Ugho: Brown Power

Posted by Martin Hutchinson on November 04, 2005, 03:43 PM | #

Nice try, Geoff, but Argentina has an equally fruitcake government, and ther’s not a brown face among them—all Spanish and Italian by ancestry; there weren’t many Amerids, and the Argies wiped them out around 1910.

It’s not race, it’s culture —that and a helping hand from the State Department for every Marxist sleazeball who proclaims his love for the “people” and devotion to democracy.  Argentina was superbly run for about 80 years, 1860-1943, under a British-dominated oligarchy—5th richest country in the world in 1929.  Then the fools went and let in democracy, and that was the end of that.

If this summit wakes the Bush administration up to the essential futility of pouring resources into Latin America, it will have done a good job.  If they’re really mean to him, it may even help our caause on immigration.

Posted by Matra on November 04, 2005, 03:56 PM | #

But Martin, isn’t Argentina still richer than most non-white parts of Latin America despite its fruitcake governments?

Posted by Martin Hutchinson on November 04, 2005, 04:30 PM | #

Slipping down the league tables rapidly, with an extra downwards lurch in 2001-2.  Venezuela’s richer these days, because of the oil, though on a 50 year view the two countries have about the worst records outside Africa.

To be fair, I have quite a lot of time for Colombia’s Uribe, but he’s probably just a short term uptick rather than anything longer term. Chile, also a country with a small mestizo element (though larger than Argentina’s) is about to re-elect the left, thus demonstrating their commitment to economic suicide, even after Pinochet had showed them how economic development should be done.

Geoff and I would probably agree about Mexico and Brazil; I am much more bearish about both than most commentators, particulalry Mexico.

Posted by Phil on November 04, 2005, 04:33 PM | #

Martin,

Arentinian “whites” have significant Negroid and Amerind mixture. I believe JW Holliday has some interesting material on that.

Posted by Phil on November 04, 2005, 04:38 PM | #

Martin,

Socialism doesn’t explain it all. There is plenty of Socialism in places like Finland (completely homogenous), Sweden (only about 10 percent non-white) that are still very rich. In addition, most of Europe is probably “socialist” by your definition but richer than much of the rest of the world.

I think the problem in Latin America is (in addition to race) Latin political culture. Italy is a great nation but its political culture is not necessarily worthy of emulation.

Posted by Martin Hutchinson on November 04, 2005, 04:46 PM | #

Phil, absolutely. It’s perfectly possible to run an effective and quite rich country with socialism if everybody’s honest and docile, and the government makes the trains run on time.  It’s not a society one would want to live in, and its econ. performance will leave a lot to be desired, and it’s pretty intolerant of non-PC nonconformists, but it can be done. 

Latin America’s problem is political culture; their governments aren’t huge, but they’re staggeringly corrupt.  Also their social culture is divisive, not uniting, which is why Italy has worked rather better than them. The rich steal everything they can get, don’t pay their taxes, and bribe politicans when they need to. The only solution is a benign oligarchy, like Argentina 1860-1943, or an honest and capable dictator like Pinochet.  Both options are currently not on display.

Posted by Martin Hutchinson on November 04, 2005, 04:49 PM | #

One other thing: corruption is much more damaging in a society governed by wealth and “equal opportunity” like the US, and less so in a society with a strong traditional social order, whether an aritocracy or the Catholic Church. Traditional social structure, and un-American snobbery, makes Italy and Spain work better than LatAm. 

The concept of “nouveau riche” is laughable in Mexico, Argentina or the US, well understood in Spain and Italy.

Posted by Phil on November 04, 2005, 05:04 PM | #

One other thing: corruption is much more damaging in a society governed by wealth and “equal opportunity” like the US, and less so in a society with a strong traditional social order, whether an aritocracy or the Catholic Church.

That is a fascinating observation.

An intersting fact about corruption is that some of the finest works of Art in the history of man were created at a time when the Catholic church was sunk neck deep in the worst corruption in its history.

Posted by Geoff Beck on November 04, 2005, 07:11 PM | #

First,

Martin’s understanding of history and culture is often shakey, as we have witnessed many times on MR, for example these statements

- The US Constitution is based on the Iroquois confederation
- Napolean, not Lazar Kaganovich (responsible for the deaths of 7-10 million Ukrainians) is the viler character in European history.
- The praising Botswana (Africa)  over Belarus (Russia) despite these facts:

Infant mortality rate: 13.37 deaths/1,000 live births Vs. 54.58
Life expectancy at birth: total population: 68.72 years Vs. 33.87 years
HIV/AIDS - adult prevalence rate: 0.3% Vs.  37.3%

Here is good website, Martin, where you can use to check the facts:

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/

Posted by Geoff Beck on November 04, 2005, 07:13 PM | #

Secondly,

The original post wasn’t about economics or money, it was about the deep seated and real racial animosity between the Brown Mestizo mass and the dwindling Euro Power structure in both Latin America and the United States.

Martin, unfortunately has hijacked the thread and turned into into a discussion of money. The economic determinists, which I suspect Martin is, are the involuted form of a Marxist, for they believe the precise application of money can remake a man. Martin, too, is very quick to quash any sort of White self identity: “no it is just money that matters…” we might here hime say.

Again…

...expect the traitorous respectable conservatives to compromise our interests, and assist in the manufacturing of White guilt until that point when the Brown Socialists cast them aside seizing property and taking White man’s women and children.

Bank on it!

Posted by Phil on November 04, 2005, 07:16 PM | #

Martin,

I am surprised you didn’t comment on my post about the French since I asserted that the French probably have more of a spine on matters of race than Americans or contemporary Brits (pains me to say it).

Geoff,

Martin’s opinions are valuable on this blog. It is perhaps one of the strengths of this blog that there is considerable diversity of opinion here. Readers would not expect to come to this blog and see monochrome opinions.

Your arguments with Martin are always lively and fun to witness.

Posted by Phil on November 04, 2005, 07:18 PM | #

Geoff,

Addendum: Your point about “Economism” is well taken. It is a most unfortunate feature of Anglo-Saxon contemporary Conservatism that Free Market hypothesis have become the end all and be all of Conservatism.

Posted by Matthew on November 04, 2005, 07:28 PM | #

No offense, but I think Martin is a typical English Intellectual(and I suppose I shouldn’t pick on the English) who is brilliant in one area ,but can talk himself into or out of any position as long as the argument is laid out in a fashion which fits his knowledge base.

Like a true white economic “conservative”, if it is good for their personal wealth and good for elite whites then screw the uncouth scumbag council estaters or what americans call trailer trash.

After living in the UK for 10 years and dealing with posh English business executives(I am will single out posh English as I found I liked the Welsh and most Scots were just plain belligerent), I am sick of dancing around handbags with them trying to get to the point of any subject.

One thing for sure, the English chattering classes AIN’T gonna pull us out this mess, “one wouldn’t want to get one’s hands dirty”

Posted by Geoff Beck on November 04, 2005, 07:33 PM | #

> Martin’s opinions are valuable on this blog. It is perhaps one of the strengths of this blog that there is considerable diversity of opinion here.

Sure, but when he throws out falsehoods, especially when they have to do with me or the American Imperium I’m not going to ignore it.

And, of course, anytime his arguments are shown wanting there is that hinting he does…. Whisper Whisper: “anti-Semite” , “holocaust denier” , “Protocols…”.

Posted by Phil on November 04, 2005, 07:36 PM | #

Geoff,

That’s why we have you around.

Posted by Geoff Beck on November 04, 2005, 07:38 PM | #

Thanks Phil, it is good to feel wanted.

Posted by Geoff Beck on November 04, 2005, 07:45 PM | #

Matthew,

I’d like to think the English are made of sterner stuff, but we are all in a bad way.

The French better start ‘cracking heads’ or the Muslims will overthrow the state:

Posted by Phil on November 04, 2005, 07:48 PM | #

Matthew,

As a member of the supposedly “posh” English, let me attempt a defence (although it may be too feeble I fear).

The problem with the “posh” English is not that there aren’t any people left among us who harbour opinions that may be “favourable” to the “MR position”. Nay, I think it is a certain wariness about saying certain things in polite society. What is said in private is another matter, of course.

Also, do not forget that Nick Griffin is from a fairly “posh” lineage. And, he went to Cambridge. 

Let me say this: we are not going to get out of this mess unless we win some support among the bright and the capable among us. The bright and the capable may not be as enthusiastic politically as the “rank and file” but they would make an enormous difference.

Front National recently received an enormous financial boost when a very rich Frenchman gifted them a very large sum of money (can’t remember details off the top of my head but it was higher than Euro 1 million, I think).

Can you imagine what 1 Million Euros would do for the BNP? The wretched establishment would be quaking in its boots.

Posted by Phil on November 04, 2005, 08:00 PM | #

I should add one other thing, while I am at it:

Sometimes success is its own worst enemy. The English middle class (not to be confused with middle class in the economic sense as in America) assisted in the governance of the greatest and most successful Empire in the modern world. And at its zenith, there was a belief (not without some justification perhaps) that the modern world would not exist without us.

And uninterrupted success for decades or more than a century can breed a certain amount of complacency or a false sense of invincibility. I get the feeling when speaking to well to do white professionals living in comfortable leafy, quiet and very civilized neighbourhoods that they are utterly and completely insulated from the problems that are fast multiplying in this country. They are too busy making money and following their own private pursuits to care.

They will eventually take notice. The key for us is to make them do so before it is too late.

Posted by Phil on November 04, 2005, 08:33 PM | #

On a slightly different note (not more in line with the subject of this thread), things are hotting up in Buenos Aires, it seems.

Posted by Matthew on November 04, 2005, 08:52 PM | #

Phil,

I probably let my anger at our situation get the best of me.

Although it can be frustrating for a brash American like myself to business with the “posh” queens English executive, I found their business acumen and thoughtful and well spoken manner very impressive.  I can see why their creative genius has led the world in many areas because of how they embrace the eccentricities of man, which makes life interesting.

What frustrates me, as you said, is the complacency that currently holds this great mass intellect back from the issues that will destroy , what I consider to be, the cornerstone of modern, western civilization.

If the UK dies, we will not recover because it truly holds a large portion of our european soul.

I cannot ever just look at this problem in economic terms.  The knife is at our throats and the protection of our living space will decide if our ancestors fulfill their destiny.

Posted by john fitzgerald on November 04, 2005, 10:00 PM | #

Levin wrote somewhere about conservatives being even more delusional about race than liberals :http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/stalkers/ml_wrm_jls.html

Posted by Geoff Beck on November 04, 2005, 10:35 PM | #

Summit of the Americas Yahoo Slideshow: here

Posted by Martin Hutchinson on November 04, 2005, 11:26 PM | #

I can assure you guys I don’t have a false sense of my own invincibility, and have always been more the British eccentric semi-intellectual than the Master of the Universe. Also, I’m not going to be bequeathing anybody 1 million euros, at least not unless I’m SPECTACULARLY right about inflation.

I write primarily about economics/finance because that’s what I know. I’ll back my capabilities against most people—including Geoff—at some other subjects, particularly history and mathematics, but I try to avoid tangling with real pros in those areas.  At economics, at least the financial market sort, I AM a pro, fat lot of good it’s done me. You want the real thing on plush upper middle class Brits, try GW or Phil, not me.

As a point of interest Geoff, have you ever been to Belarus? (I haven’t either, but I’ve traveled opretty extensively in E Europe and the FSU.) What precisely makes you believe that their demographic statistics are accurate? Belarus is a closed society, run by a man, Alexander Lukashenko who would have fit fine into Lenin’s Politburo. Botswana is a fairly open one, albeit starting from the usual very low African base and possibly if the new genetic research is correct with poor human resources (but I can assure you, anyone intelligent has either left Belarus or been liquidated.) If I have the choice I’ll live in an African country that’s decently run and not in one of the last bastions of really evil tyranny. I quite grant you that others may differ.

Of course economics/finance isn’t the only thing that matters but it’s important, and it’s my area of expertise.  Also, good economics generally though not always goes along with other things—pre-1943 Buenos Aires was one of the most civilised places in human history.

However, I am not Economic Man—an essentially Marxist concept—if I was I would presumably be rich.

Posted by Mark Richardson on November 04, 2005, 11:27 PM | #

European populations aren’t all the same.

A homogeneous population of Spaniards isn’t going to behave exactly the same as a homogeneous population of Norwegians.

So when you look at a Latin country like Argentina it’s difficult to know how much its development has been influenced by factors of religion or political tradition, and how much by qualities inherent within the Latin races (both factors being difficult to disentangle anyway).

Posted by Martin Hutchinson on November 04, 2005, 11:36 PM | #

Mark, I agree. Also, relatively short term political factors are important.  If you’d looked at Spain and Argentina about 1930 you’d have said that Spanish culture had decayed completely at home, and could only flourish in South America. Needless to say Franco and Peron changed all that.

Posted by Matra on November 05, 2005, 01:03 AM | #

Martin Hutchinson - “If I have the choice I’ll live in an African country that’s decently run”

Could you name a couple of well run African countries?

Posted by Geoff Beck on November 05, 2005, 01:36 AM | #

Mexican Joke: Courtesy VDARE

  Jose robbed a bank and fled south across the Rio Grande, with the Texas Rangers in hot pursuit. They caught up with him in a small Mexican town; since Jose knew no English and none of them spoke Spanish, they found a local resident willing to act as translator, and began their questioning.

  “Where did you hide the money?”

  “The Gringos want to know where you hid the money.”

  “Tell the Gringos I will never tell them.”

  “Jose says he will never tell you.”

  The rangers all cock their pistols and point them at Jose.

  “Tell him that if he does not tell us where he hid the money, we will shoot him.”

  “The Gringos say that if you do not tell them, they will shoot you.”

  Jose begins to shake with fear.

  “Tell the Gringos that I hid the money by the bridge over the river.”

  “Jose says that he is not afraid to die.”

Posted by Phil on November 05, 2005, 03:26 AM | #

I can assure you guys I don’t have a false sense of my own invincibility, and have always been more the British eccentric semi-intellectual than the Master of the Universe.

Martin,

I apologise. That wasn’t aimed at you. It was a more broad generalisation of the English middle class that I was attempting. And I grant that there are several exceptions to the rule.

Botswana:

Every few years we Europeans pick an African country as a shining beacon of hope for that miserable continent. And every few years our hopes are shown to be a mirage but only to be replaced by new false hope in placing a different African country on the pedestal.

I believe, perhaps pessimistically, that no African country will ever succeed in building a technological society (unless a significant minority in that country is non-African, such as apartheid South Africa).

In Eastern Europe, we have seen nations with similar racial groupings as Belarus succeed handsomely after the fall of communism. Granted that there are some that haven’t yet. But given time, they will. And this is I believe the difference.

The Belarus argument is like saying that North Korea’s wretched condition (and South Korea’s affluence) proves that race is irrelevant for the purposes of creating a technological society.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on November 05, 2005, 11:11 AM | #

This will come as no surprise to most MR.com regulars but for others I’d like to point out that the demographics of the photo accompanying the log entry—no whites or as few as possible (the half-hidden guy with the hat behind Chavez might conceivably be white or part-white or something ...) are what are considered the ideal demographics for the U.S. as a whole (along with Canada, the U.K., every European country, and Oz/NZ) by the side pushing race-replacement.  They want no whites or as few as possible.  Better believe it ...

Posted by Geoff Beck on November 05, 2005, 11:21 AM | #

Fred,

I think everyone ought to listen to this audio from 1998 describing the

Mestizo Menace

(WMV | 30 Minutes).

One might not like the author but the content is factual and accurate.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on November 05, 2005, 12:57 PM | #

Thanks, Geoff. 

Notice that the other thing is colonialism, projections of hegemony by a nation, and the establishment of spheres of influence aren’t only for profit but also for self-defense and therefore necessary and legitimate to an extent, and yes, that includes colonialism, which we are always being told is/was so wrong:  a certain minimal degree of historical European and U.S. colonialism was partly for self-defense and therefore necessary and legitimate, and another minimal degree of it was to defray the costs of what was necessary for self-defense and therefore also legitimate.  So it turns out that colonialism isn’t so wrong after all. 

One way this can be noticed is to consider what will happen if Phil’s scenario comes true:  the race-replacers succeed in race-replacing the U.S. but not Europe, so that the United States is made up exclusively or nearly so of people like in that Chavez photo, and Europe is still white.  In order to defend itself a future white Europe will be obliged to take bases and pieces of territory in North America, which will be non-white just like a second Brazil or Venezuela, and in order to defray the costs of administering those necessary bases and pieces of territory Europe will need to extract a certain amount of financial profit from the subjugated populations, the whole thing amounting to colonialism which is necessary and justified. 

As long as Europe remain white, India will be no threat to it but China and Japan will, potentially—as will Russia also, potentially, if it were to get itself up and running again. 

What I’m saying is if the U.S. gets race-replaced and Europe manages to escape that transformation Europe will not leave North America alone but will, for its own good, have to come here and take bases and pieces of territory for itself.  If Europeans have got their heads screwed on frontwards by then (little likely, I know ...) they might re-do their erection of white Euro nation-states on North-American soil but taking steps this time to make sure they get it right.

American Euros should fight to save white-race predominance in the U.S.  Failing that, they should break away from the U.S. now that the Constitution is dead-and-buried and whites are the target of slow and not-so-slow genocide, and do exactly what JW Holliday recommends:  start a whites-only nation-state on a good-sized chunk of North America (with the harshest punishments meted out to any white advocates of race-replacement of whites:  such advocacy

SHOULD

!

NOT

!

BE

!

TOLERATED

!  Let the son-of-a-bitch bastards go somewhere else and advocate that—not here!). 

If all else fails in North America, American whites should return to Europe to their respective ancestral nations of origin (provided these Americans are still fully white—haven’t changed races since their grandfathers and great grandfathers came here:  any who aren’t should be rejected by those European nations and put on the immigration waiting list like any unrelated alien) and re-make their lives there.  (Yes, yes, how will Europe fit them all in?  But on the other hand, why do we keep hearing every other day that Europe will need fifty-million new workers every week for the next five hundred years to keep from going under and “that’s why it’s essential to import the entire Maghreb into France, the whole of Turkey into Germany, and so on”?  If there’s all this room for newcomers—nay, not just “room” but “crying need”—let those newcomers be the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the nation in question instead of non-whites and other unrelated peoples). 

In time, Europeans will expand into North America again—but they damn well better get it right this time.  What should be done to back-stabbing fifth-column white race-replacement advocates living among whites, such as Bush, Clinton, Jacques Chirac, David Blunkett, Tony Blair, Abe Foxman, Morris Disease, and Ben Wattenberg is immediate arrest and permanent banishment (and if they are caught sneaking back into the country, do to them exactly what the Israelis did to Adolph Eichmann).

Posted by Fred Scrooby on November 05, 2005, 01:03 PM | #

“and if they are caught sneaking back into the country, do to them exactly what the Israelis did to Adolph Eichmann).”

I’ll be for the same reason, as many here will appreciate, I’m sure ... (for those in Rio Linda:  genocide).

Posted by Fred Scrooby on November 05, 2005, 01:10 PM | #

“they might re-do their erection of white Euro nation-states on North-American soil but taking steps this time to make sure they get it right.”  (—me, above)

Stuff like, if you’re going to go around putting things like “all men are created equal” into your documents you’d damn well better spell out exactly what you mean by it and don’t mean by it. ...  Stuff like that. ... Hey just make me head of the committee that sets the place up—I’ll make sure it gets done right this time, guaranteed.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on November 05, 2005, 03:58 PM | #

“I’ll be for the same reason, as many here will appreciate, I’m sure ... (for those in Rio Linda:  genocide).”  (—me, two comments above)

First word there should’ve been “It’ll,” of course, not “I’ll.”

Posted by Svigor on November 05, 2005, 05:50 PM | #

“all men are created equal”

Jefferson goes on to rant about the savage semi-human Indians and so puts a degree of context into the Declaration, a context usually conveniently edited out in schoolbooks.

Still, your point is of course well taken.

Posted by Alexei on November 07, 2005, 07:31 AM | #

Martin, Phil—it’s unfair to compare Belarus to North Korea. Unpleasant as he is, Lukashenko (the Belarusian dictator) is probably no more authoritarian than Pinochet or Franco (post-Civil War). Lukashenko seems to enjoy pretty sound popular support, which cannot all be ascribed to his propaganda (Belarus is not that closed, really). Most of the support must be coming from the people who, looking at Russia’s and Ukraine’s experience, expect to be the losers in a transition to a more open and free economy. If the health care system in Belarus is basically an improved and modernized version of the Soviet syste (which is likely), their infant mortality numbers should be above Western Europe but not by that much.

Botswana, as far as I know, has been suffering from an AIDS epidemic, which I think says something about Botswanians’ behavioral patterns. Russia’s and Ukraine’s transition has (apparently) coincided with a change in their young people’s “lifestyles,” promiscuity and drug use making it into the mainstream, hence the spread of AIDS (to say nothing of more traditional STDs). When Lukashenko goes, it’ll be Belarus’ turn.