished” - and “reform” is useless - where does that leave the peoples of the West?
Instead of blithely stating “go east young man”, how about honestly admitting that if the situation is as bad as is stated then the populations of the West - who cannot, will not, and do not wish to, “go east” - need to overcome the whole multiculturalist, multiracialist apparatus? That’s not saying that they actually will do so, but at least admit that they *should* do so, and would be amply justified if they did?
No, instead we get barlow telling us to import even more racial aliens, we have David B telling us “life has no interests” and we have Razib with his “population projections” that “Eurabia” won’t be that bad (is he still doing that?). The GNXPers and their fellow travellers are still preaching the doctrines of aracial worldviews and that things aren’t that bad - while GC, who was the foremost in also preaching that 4 years ago, is now telling us that the West *is* doomed, and is doomed even if all immigration were to be shut off today.
Posted by larch on December 28, 2007, 10:52 AM | #
Repeat the GNXP mantra: “things aren’t that bad, and whites don’t have much to complain about”:
http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2007/12/an_ambassador_w.php
Don’t worry too much about it. Since “life has no interests” and the most important things are “Mahler and toffee”, what difference does it make if Europe becomes a mix of Africa, South Asia, the Middle East, and East Asia, or if America becomes a Negro-Mestizo majority nation?
Or, if you do worry, then just emigrate to Hong Kong. After all, 700 million or so odd whites from Europe and America will just migrate there, claiming to be “skilled immigrants.” The Chinese, who kicked out all the British workers (skilled or not) from Hong Kong after the takeover, surely would love that possibility.
Posted by larch on December 28, 2007, 05:06 PM | #
On GNXP, birch barlow has written the following:
“The other big issue with drugs and alcohol is that for those susceptible, they tend to take over a person’s entire life and thinking. When I do drugs, it usually begins to take precedence over everything else, which causes a lot of problems. This is not to say that drugs aren’t loads of fun, or even that they aren’t valuable. But anyone who has depression issues should really try antidepressants. I had to try 5 over a period of nearly 3 years before I found the 6th one (Cymbalta) that’s actually worth a damn for me. Note that mixing antidepressants with recreational drugs can be dangerous; though in my personal experience Cymbalta has reduced (street) drug cravings and stereotypical “addict” like behavior and thinking while not causing any negative interaction effects.”
Of particular importance:
“When I do drugs, it usually begins to take precedence over everything else, which causes a lot of problems. This is not to say that drugs aren’t loads of fun...”
and
“...try antidepressants. I had to try 5 over a period of nearly 3 years before I found the 6th one (Cymbalta) that’s actually worth a damn for me.”
and
“...in my personal experience Cymbalta has reduced (street) drug cravings and stereotypical “addict” like behavior...”
Hmmm. A self-admitted drug user who has taken Cymbalta, which he notes reduces “street drug cravings” and “stereotypical addict like behavior” is the same person who supports East Asian immigration in part because be likes East Asian women and how dare anyone get in the way of his personal pleasure.
I see. Interesting. Is this the sort of “freedoms” that we are to “enjoy,” while being denied freedom of association.
No doubt as well that there are Asiatics out there who are not only happy to see white guys advocating for Asian immigration, but also removing themselves from competition through drug abuse.
Connect the dots....
Posted by birch barlow on December 28, 2007, 11:29 PM | #
Time to admit (my) defeat
I have gone to far in flaunting my hedonism, not only at this site and the web but in my life in general. Though I don’t think race relations are necessarily as dire as argued on this site, the idea that things will be peachy if we stop low-IQ immigration is blindly Utopian, and overly idealistic and romantic. The first fact--I will get to the downsides of Asians later--is that, as a group, blacks and Hispanics are inferior in the traits that count. The only saving grace is that there are *some* blacks and Hispanics who do possess the kinds of traits that maintain and even build civilization, that is there some blacks and Hispanics who are equal or superior to the average white, and a few who are much superior to the average white.
As an example, I think this clip from South Park is a riot.
Kid (giving report on Asian culture): Asian culture has plagued this fragile earth for many years. We must end it.
Teacher: Excellent, A-
But just try inserting “black” or “Hispanic.” The PC people of course would be outraged. But anti-PC people probably would see it as true but too serious and horrific to be funny. As for Muslims, a minority are decent, but Islam is a fundamentally corrupt religion. To be a “good” or “true” Muslim in the sense that Bible Belters are stereotypically “good” Christians is to be unspeakably evil and destructive. The only hope is that the low IQ black and Hispanic population will not reach a critical mass, and that there won’t be too much strife between amongst the multiracial cognitive elite.
It’s all well and good to believe that people are basically decent and everything will be OK. But that’s not the case. For example, it is a fact that abuse of chemicals all too often destroys the life of not only the chemical user, but those around him. “Recreational” drugs can easily take over a person’s life at the expense of everything else, and there’s no way of knowing until you try and get burned. Even those who think they didn’t get burned, or didn’t get burned in any important way should realize that they have had to compromise the other aspects of their lives to do drugs, at least to an extent. Likewise, a person living in a society with an average IQ of 125 made up of the same race will, on average, have better personal relationships than a person in a multiracial society with an average IQ of 125. It’s easy to say that those who oppose things I find pleasurable or important in my life are stupid a--holes, but this kind of thinking should ring alarm bells in any sane person. Believing that “I just need to work and suffer enough to support and maintain my pleasures” is incredibly juvenile and destructive.
In addition to being a means of status seeking and competitive altruism, multiculturalism is also a kind of codependency. People want to believe that they are good, that they can help, that the downtrodden are noble but very unlucky. Thinking of large groups of your fellow citizens as difficult, worthless, harmful, and dangerous is uncomfortable and very scary. For people in high IQ diverse environments like myself, it is even scarier to think that race is a divider even amongst the cognitive elite...the thought that I may be more at ease and more easily make friendships with whites, is unpleasant. Worse yet is the thought that other people, both white and nonwhite, tend to feel more at ease with and more easily make friendships with those of the same race.
As for the obsession of myself and other white males with East Asian women, I tend to think that it is in large part because my own race and culture has been so battered in the media and in the schools, in combination with my lack of self-confidence, self-respect, and sense of self-worth (probably from genetically inherited depression and anxiety). I have been constantly told “whites suck!” for my whole life. I was only born in 1984, by which time PC madness was already entrenched. Generally being a realist and practically minded person, I found it hard to “celebrate” or look up to poor, crime prone blacks and Hispanics. But Asians...they’re non-white *and* they’re smart and superior--as Cartman from South Park would say, “Sweeeeeet!”
My Asiaphilia is too deep-seated to change, but it is nothing to be proud of. Just like with gays, I will have to get my jollies, and I will see those who burst in anger over it as bad people, but to revel in Asiaphilia is incredibly perverse. I should follow Scrooby’s advice and have fun with Asian women on my own time, rather than advocating hordes of them to come to the USA. Adding racial differences to sex differences and individual differences in the dating/mating world is a good way to weaken already fragile romantic ties between men and women. All other things being equal, interracial marriage is a bad idea. If the West re-asserts itself, and becomes proud of its European heritage (yes non-Europeans can contribute, but historically the West=whites), maybe interracial marriage, particularly of the white-Asian variety, will decrease.
Yeah, my sobering (pardon the pun) was thanks in large part to Godless and your link to him. But it also has to do with recent events in my life. I went off the deep end because I so desperately want to believe that the things that please me are all-around good.
If you ask why I am such a follower of godless, I will explain. When I first read his work, I found his thinking very much in sync with my own. I consider GC to be a friend. Moreover, Godless seems smarter, happier, more worldly, more disciplined, and less put off by “boring details” than me. My admiration of godless can be summarized as being him being almost identically like-minded, but more willing and able to do real footwork than me. Yeah, godless has influenced me, but he couldn’t have influenced me as much as he had if he did not think so much like I did when I first read his writings.
To close, I want to say that I am not writing this to gain some sort of favor amongst the MR crowd...you probably think I am a coward whose line of thinking changes as soon as it gets me in hot water, or that I am simply a hedonist mugged by reality.
Posted by danielj on December 28, 2007, 11:40 PM | #
Lay off the cocaine.
I liked it too Birch.
Lay off the Asians.
I liked them too.
Do not engage in destructive behaviors.
Very simple.
Eat right, exercise, disengage from the current system and read lots of the right books.
Very simple.
Posted by skeptical on December 29, 2007, 12:24 AM | #
Birch,
I was only born in 1984, by which time PC madness was already entrenched. Generally being a realist and practically minded person, I found it hard to “celebrate” or look up to poor, crime prone blacks and Hispanics. But Asians...they’re non-white *and* they’re smart and superior--as Cartman from South Park would say, “Sweeeeeet!”
If East Asians are so superior why are they leaving their own countries to come to Western ones? Alternatively, why haven’t East Asians made countries of their own at least as attractive (for immigrants) as Western ones?
From my experience the East Asian has the benefit of being relatively disciplined, obedient, and mechanically intelligent. But those attributes alone do not make great countries.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 29, 2007, 01:17 AM | #
That was a brave post, Birch (assuming it was you, not some prankster). I’m sure I’m far from alone in respecting you more for it. Good luck in getting things better-sorted-out in your own mind. Looks like you’re off to a good start. You’re young yet, just beginning. Just keep being honest with yourself and others. And as you’ve obviously already realized, abusing drugs isn’t the answer to depression or low self-esteem. The sooner you turn back out of that blind alley the better for yourself and for everyone.
Posted by birch barlow on December 29, 2007, 02:03 AM | #
Lay off the cocaine.
I liked it too Birch.
Lay off the Asians.
I liked them too.
Do not engage in destructive behaviors.
Very simple.
Eat right, exercise, disengage from the current system and read lots of the right books.
Very simple.
The problem is, that by age 23, a person’s sex drive is pretty much hardwired (and btw, I’ve barely done coke...mostly Robitussin “DM” (dextromethorphan aka DXM is the active ingredient), Vicodin (hydrocodone), pot, and booze...You may ask, OTC and Rx meds????? Yes I am a sick puppy). This may sound hypocritical since I most certainly still desire East Asians, but I think the best “solution” to interracial dating/hooking up and especially marriage is to teach your children to be proud of, or at the very least not disgusted by, their heritage (a proud white person may have a “fling” with an Asian or other nonwhite, but ultimately would probably not want to marry that person).
While I don’t think interracial marriage and high IQ non-white immigration are very big problems compared to say, the burgeoning of the low IQ underclass and the elderly (nothing against the elderly, or low IQ people for that matter, but these are very serious social problems). The schools and media may be hard to change, but parents can still influence their children, and adults can influence their peers (though this can be risky). I also still believe that the benefit of high IQ nonwhite immigrants outweighs the increased racial and cultural divisions, but such immigration is far from essential, and could be harmful, especially in the present environment where the powerful get Asian and other high IQ nonwhites to believe their interests lie with with the black and Hispanic underclass and against whites. As long as this “united front” exists, high IQ nonwhite immigration, not to mention Jews, will have a major downside (not to mention the decreased social cohesion, at least relative to IQ and other social capital traits, that results from a more diverse society).
If East Asians are so superior why are they leaving their own countries to come to Western ones? Alternatively, why haven’t East Asians made countries of their own at least as attractive (for immigrants) as Western ones?
From my experience the East Asian has the benefit of being relatively disciplined, obedient, and mechanically intelligent. But those attributes alone do not make great countries.
It has been my belief that East Asians have not risen above Europeans because of geography, history, and pure chance. I still believe this to be true. But the days of getting huffy and puffy (except maybe for show at the workplace or in front an Asian girlfriend [or really, any girlfriend]) over statements like the one quoted below are over.
[T]he civilization that we as whites created in Europe and America could not have developed apart from the genetic endowments of the creating people, nor is there any reason to believe that the civilization can be successfully transmitted to a different people.
I do not currently accept Sam Francis’ above statement as true, but I most certainly don’t reject it out of hand either.
Posted by birch barlow on December 29, 2007, 02:05 AM | #
Ooops...I messed up the italics. This should all be italics:
If East Asians are so superior why are they leaving their own countries to come to Western ones? Alternatively, why haven’t East Asians made countries of their own at least as attractive (for immigrants) as Western ones?
From my experience the East Asian has the benefit of being relatively disciplined, obedient, and mechanically intelligent. But those attributes alone do not make great countries.
Posted by onlooker on December 29, 2007, 02:12 AM | #
birch barlow,
I really think you should take the advice of the sometimes irascible, but always avuncular, Fred Scrooby.
Posted by birch barlow on December 29, 2007, 02:14 AM | #
I will also add that while serving base desires may be fun, and in some cases necessary or unavoidable (see Derbyshire re:Don Quixote vs. Sancho Panza), it is incredibly stupid to think “if it feels good and doesn’t hurt anyone (or at least doesn’t seem to...), it IS good.”
I’m not very biblically literate, and am barely religious. But I believe the Bible says something to the effect that “It’s bad to sin, but you can be forgiven; however it is MUCH MUCH worse to *revel* in sin.” I think there is a lot of wisdom to that. This may sound like an endorsement of hypocrisy, but its not. Screaming “hypocrisy” is just a person’s excuse to f*** up (that guy says it’s bad and does it anyway, so I should just say f*** it, and do the bad thing, and convince myself it is good). Better to slip, or realize that you have a vice, than to ennoble it, grow it, and revel in it.
Posted by skeptical on December 29, 2007, 03:24 AM | #
birch
The problem is, that by age 23, a person’s sex drive is pretty much hardwired…
Ha!
Very little is hardwired at the age of 23. As you get older you’ll find out just how drastically people can change over the course of their lives.
It has been my belief that East Asians have not risen above Europeans because of geography, history, and pure chance. I still believe this to be true. But the days of getting huffy and puffy (except maybe for show at the workplace or in front an Asian girlfriend [or really, any girlfriend]) over statements like the one quoted below are over.
The civilization that we as whites created in Europe and America could not have developed apart from the genetic endowments of the creating people, nor is there any reason to believe that the civilization can be successfully transmitted to a different people.
So, in other words, you are willing to admit the possibility that the success and grandeur of Western [White] civilization could have alternatively arisen under the basis of (say) East Asian genetic material? That seems like a strong statement to me.
Towards that end, have you ever been to an Asian country?
Posted by birch barlow on December 29, 2007, 05:48 AM | #
So, in other words, you are willing to admit the possibility that the success and grandeur of Western [White] civilization could have alternatively arisen under the basis of (say) East Asian genetic material? That seems like a strong statement to me.
I’m sorry, but the romantic idealist in me says that must be true.
Now if ask me, would I want to be able to transfer to another “quantum reality” in which Europeans were replaced with East Asians, and where, supposedly Western culture would have arisen but only even better than with Euros? No. In this regard I’m as bad as the limousine leftists and pseudo-righties. I desperately want to believe in that sort of syrupy idealism, but I wouldn’t want to put my money where my mouth is, and I’m glad I can’t. Now as the scenario applies to the West today in the form of allowing Asian and other high-IQ nonwhite immigration, there is some difference. Western culture is already established. Even if Asians and high-IQ Africans and Amerinds would not have been able to build Western civilization, they still may be able to contribute to a majority-white societies. Though as I said I still have misgivings about such immigration, and believe that Europe should have the right to stay European.
Posted by skeptical on December 29, 2007, 06:20 AM | #
birch,
I’m sorry, but the romantic idealist in me says that must be true.
Well, at least you admit that it is the “romantic idealist” in you which speaks this way.
…
Western culture is already established.
...
And can be similarly tossed aside (concomitant to a demographic transformation). Don’t assume for a moment that our precious Western civilization will survive (in any recognizable form) the kind of race-replacement MR contributors harp on. Nothing is certain nor immutable. And before you cast aside this notion meditate on the American negro’s drastic change in status (to borrow a phrase from Scimitar).
What was once a truly Western civilization will continue to evolve (as all societies must) and if our countries are no longer populated by [White] Westerners then it can be certain that it will evolve in non-White racially alien ways. As an old man you will certainly not be able to recognize (or even call home) the place of your birth if the struggle for the preservation of Western man isn’t won.
On a concluding not, I certainly appreciate your candor in this exchange and wish you the best as you continue to grow and develop in the nihilistic postmodern abyss we accidentally confuse for civilization.
Posted by larch on December 29, 2007, 10:09 AM | #
“(assuming it was you, not some prankster).”
That was my first thought as well, but, apparently, the comments are real.
“"That was a brave post, Birch”
I’ll admit that, although I’m still annoyed over the GNXP “virus” incident.
That was some turnaround in thought. Not complete, but something. That’s the first sign I’ve seen that reading a blog can actually accomplish something in changing an individual’s mind - that is, change it for the better.
As much as this turnabout can be viewed as positive, a pessimist such as myself would like to concentrate on the negative for a moment:
“If you ask why I am such a follower of godless, I will explain. When I first read his work, I found his thinking very much in sync with my own. I consider GC to be a friend. Moreover, Godless seems smarter, happier, more worldly, more disciplined, and less put off by “boring details” than me. My admiration of godless can be summarized as being him being almost identically like-minded, but more willing and able to do real footwork than me. Yeah, godless has influenced me, but he couldn’t have influenced me as much as he had if he did not think so much like I did when I first read his writings.”
People from GNXP have mocked us in the past for asserting that white participants of that blog sometimes behave as extended phenotypes of Razib and GC. Here we have a behavioral description which sounds very much like the extended phenotype. I will give credit to GC2007 for being more honest about the racial situation, which has allowed a person like barlow to reevaluate certain things (*). But version 2007 should admit error with respect to the diatribes of version 2003.
*The problem here is if GC2008 decides to return to the ideals of 2003, rather than 2007. Will those who admire him also alter their viewpoints to follow? It’s not a good idea to have a “guru.” Yes, if someone makes an important contribution, digest it and ponder it and, if it sounds reasonable, incorporate it, but don’t “admire” someone in the sense of “hero worship.” In the end, it’s about ideas, not personalities.
Posted by larch on December 29, 2007, 10:21 AM | #
On an only partially unrelated issue, Auster has been going off the deep end recently about “anti-semitism;” the latest of his “anti-semites are souls in the depths of hell” diatribes is here:
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/009553.html
It’s stunning that such an intelligent man as Lawrence Auster has such a blind spot with respect to this question. Ad hominem, nutty emotion-laden comments about “hell”, strawmen - all are grist for the mill for him on this topic. He is unable to actually objectively sit down and carefully answer the actual points made by the “anti-semites.” For all that Auster dislikes the MacDonaldite theory, his own behavior bolsters it. It seems like self-deception is going on there.
Needless to say, Auster’s constant harping against Darwinism is boring as well.
Posted by Guessedworker on December 29, 2007, 11:48 AM | #
Larry is in conflict with his Jewish soul (not to mention EGI). It is not unusual for emotionally conflicted people, regardless of their intellectual endowments, to re-arrange their intellectual or idelogical model of the world to give an appearance of resolution. This is also the modus operandum of many personally conflicted white liberals. Politics is just one field in which the conflict can be safely externalised, and the negatives exported to a third party.
Larry exports his psychological negatives to “the far white”, to Jared Taylor, me, Alex Linder ... anyone will do. In the process he denies us our humanity, and reduces us to hate cyphers, the better to serve as carriers for his projection.
It is a personal tragedy for him and a nuisance for us.
Posted by Guessedworker on December 29, 2007, 12:06 PM | #
I will also gladly applaud birch barlow’s honesty, which I think is one of the more remarkable things to have been posted on this site.
I hope that now he thinks hard on Fred’s advice - and, especially, on those last words of JW’s. This battle we fight is indeed one of ideas, not personalities. Birch will help himself if he can detach personality issues - meaning, really, his own, but also his admiration for GC - from the arguments for and against the survival of European Man. If, as a general principle, he can see that survival is a moral, natural and ultimate interest, and all the rest - the appeals to Western cultural continuity in the hands of Asians, to a race-blind productivity, prosperity, etc - work against that, then he is “getting there”.
Birch, to a greater or lesser extent all of us have been immersed in the postmodern test-tube - not through any fault of our own, of course. It’s a hell of a task, but it’s also a fine thing to climb out of it. If that sounds condescending, I can’t apologise. It is as it is. Like it or not, you are a prodigal son.
Posted by danielj on December 29, 2007, 01:01 PM | #
The problem is, that by age 23, a person’s sex drive is pretty much hardwired
I am not sure where you have gotten this idea and would like to see some sources.
I’ve been through a lot of different sexual phases and escapades in my life and am grateful to be disease free and well adjusted now. However, this (hopefully final and lasting transformation) did not start until two years ago at the age of 22.
(and btw, I’ve barely done coke...mostly Robitussin “DM” (dextromethorphan aka DXM is the active ingredient), Vicodin (hydrocodone), pot, and booze...You may ask, OTC and Rx meds????? Yes I am a sick puppy).
For indulging in the consumption of synthetic drugs I can only sympathize but also state that I don’t really think there is anything that wrong with small amounts of recreational drug use of the “natural” varieties. I don’t understand why you are so stuck on that as the barometer of your morality.
I was more of an ‘upper’ fiend than the ‘downers’ you seem to enjoy but I imagine developing the necessary fortitude to kick the bad habit involves the same qualities and characters and therefore I offer this a of wisdom. After you have given up the friends and situations in your life where the drugs are easily available most of the desire to do them goes away.
This may sound hypocritical since I most certainly still desire East Asians, but I think the best “solution” to interracial dating/hooking up and especially marriage is to teach your children to be proud of, or at the very least not disgusted by, their heritage (a proud white person may have a “fling” with an Asian or other nonwhite, but ultimately would probably not want to marry that person).
No one is in charge of their desires! It is not “hypocritical” to have desires that one does not seek to fulfill or tendencies to certain behaviors that one actively suppresses. Whatever this trait is, it is not hypocrisy. It is in fact the opposite and it is called, in the parlance of our times, practicing what you preach.
Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 29, 2007, 02:35 PM | #
A minor point, but I’ll throw it in: my sense is it’s counterproductive to say “doing” drugs instead of “taking” drugs, and it’s counterproductive to say “dealing” drugs instead of “selling” drugs (or “peddling” them or “trafficking in” them). “Doing drugs” and “dealing drugs” (instead of, respectively, “taking drugs” and “peddling or selling drugs") are particular “in-crowd” styles of speaking about drug-taking which are intended unmistakably to convey subtle sympathy for the wrongdoing, and were originally deliberately promoted by the degenerate-symp media (largely Jewish) precisely for the purpose of popularizing drug-taking. Adopting those ways of speaking about drugs sort of advertises sympathy for the activity, solidarity with it. In my view if you adopt those styles of speaking — “So-and-so did cocaine” (instead of took cocaine or used cocaine) or “That guy used to deal drugs” (instead of used to sell drugs) — you risk helping the wrong side, however slightly. I for one always strictly avoid those two post-’60s drug-friendly stylistic innovations.
Posted by birch barlow on December 29, 2007, 09:01 PM | #
Larry exports his psychological negatives to “the far white”, to Jared Taylor, me, Alex Linder ... anyone will do. In the process he denies us our humanity, and reduces us to hate cyphers, the better to serve as carriers for his projection.
It is a personal tragedy for him and a nuisance for us.
The problem for everyone from Godless to Auster to Salier to myself is that it is so fun, easy, and emotionally satisfying to tromp on those who are any farther to the pro-human biodiversity extreme than we are. It also wins us status points in our own minds too..."well yeah, my views aren’t terribly respectable, but at least they’re more respectable than those guys‘ views. I can handle reality without become a raving racist.” And yes I wouldn’t deny out of hand that ethnicity plays some role for Godless, Auster, Sailer (I believe one of his biological parents is Jewish), and the extended phenotype idea to people like myself. As an aside, I wouldn’t mind if someone here expanded on the extended phenotype idea more. From my google searches, it seems to be mostly about how an organisms genes affect its environment...how exactly am I an extended phenotype of Godless, Sailer, attractive East Asian women, etc. I mean it seems hard to say that the traits of these people evolved specifically to control the weak-minded, depressed, insecure people of the world...how could East Asian genes evolve to dominate insecure white males* by making Asians smart and their females attractive, for example? Maybe I am asking the wrong questions. But I would be interested to hear an explanation.
*And there is evidence that N. Europeans in particular are especially vulnerable in the sense of being, on average, more shy, insecure, and overly concerned about the wants and needs of others than other groups are. Also N. Europeans are more susceptible to alcoholism and (I believe) other chemical addictions than other Eurasians, and probably more susceptible to addictions and object/idol worship in general, whether that idol be alcohol/drugs, other people in general, or anything that helps to melt away a person’s sense of insecurity. Also, there seems to be a view of people in general that Nordic (including Celtic/Anglo/German) traits tend to be more innocent, weak, feminine, vulnerable, and recessive. I think there’s something to that.
Posted by larch on December 29, 2007, 09:58 PM | #
I would say that “A” is an extended phenotype of “B” in the sense described here, if:
1. A behaves in a manner to boost B’s genetic interests at the expense of A’s own (genetic and otherwise) interests, and
2. This behavior of A can be reasonably seen as being significantly influenced - directly or indirectly - by some aspect of B.
There’s no reason to start speculating if this property of “B” is somehow “evolved” and in what manner. That’s the GNXP obsession to conflate “what” arguments into “how” and “why” arguments.
It may well be that these effects of B are some “side effect” that has not been “evolved” for this “purpose.”
Posted by Desmond Jones on December 29, 2007, 11:02 PM | #
Auster’s anti-Darwinism/anti-semitism are related. Accepting evolutionary theory gives credence to a Jewish evolutionary strategy. The existence of a Jewish evolutionary strategy means that Auster’s assertion that Jews will respond to a reasoned argument, by a assertive non-Jewish host, to change their maladaptive/destructive behaviour, significantly less likely.
Posted by larch on December 29, 2007, 11:24 PM | #
Auster’s “solution”:
“To boil down the elements of this Christian-Jewish entente to the simplest terms: Christians must accept Jews as the minority, and Jews must accept Christians as the majority. “
Interesting. “Christians”, and not “white gentiles.” Thus, if America becomes a Christian mestizo majority nation, that would be an acceptable outcome that Jews can and “must accept?”
What about those white gentiles who are not “Christian” in the religious sense. Do they have the obligation that they “must” accept “Jews as the minority?”
Posted by larch on December 29, 2007, 11:35 PM | #
I think it is worthwhile to read the following in its entirety:
Posted by bleh on December 29, 2007, 11:38 PM | #
*And there is evidence that N. Europeans in particular are especially vulnerable in the sense of being, on average, more shy, insecure, and overly concerned about the wants and needs of others than other groups are.
What evidence do you have in mind?
I’m aware of studies showing blue-eyed children are more shy than their brown-eyed counterparts, but these studies are presumably detecting a differences between racially similar Northern Europeans (the studies I’ve seen deal only with white children and have been done in areas where most whites are presumably Northern European), not between ethnicities. And I’m aware of no studies on shyness and eye color in adults.
Also N. Europeans are more susceptible to alcoholism and (I believe) other chemical addictions than other Eurasians, and probably more susceptible to addictions and object/idol worship in general, whether that idol be alcohol/drugs, other people in general, or anything that helps to melt away a person’s sense of insecurity.
Again, I’d like to see your evidence.
The major variants shown to be related to between-group differences in alcoholism directly relate to alcohol metabolism. Mongoloids and Middle-Easterners tend to become alcoholics less frequently because many can’t drink excessively without becoming physically ill—not due to any general reduction in addictive behavior.
As for DRD2:
1) I believe some researchers deny DRD2 variation plays any role in alcoholism. Researchers claim effects for DRD2 on all sorts of behaviors, but results aren’t always replicated.
2) Where an effect is claimed, it is relatively small.
3) Northern Europeans do not have elevated levels of the A1 allele relative to “other Eurasians”. Nor does the Chinese experience with opium do much for your case.
I suspect Northern Europeans may have an inherently greater tendency to value objectivity and individualism than members of other groups. But I doubt they are “vulnerable” in any of the senses you mention.
Also, there seems to be a view of people in general that Nordic (including Celtic/Anglo/German) traits tend to be more innocent, weak, feminine, vulnerable, and recessive. I think there’s something to that.
At least through the 1930s, the masculine ideal was blond in much of the West (this according to Joanna Pitman). Hollywood has heavily promoted the blond man as villain and/or effeminate and has preferred to cast dark-haired (though still typically Northern European) men as heroes and romantic leads. But I’m not sure how much this idea has taken with the general public.
There’s a general tendency among humans to view traits characteristic of the in-group as positive, and traits associated with out-groups as negative. So it would hardly be surprising if nonwhites believed Northern Europeans were “weak”, etc. That said, I don’t think there is any such general belief in America. It’s pretty obviously false since Northern European men are on average bigger/stronger than men from other groups. Do Asian women view white men as “feminine”? Is squeaky-voiced, skinny-fat razib a paragon of masculinity? Woody Allen?
Blacks are widely promoted as more masculine than whites, and this belief may have more traction among the general public. It seems to be especially popular among Jews, who view themselves as less athletic, less physically-attractive, less masculine than white men and wish to bring white men down a notch, as well as among blacks themselves. But this again goes against your assertion that there is a “general” belief Northern Europeans are “feminine”.
Posted by bleh on December 29, 2007, 11:55 PM | #
“It seems to be especially popular among Jews, who view themselves as less athletic, less physically-attractive, less masculine than white men and wish to bring white men down a notch . . .”
Add effeminate Bangladeshis with interracial-porn fetishes to that.
Posted by Desmond Jones on December 30, 2007, 01:39 AM | #
Re: the Auster thread, the “Tanstaafl"/ “Schutzstaffel” bit is simply hilarious.
Somehow it seems that “Tanstaafl” was just hoping that someone would notice that “Tanstaafl” rhymes with “Schutzstaffel.”
Schutzstaffel is, of course, also known as the SS.
Posted by birch barlow on December 30, 2007, 01:46 AM | #
Re: Nordics
I did not mean to make any definitive points w.r.t. those of Northern European descent, in fact my posts here have been largely stream of consciousness. I have a lot of thoughts coming to my head and feel like I should write them down and express them. However, I would like to say that it seems that at a bare minimum Nordic *women* are more desired than Nordic men.
I’ll admit this is definitely a two-way street, but I think that railing against East and South Asians, Jews, and high-IQ/generally superior blacks and Hispanics is a waste of time. I’m not going back on saying that there are downsides with these groups, only that in the present political climate, these groups are far down the list of negatives/potential negatives for the West. Moreover, GNXP-Sailer-Auster types like myself have much bigger worries than white nationalists.
I think the only fair criticism of white nationalists--one that is not rooted in South Asian, East Asian, or Jewish ethnic interests, or whites such as myself enamored with and psychologically invested in “model minorities,” i.e. any non-European who could fairly be perceived as “superior"--is that white nationalism is so far beyond the pale in the mainstream, so politically suicidal, that race/IQ/genetic realism will be even more marginalized than it already is. Ideally, in a political sense, I believe a spokesperson for the race/IQ/genetic realism side should be non-white (at the very least Jewish) and less importantly, but probably still a plus, female. Also I think it’s politically best to knock those in power, particularly middle age to old white men like George W. Bush, Ted Kennedy, et al. For example, push ideas like Bush and Kennedy are using open borders as a battering ram for their own selfish interests, white limousine liberals don’t give a s--- about underclass crime because they can insulate themselves from it while at the same time looking compassionate towards the underclass, etc. This helps gain the “speaking truth to power” angle; who doesn’t think that Bush, Kennedy, Kerry, Reid, Pelosi, etc have more wealth and power than they should?
Posted by bleh on December 30, 2007, 03:13 AM | #
However, I would like to say that it seems that at a bare minimum Nordic *women* are more desired than Nordic men.
I don’t see the point of this comparison. Rank women vs. women and men vs. men, if that’s what you want to do. Anyway, men tend to place a higher value on physical characteristics than women when choosing mates, so the comparison is not valid.
I’ll admit this is definitely a two-way street, but I think that railing against East and South Asians, Jews, and high-IQ/generally superior blacks and Hispanics is a waste of time. . . . these groups are far down the list of negatives/potential negatives for the West.
I don’t see how promoting greater understanding of inter-ethnic group dynamics could be considered as a waste of time, but I guess that depends on what your goals are. What is your ultimate objective?
Elites infatuated with cheap labor are part of the problem, but only part. Aracial white elites should be attacked where warranted, but if you think ignoring the ethnic factors shaping immigration policy will prevent the ADL from releasing statements like this, you are sorely mistaken.
If Jews have been instrumental in creating and perpetuating our present immigration disaster, why must we ignore the Jewish role? If there are sound tactical reasons for doing so in public, so be it. But why come to a venue like MR and tell us we’re “wasting our time”?
Likewise, I see no problem with using nonwhite spokespeople, if white interests are advanced. Jews have used their share of non-Jewish front men to great advantage. But, ultimately, I don’t think we’re going to get too far operating within the current structure of taboos. There are hints these taboos are already starting to wear thin. Let PC enforcers try to marginalize race realism further. They will discredit themselves as scientific evidence piles up against them. That may or may not happen. They may attempt to co-opt scientific results and shoe-horn them into a leftist framework. Saletan has already tried this at Slate, and found out his indoctrinates weren’t ready yet. Great. I think the farther science gets ahead of the current PC orthodoxy, the less-likely that orthodoxy is to survive in the long run.
Posted by birch barlow on December 30, 2007, 04:10 AM | #
I don’t see how promoting greater understanding of inter-ethnic group dynamics could be considered as a waste of time, but I guess that depends on what your goals are.
I’m saying it is a waste of time compared to the pressing issues that the West currently faces. Criticism of Godless Capitalist and other GNXPers, Steve Sailer, and Lawrence Auster may be perfectly valid. Ethnic self-interest, holier-than-thou attitudes amongst anti-racist race realists, model minority fetish, and the influence of PC on its allegedly virulent opponents are real and debate-worthy issues. But compared to the underclass and their power-grabbing exploiters, these issues are small potatoes, like worrying about the lack of higher meaning in life while one faces starvation.
Posted by bleh on December 30, 2007, 04:34 AM | #
Whites already know they don’t want to live in black or hispanic neighborhoods, or send their children to schools dominated by these groups. One doesn’t need to explain this to them. Whites don’t want to live in Asian neighborhoods, for that matter.
People are less clear on why America is being demographically transformed and how they can reverse it.
I don’t understand why you think it’s acceptable to go after “power-grabbing [white] exploiters” but not hostile ethnics. If you think the growth of the “underclass” is the immediate threat we must address, then clearly white elites are no more a direct part of the problem than Asians and Jews, and hostile ethnics are no less of an indirect cause than white “exploiters”.
Posted by Scipio Americanus on December 31, 2007, 04:44 AM | #
Regarding the impudent little troll who calls himself Birch Barlow:
I suggest those not familiar with this creature’s deep-seated animus for the West read the following Majority Rights thread in its entirety:
http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/diversity_leads_to_a_loss_of_social_capital/
Here’s a quote for the ages to keep in mind:
“In any case whitey is going down the tubes...whites are a dying breed. Live with it.”—Birch Barlow
No doubt B’nai Birch Barlow (referred to as “Birchy” henceforth) gets his kicks by gumming-up discussions (note how much of this thread has been dedicated to refuting his sophomoric remarks) while pushing his diseased neo-liberal theology of a “One World” cosmopolitan elitism in which all lesser hominoids, regardless of race, color or creed, live as “equals” while serving their technocratic masters in perpetual rut. But such prattle about “bio-diversity” and a global society dominated by economic “productivity” and the “bottom line” is nothing more than a red herring to cover up his brooding psychopathological hatred for the race and civilization he purportedly belongs.
Surely Birchy understands that the entire field of science and technology which he ostensibly worships is a product of the Western mind and our race’s Faustian spirit and not of the static-minded East Asians whom he venerates as our “betters”? And surely he knows that the best and brightest of the yellow man’s East flock to the white man’s West to study, to learn and to improve their understanding of such fields of thought that they were incapable of creating and advancing on their own?
In fact, when we speak of Western science and technology it is important to note the racial adjective that precedes these terms. Western = White. Of course, it is easy today to deny these facts given the universal dominance of Western thought which gave rise to these endeavors and was mindlessly given away to our racial adversaries but the fact still remains that without the white man, such discoveries and advances would have been impossible. As the writer Anthony Jacobs points out:
“To my mind it is self-evident that the Anglo-Saxon and kindred peoples are absolutely irreplaceable, and that without them the civilization they engendered and represent would, with the possible exception of one or two curious deviations or malformations, soon cease to exist. Let there be no mistake about this. When we speak of civilization we are referring to that which is wholly our own. There is no other civilization whatever. At best there are one or two successful foreign copyists of our civilization’s more material aspects. But there are absolutely no imitators of its moral and spiritual uniqueness, because there are no other people like the Westerners whose possession it is....Without the Westerners, even the successful material copyists of our civilization would not further nor even for long maintain that which they have copied, any more than the froth on the surface of a great river would continue to exist were the river to dry up.” (—White Man Think Again!)
To cite just one historic example, let us consider the best racial stock the East Asians have to offer: the Japanese. At the beginning of World War II, these so called “Aryans of the East” had a military and industrial capacity that was on par with that of a comparably sized Western nation. Yet within a few short years, the Japanese found themselves technologically outclassed in every field relating to the war effort. Their once vaunted “Zero” which had dominated the skies of the Pacific was obsolete and even their best pilots were no match for our worst pilots given the superiority of American aircraft design. Without the means to copy from the West, Japan’s entire military effort quickly stagnated with no significant advances being achieved and thus their war of conquest was lost. Not even their insatiable desire to die for their emperor via Kamikaze attacks could make up for their innate deficiencies.
And in terms of spiritual and moral values, there is simply no comparison at all. While Japan outwardly embraced Western cultural norms, standards and values, nevertheless it remained inwardly despotic and tyrannical at heart. Just ask the unfortunate souls who nations were occupied by the Empire of the Rising Sun and the allied soldiers who suffered so horribly as POWs. Does The Rape of Nanking and the Bataan Death March ring a bell? The Japanese claimed to be an “honorable” people but thought it not dishonorable to launch a sneak-attack on Pearl Harbor before issuing a formal declaration of war, just as they had done to the Russians at the beginning of the 20th Century, thus demonstrating that despite all of their pretenses, they were not our equals! Brutality, barbarism, treachery and savagery were the hallmarks of the Japanese throughout the Second World War—something all Westerners should never forget!
Yet despite these facts, Birchy declares that the West would economically implode and become spiritually prostrate without the influx of “high IQ” Asians to keep it afloat! LOL! Clearly this is not the case as recent history has so aptly demonstrated. To the contrary, the West was strongest when it embraced the notion of racial integrity while remaining true to its Christian and Classical traditions. But despite all of the technological transfers via “free trade” to the non-white world, it is the white man’s West which clearly remains the fountainhead of scientific and technological progress to this very day. Again, Birchy’s insipid and inane remarks constitute nothing more than a ruse on his part, especially given the fact that he gleefully cheers for our racial and cultural destruction.
Clearly, his profound antipathy towards our race takes precedence over the technological achievements which he ostensibly holds in reverence. Why? The answer lies in the fact that science and technology are ultimately manifestations of our spiritual qualities which are traced directly to our race’s soul, a soul which he hates implacably. Birchy is motivated not by love of science and technology and the material “goodies” which are mere end products of that chain of thought but hatred of the spirit and soul that ultimately gave birth to such creations—a spirit and soul that is found in our White Race.
That is why he despises and ridicules those of us who want to preserve our race with vicious taunts about how we must accept and even embrace our own demise and eventual extinction. That is why he mocks sacred concepts such as honor, duty and pride in our civilization’s accomplishments. That is why he embraces “diversity,” “South Park,” and “sex, drugs and rock & roll.” That is why he defames and slanders the names of good men found here at Majority Rights while bragging about his childish exploits on other boards.
Only a truly depraved soul revels in the liquidation of his own kind and spits on the hallowed traditions and values that brought them to greatness. Birchy is nothing more than a secular-minded nihilist driven by the worst emotion known to man: ENVY. He is driven by hatred of the West not for its flaws, which it certainly has, but for its virtues and no amount of Orwellian double-talk on his part will change this fact.
In the immortal words of Tennyson:
Envy wears the mask of Love, and, laughing sober fact to scorn,
Cries to weakest as to strongest, ‘Ye are equals, equal-born.’
Birchy is a contemptible little prig who attempts to pass himself off as a “serious” mind only to fail at his endeavors miserably. He outwardly claims to have come here to Majority Rights in the spirit of good faith seeking knowledge, understanding and dialogue and then proceeds to attack us while chuckling behind our backs on another “discussion” forum about how he successfully managed to perturb some of the board’s regular posters. Birch Barlow is a snake who speaks with a forked-tongue. He is a drug-induced degenerate, a pervert and a weakling. He is a prototypical example of the kind of biological refuse that every society invariably produces but must be flush from its system if life is to go on. Indeed, this piece of animated garbage epitomizes the term “white trash.”
The time will come when Birch Barlow and his ilk will find themselves between a rock and a hard place. Having repudiated their less successful kinfolk in favor of higher income non-whites and having actively participated in the whole-sale destruction of their own society, they will one day find themselves in “no man’s land” having been rejected by the very cosmopolitan elitists they once embraced. No doubt when that time arrives our race will experience a badly needed cleansing of the “Augean Stables” and the proverbial wheat shall be separated from the chaff. So be it! Frankly, I relish the moment when that day arrives. The sooner the better! For when it does arrive it will be traitors like Birch Barlow who will have to LIVE WITH IT!
Strength and Honor!
Scipio Americanus
Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 31, 2007, 05:13 AM | #
Scipio are you saying his apology and follow-up explanations of why he had behaved like that were insincere? It you are, who knows, you might be right, but I for one believed him.
Posted by Canada Firster on December 31, 2007, 05:42 AM | #
Ideally, in a political sense, I believe a spokesperson for the race/IQ/genetic realism side should be non-white (at the very least Jewish) and less importantly, but probably still a plus, female.
Perhaps we can extract an ambiguously semitic phenotype among our Italian WNs and use her as a “Jewish” spokesman. Two can play the crypsis game.
Posted by Scipio Americanus on December 31, 2007, 08:58 AM | #
“Scipio are you saying his apology and follow-up explanations of why he had behaved like that were insincere? It you are, who knows, you might be right, but I for one believed him.” (—Fred Scrooby)
Since when has Majority Rights become the Oprah Winfrey Show? What matters is his track record of statements over a length of time. Frankly, his remarks have been the most condescending I’ve come across in years. Please note that his supposed contrition came only after he was exposed as a drug addict, a pervert and a degenerate—something that was no surprise for me to read at all. Hats off to “Larch” for some mighty fine detective work. I also think he’s playing to your vanity while simultaneously playing the “victim card” in order to score some sympathy points. I have a younger brother who is a master of that technique and used it time and again on my parents with great success. It’s sickening to watch! Needless to say, my younger brother is still an asshole to this very day. As my very wise Grandmother (god bless her soul) used to say: “Excuses are like noses kid—everybody’s got one.” Besides, Birchy’s still babbling about his beloved Asians. It’s enough to make a grown man vomit! It’s time for Birchy to just shut the hell up and go away!
“You probably think I am a coward whose line of thinking changes as soon as it gets me in hot water, or that I am simply a hedonist mugged by reality.” (—Birch Barlow)
You damn right I do, Birchy. In fact, I think you are nothing more than a maggot subsisting on the remains of a civilization that is infinitely beyond your comprehension. Your loss to our race would be a blessing. Don’t expect any sympathy from me, dear boy, not after the sickening rhetoric you have spewed on this site. You haven’t been mugged by reality—yet. But trust me, that time will come. Whether you get your life together or not is really no concern of mine. Those who matter to me are the fine younger men and women who don’t sit around making excuses for themselves while maintaining their composure, dignity and sanity in a world gone mad. However, in the unlikely event that there is a shred of decency left in that rotted-out soul of yours, I suggest swinging by Robert Frenz’s old site for some badly needed spiritual sustenance. Robert Frenz was the great, great, great grandson of Robert E. Lee who spoke of honor, courage, loyalty, character and many other values that once made the West strong and vibrant. Start with the following essay: Females to Avoid: http://www.faem.com/edward/fleamale.htm and then proceed to the main page from there: http://www.faem.com
Birch, to a greater or lesser extent all of us have been immersed in the postmodern test-tube - not through any fault of our own, of course. It’s a hell of a task, but it’s also a fine thing to climb out of it. If that sounds condescending, I can’t apologise. It is as it is. Like it or not, you are a prodigal son. (—Guessedworker)
Guessedworker, there are millions of upstanding young men and women who don’t sink to the level of a Birch Barlow and who don’t make excuses for themselves. Indeed, they are the true Atlases who are still holding up this stinking cesspool of a world. Birch Barlow is not someone to be pitied. His earlier remarks are sickening and for you and others to now disregard them on the basis of a few statements strikes me as inversion of true morality. Besides, the prodigal son did not make excuses for himself—he accepted his own responsibility for his degraded condition and begged his father’s forgiveness. Redemption requires true change in a person and it must be demonstrated over a substantial period of time. I’ll repeat my Grandmother’s words: “Excuses are like noses kid—everybody’s got one.”
Scipio Americanus
Posted by Guessedworker on December 31, 2007, 10:29 AM | #
Scipio americanus,
A fine and combative post. But the boy is 23. He will stop taking drugs, and will look back on that part of his life with regret. He might also grow ashamed of his obviously stupid Asian fetishism and the attitudes he has adopted towards his own people. Or he might seek to bolster them with more of the same and keep it going his whole lifelong, which is something people who live in error very often do. I tend to think it will be the latter. But at least that is in the balance.
In any case, it behoves us to leave the door open. We are the believers in our people, and none who make it through that doorway are excluded from our company, even those who have lived in the most wilfull error, and in self-harm.
Posted by birch barlow on December 31, 2007, 03:05 PM | #
It’s good to see that GW, Scrooby, and even JW seem to see some good, some openness to reason in me. But that’s not really my top concern.
Ultimately what will matter for me is whether my intelligence and my values of being a net contributor, of not being part of the riff-raff, of being no better than some illegal, will win against my desires--particularly for drugs and alcohol; I don’t see nearly as much danger from Asian females, or South Park, Family Guy, House MD, 24, Married with Children, All in the Family et al. as with the dope and booze, which really have no value beyond relief and fun, like a mini-vacation.
I’ll admit also that I have a major issue of idolization and idealization (and not just of East Asians, but pretty much anything related to what I enjoy) and being a follower--my opinion is heavily influenced by those I respect and have trust in...not just GC and other members of the “Sailersphere"/Bell Curve advocates (Parapundit, VFR, Derbyshire, just to name a few), but also talk radio hosts like John and Ken, Bill Handel, Doug McIntyre, Al Rantel, academic psychologists who seem to have a realist point of view such as Martin Seligman, Csikszentmihalyi, Vallaint, and my own friends and acquaintances. Probably one thing that almost everything I have listed...from South Park to GC to Seligman, even while perhaps “maverick” in today’s political atmosphere are also heavily influenced by it as well. I’ll also admit that I spend a lot more time thinking about Asian females, popular culture like South Park and 91X/KROQ music, than my bread and butter, like my family, work, and school work (though I do enjoy many academic/intellectual topics and subjects, I find the nitty-gritty of say, organic chemistry, linear algebra, and statistical mechanics to be often quite boring).
Why am I saying all this crap? I’m not really hoping to gain sympathy, but just sort through my issues. All the hedonistic crap I enjoy can be loads of fun, but when it gets in the way of my being a productive member of society (as it has in the past), it’s a real problem.
Posted by birch barlow on December 31, 2007, 03:47 PM | #
Surely Birchy understands that the entire field of science and technology which he ostensibly worships is a product of the Western mind and our race’s Faustian spirit and not of the static-minded East Asians whom he venerates as our “betters”? And surely he knows that the best and brightest of the yellow man’s East flock to the white man’s West to study, to learn and to improve their understanding of such fields of thought that they were incapable of creating and advancing on their own?
In fact, when we speak of Western science and technology it is important to note the racial adjective that precedes these terms. Western = White. Of course, it is easy today to deny these facts given the universal dominance of Western thought which gave rise to these endeavors and was mindlessly given away to our racial adversaries but the fact still remains that without the white man, such discoveries and advances would have been impossible.
I see this as a debatable point. I would argue that the main reason East Asians are not currently ahead of Europeans is due to geography and accidents of history. For example, a few dozen people had a huge influence on America’s winning the Revolutionary War, and later on in adopting the Constitution over the Articles of Confederation...if the Brits had gotten lucky and wiped out, say, a Continental Congress, or killed Washington, history may have turned out quite differently. And the prosecution/persecution of Galileo arguably had a major chilling effect on the Scientific Revolution in southern Europe.
Now, I’m not saying that this necessarily *is* the case. I’d say my main difference from my previous thinking on this issue is that I would not shout down the converse as racist, or consider it impossible or personally unthinkable (though like I said before I might do so to impress my co-workers and boss, or an attractive female...but this is the Web, and there is no one with power over me [other than to ban me] to impress).
Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 31, 2007, 03:57 PM | #
Scipio I think Birch is showing maturity, honesty, and courage. Of course, only he can know inwardly how sincere he is being, but my sense is he deserves the benefit of the doubt. Time will tell.
Posted by Guessedworker on December 31, 2007, 06:33 PM | #
Less “me” and more “we” would be a beginning, Birch.
Posted by birch barlow on January 01, 2008, 12:47 AM | #
The question now becomes how to advance the truth and prevent the fall of Western civilization. Tactically, I am of two minds on the White Nationalism vs. Elitist Cosmopolitanism. On one hand, it seems stupid for elitist cosmopolitans like myself or even traditionalists like Auster and Buchanan to be associated in any way with white nationalism or white supremacy, because society tends to reject WN harshly. And the Stormfront types can be a liability independent of their point of view. On the other hand, offering concessions to the left and pseudo-right doesn’t seem to do much good.
I think both the “yeah I believe in THE BELL CURVE but everybody to the right of me is a stupid racist” and “it’s good and well you believe in THE BELL CURVE but your vision of multiracial cognitive elitism is just another shade of multiculturalism” are incredibly stupid points of view. A white nationalist living in a 50% nonwhite society (but where the nonwhites have an average IQ equal or greater than the white mean) is far better off than someone in Mexico Norte. Likewise, a cognitive elitist living in a 90+% white society, with many areas virtually 100% white, will be far better off than in Mexico Norte. I think both elitist cosmopolitans and WNs (and all those in between) should realize that we have common goals. For the USA, stopping unfiltered Mestizo immigration (and relatively small but incredibly destructive groups like Somali refugees) is critical...but if stemming that tide means stopping immigration period, that’s good too. Both elitist cosmopolitans and white nationalists have an interest in deporting illegals/punishing their employers, deporting legal non-citizens (esp Muslims and the low IQ) and punishing THEIR employers...a harder step but probably necessary, and paying Muslim and low IQ citizens (or if you wish, all nonwhites and those wishing to be with them) to leave.
Posted by birch barlow on January 01, 2008, 12:52 AM | #
In other words, WN and elite cosmopolitans should join where their interests are similar, and sort out the differences once the anti-hbd side is defeated. Like I said my only misgiving is that I don’t want to be associated with white nationalism, because even those sympathetic to h-bd or who COULD be sympathetic to h-bd are repelled.
Posted by birch barlow on January 01, 2008, 01:13 AM | #
As for convincing others of h-bd: yeah it can get boring, like in the quote below:
Now where was I? Ah yes. Not only am I not in the business of persuading my real life woman, I’m not in the business of persuading random people on the
internet anymore. Gave up blogging. Once in a while
I come out and stretch my legs on a comments thread.
However, there are more efficient ways of changing the world
than playing conversational whack-a-mole
with the same tired tropes ("race doesn’t exist!”, “IQ is all cultural”,
“MRI measurements prove nothing”,
“people who believe IQ is important are Nazis”,
“people who believe human intelligence influences society are reductionists”, etc.).Sometimes I just play that whack-a-mole game out of habit,
like in this thread, though it’s kind of like beating up on kindergartners
or playing a familiar video game. You know what argument is going
to be deployed and when before they do. As you say, that’s boring, so what now. “What is to be Done”, as ol’ VI Lenin would say, or “Who Whom” if you will.
The whack-a-mole game getting boring and tiresome is one reason I have posted (and stupidly posted) here. It’s more fun getting attacked from the right. But debates between WNs and Elite Cosmopolitans are largely counterproductive to the cause of the West, unless the debate somehow brings WNs and ECs closer and gives them more combined firepower against the Left.
I think GC is too pessimistic and paranoid. I have discussed h-bd/Bell Curve issues with dozens if not hundreds of people at school, at work, and in my neighborhood. If I present my POV thoughtfully (as opposed to sloppily, as sometimes happens to me particularly on blogs), people usually seem at least sympathetic, even if they aren’t convinced. They at least tend to go up on J.B.S. Haldane’s “four stages of acceptance” of a scientific theory:
1. This is worthless nonsense.
2. This is an interesting, but perverse, point of view.
3. This is true, but quite unimportant.
4. I always said so.
I have never gotten in trouble for discussing h-bd with anyone*...though notably I have never done it in front of my professors or supervisors. GC needs to let go of some of his pessimism and paranoia. He will be happier for it. I think his belief that especially attractive females do not give a damn about abstract topics, and especially abstract taboo topics, becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy because this belief causes GC to lose all his self-confidence. Yes, women are different, but not as fundamentally and radically different as GC seems to fear. It’s easy to fall into the cynical “I’ll only be accepted if I’m totally boring and phony” trap, because I’ve done it myself.
*Well, OK, Abiola threatened to sue me, and Frank McGahon revealed some of my identity (e.g. my first name and last initial, which I stupidly used to post under, and the college I used to go to).
Posted by onlooker on January 01, 2008, 02:07 AM | #
birch,
You’re 23 years old. Are you employed? Did you ever have a full time job?
Your true life’s education will begin after you are employed full time and acually have to work for a living.
Better yet, start your own bussiness and work for yourself. You’ll soon find the most demanding boss you’ll ever have, ironically, will be yourself. What I say is true, I’ve experienced it myself. If you want to succeed in this world, there is only one thing you must do...work your ass off!
Posted by birch barlow on January 01, 2008, 04:22 AM | #
I am not currently employed, but I am about to become an electrician apprentice.
Next entry: Strange Occurrence in Germany
Previous entry: White Nationalists Should Negotiate Settlement with Lakota Nationalists
Existential Issues
Of note
Recent Comments
Guessedworker commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/16/10, 09:26 AM. (go) (view)
Borvo commented in entry 'Europe's Future: Is this what "they" want?' on 03/16/10, 09:09 AM. (go) (view)
Immigration is Pollution commented in entry 'Europe's Future: Is this what "they" want?' on 03/16/10, 04:15 AM. (go) (view)
Obvious commented in entry 'Greece thwarts Barbarossa, yet again' on 03/16/10, 04:07 AM. (go) (view)
Fred Scrooby commented in entry 'A genocide in South Africa' on 03/16/10, 02:35 AM. (go) (view)
Gorboduc commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/16/10, 01:48 AM. (go) (view)
Gorboduc commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/16/10, 01:42 AM. (go) (view)
Q commented in entry 'A genocide in South Africa' on 03/16/10, 01:06 AM. (go) (view)
Brendan commented in entry 'A genocide in South Africa' on 03/16/10, 01:00 AM. (go) (view)
Guessedworker commented in entry 'Wadham and the EHRC win. The existential will go ballistic.' on 03/16/10, 12:40 AM. (go) (view)
Guessedworker commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/15/10, 11:17 PM. (go) (view)
Desmond Jones commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/15/10, 07:50 PM. (go) (view)
John commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/15/10, 06:18 PM. (go) (view)
Dan Dare commented in entry 'Wadham and the EHRC win. The existential will go ballistic.' on 03/15/10, 04:43 PM. (go) (view)
Englander commented in entry 'A genocide in South Africa' on 03/15/10, 12:03 PM. (go) (view)
MsAnnThrope commented in entry 'A genocide in South Africa' on 03/15/10, 11:17 AM. (go) (view)
Gorboduc commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/15/10, 10:02 AM. (go) (view)
Captainchaos commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/15/10, 08:09 AM. (go) (view)
John commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/15/10, 08:07 AM. (go) (view)
Guest Lurker commented in entry 'The evolution of gang violence in Australia' on 03/15/10, 07:55 AM. (go) (view)
Englander commented in entry 'It’s Official – fake money is as good as the real thing (if not better)' on 03/15/10, 02:11 AM. (go) (view)
martin_uk commented in entry 'It’s Official – fake money is as good as the real thing (if not better)' on 03/15/10, 01:47 AM. (go) (view)
andrew muhling commented in entry 'The evolution of gang violence in Australia' on 03/15/10, 12:49 AM. (go) (view)
john rackell commented in entry 'It’s Official – fake money is as good as the real thing (if not better)' on 03/15/10, 12:38 AM. (go) (view)
Guessedworker commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/14/10, 10:58 PM. (go) (view)
Wandrin commented in entry 'Wadham and the EHRC win. The existential will go ballistic.' on 03/14/10, 10:38 PM. (go) (view)
Gorboduc commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/14/10, 10:06 PM. (go) (view)
Captainchaos commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/14/10, 09:09 PM. (go) (view)
Gorboduc commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/14/10, 08:55 PM. (go) (view)
Dan Dare commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/14/10, 08:06 PM. (go) (view)
Gorboduc commented in entry 'Wadham and the EHRC win. The existential will go ballistic.' on 03/14/10, 07:48 PM. (go) (view)
John commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/14/10, 07:46 PM. (go) (view)
Gorboduc commented in entry 'Wadham and the EHRC win. The existential will go ballistic.' on 03/14/10, 07:36 PM. (go) (view)
John commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/14/10, 07:31 PM. (go) (view)
Wandrin commented in entry 'Wadham and the EHRC win. The existential will go ballistic.' on 03/14/10, 07:15 PM. (go) (view)
Recent Posts
- Apologies for the down-time
- It’s Official – fake money is as good as the real thing (if not better)
- Wadham and the EHRC win. The existential will go ballistic.
- DDR or Third Reich, which would you choose?
- Greece thwarts Barbarossa, yet again
- Europe’s Future: Is this what “they” want?
- ‘Enlightened’ Child Abuse
- My latest teleology
- The Revolution of Kai Murros
- Linda Carty, the Reprieve lie machine, and the bleeding heart of Clive Stafford Smith
- Humour and the English Disease
- True Science is Barbaric
- The New Rome; or, the United States of the World (1853)
- Cameron on Griffin and the MultiCult
- Absurd assumptions about life’s advantages
- Was It Real For You?
- ‘A Dark Intrigue…’ The Revolutions of 1848
- Pay-Back for the BNP
- The End of Teleology
- Just Add the ‘R’ Word
General News
Science News
Science Categories
All Categories
The Writers
Each author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages.
Links
Endorsement not implied.
Crime
General
- American Renaissance
- Age of Treason
- Balder
- Brussels Journal
- Civic platform
- CofCC
- Chronicles
- Crosstar
- Culture Wars
- Dissecting Leftism
- Face Right
- Fallen Freedom
- Fred on everything
- Freedom Site
- From The Wilderness
- Frontierist News
- Gates of Vienna
- God help Britain
- Hogtown Front
- I am an Englishman
- Inductivist
- iSteve
- Modern Tribalist
- National Policy Institute
- Occidental Dissent
- Occidental Quarterly
- Our Way of Life
- Oz Conservative
- ParaPundit
- The Political Cesspool
- Romanian National Vanguard
- Rusty Mason
- Renaissance Press
- Right Now magazine
- Salisbury Review
- Sam Francis Column
- Scotchfriend
- Signals From The Brink
- Spoils of War
- Snouck Hurgronje
- Songlight for Dawn
- Stop ACLU
- Tomorrow in Vinland
- Turnabout
- UK Commentators
- Viking Observer
- Western Survival
- White civil rights
Immigration
- American Patrol
- Immigration watchdog
- Immigration Watch Canada
- Limits To Growth
- Migration Watch
- Minutemen
- Numbers USA
- Private police
- Project USA
- Team America
- Vdare
Islam
Jews
- 9/11 – #1, #2
- Banking – #1, #2
- Eric Hufschmid
- Holocaust – #1, #2, #3, #4, #5
- Immigration
- Jewish deception
- Judenfrei
- Michael Delaney
- Subverted nation
- Why the Jews?
Nationalist Political Parties
- British National Party
- Front National (FR)
- Nationaldemokraterna
- Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands
- Vlaams Belang
New Right
Science
Whites in Africa