|
|
Father’s dayMy “Life in a backwater” post generated the longest comment thread for quite a while on this blog so I am encouraged to write a little more in a similar vein. Today was Father’s Day in Australia and I was delighted that my 19 year-old son came over in the afternoon and joined me in a drive down to Wynnum (another Brisbane seaside suburb) in the Humber. Joe (my son) has now got very high marks in all three years of his university studies (in Mathematics) so I am of course very pleased to have such an academic son. And he has never given me a moment of worry about his personal life either. There is a picture of him here with his Asian girlfriend. We bought takeaway coffee and cakes as soon as we got to Wynnum and sat down on the grass a few feet from the sea to eat, drink and chat. We had no sooner sat down than Joe spilt his coffee. I am myself a bit clumsy so it is no mystery where he got a bit of clumsiness from. He was apologetic about the spill but I gave him half of my coffee and remarked that he would probably learn from what he did. I pointed out to him that I give him thousands of dollars every birthday and Christmas precisely so he can make mistakes on the stockmarket and learn from them. I want him to have learnt investing by the time I die and he gets my money to manage. We talked about politics and current affairs and I pointed out to him the number of fronts on which I am doing battle at the moment. Some of the things I mentioned to him were: On my FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC blog I am doing battle with the obesity warriors and trying to get the results of the longevity studies known—which show that it is people of MIDDLING weight, not slim people, who live longest. On “Dissecting Leftism” I try to demolish the great Leftist coverup of their prewar liking for Fascism and I also pointed out what a myth is the Marxist claim that Fascism was “bourgeois” by referring to a scholarly study which shows that it was WORKING class people, not middle class people, who were over-represented in the Sturm Abteilung (Brownshirts). I also mentioned to him a couple of things that I have publicized on my Scripture blog —in particular that Christ plainly did NOT die on a cross but on a single upright stake. The words in the Greek New Testament that are usually translated as “cross” are “Xylon” —which is simply the ancient Greek word for “wood”—or “stavros” —which is simply the ancient Greek word for “stake”. I did however advise him to keep out of all politics at university as it would be bad for his career. So we in fact spent most time reading poetry together. I read him poems by Keats, Coleridge, Blake, Burns, Fitzgerald, Hopkins etc which I myself had mostly read at school but which he had never heard of. Schools these days have robbed our kids of their literary heritage but I am doing my best to see that my son is not robbed in that way. Posted by jonjayray on Sunday, September 3, 2006 at 08:35 AM in Comments:2
Posted by On Holliday on September 03, 2006, 09:09 AM | # “And he has never given me a moment of worry about his personal life either. There is a picture of him here with his Asian girlfriend.” In other words, Dr. John Ray *approves* of his son’s choice in women, so much so that he wishes to share it with us. Excellent. Excellent. The racially-inclined readership here can thus can a fairly good evaluation of the blog’s worth with respect to racial issues. John, can I suggest a separate post about your son and his girlfriend? 3
Posted by Nio Zilda on September 03, 2006, 09:11 AM | # Quite an amusing self-parody. 4
Posted by On Holliday on September 03, 2006, 09:11 AM | # “I did however advise him to keep out of all politics at university as it would be bad for his career.” And *that* IS the “conservative” thing to do. Excellent. Excellent. 5
Posted by On Holliday on September 03, 2006, 09:12 AM | # “How then can larger scale race-replacement be a bad thing in your eyes? “ You are learning Nio, you are learning. 6
Posted by On Holliday on September 03, 2006, 09:16 AM | # correction: “thus can” thus get You must excuse me, I am an inefficient socialist. John Ray and son, on the other hand, are indeed the exact types of free market capitalists that the readership are encouraged to emulate. Alon Ziv would improve. Get some of ‘dat hybrid vigor into the Ray clan - some of ‘dose “Han contributions.” Go get her, Joey boy. 7
Posted by Al Ross on September 03, 2006, 09:34 AM | # I’m sure we all hope that JJR lives long enough to witness the pitiful but inevitable clash of genetic heredities which his miscegenated grandchildren will doubtless suffer. 8
Posted by On Holliday on September 03, 2006, 09:40 AM | # “I’m sure we all hope that JJR lives long enough to witness the pitiful but inevitable clash of genetic heredities which his miscegenated grandchildren will doubtless suffer.” Al, Al, Al - does that really matter? No. Of course it doesn’t. Instead think of all the stock market investments the grandchildren would have accumulated by then. Plus, they will be good conservatives. The free market, conservatism - it’s all right there. God bless John Ray and his Eurasian grandchildren. They well represent conservative majority rights? As Karl tells us, who cares about EGI? You can’t put a dollar sign on *that.* 9
Posted by On Holliday on September 03, 2006, 09:48 AM | # “which shows that it was WORKING class people, not middle class people, who were over-represented in the Sturm Abteilung (Brownshirts). “ The WORKING (!!!!) class - those no good, depraved, able-bodied beggars - very last one of them. No good white trash yobs. On the other hand, we have the hard-working Joey Ray, who gets thousands of dollars of hard-earned money from daddy, which he can invest in stocks, so as to put together a nice nest egg for “Sam.” Now, that’s very “conservative” - he’s a veritable entrepreneur. 10
Posted by Daedalus on September 03, 2006, 09:58 AM | #
Don’t worry. Australia will be full of yellow Tories. Just imagine the benevolent rule the Japanese would have brought to Australia had they won the Second World War. Whites in Hong Kong and Singapore got a taste of it, and so did MacArthur’s boys in Bataan. “From the United States and Australia, the Chinaman is kept out because the democracy, with much clearness of vision, has seen that his presence is ruinous to the white race.” 11
Posted by On Holliday on September 03, 2006, 10:15 AM | # “so I am of course very pleased to have such an academic son” “So we in fact spent most time reading poetry together.” No criticisms here from the “Me Tarzan” crowd. After all, it’s not like John is telling them they actually have to, like, do anything. Vote for Bush. Rah Rah Rah Now go eat your oysters and read poetry, that’s real hairy-chested he-man stuff, right there. 12
Posted by Nick Tamiroff on September 03, 2006, 10:32 AM | # My son,at one time in his life,chose to deal drugs-but he was still my son,and I supported him.That didn’t mean I condoned his actions,nor believed him to be above the law.I was sympathised with by my friends and neighbors,not castigated as some are doing to JJR.The sins of the son are cast upon the father-that’s a new take! Take a break-pick on someone else for a while-apparently I’m next in line,so go for it OH&acolytes.As I said;I’m frigging bulletproof.Semper Fi,wankers! 13
Posted by Daedalus on September 03, 2006, 10:38 AM | #
“And he has never given me a moment of worry about his personal life either. There is a picture of him here with his Asian girlfriend.” 14
Posted by Alex Zeka on September 03, 2006, 10:51 AM | # Holliday, Where did you learn to equate the working classes and the permenantly unemployed? And please, don’t point your accusing finger at me, unless of course you are also about to prove how workers benefit from u/e benefits. 15
Posted by john ray on September 03, 2006, 10:54 AM | # LOL What a splendid response within an hour or so to my post I think I have really got the holiday man’s goat 16
Posted by john ray on September 03, 2006, 10:56 AM | # “In other words, Dr. John Ray *approves* of his son’s choice in women” Of course I do. She is steady, very bright and hard-working. Beat that! 17
Posted by Nick Tamiroff on September 03, 2006, 11:32 AM | # JJR-You are either the most devious shit-stirrer on record,or a lode-stone to all the filings in this area.Tho I am at odds with you on many things,I enjoy your postings,and especially the mouth-foaming responses of your many critics.My understanding is that OH was once a student of yours-what did you do ?-give him a C for mediocracy? LOL 18
Posted by EC on September 03, 2006, 12:08 PM | # JJR-You are either the most devious shit-stirrer on record He IS that, AND he believes his race-mixing, open immigration of Asians and South Asians tripe, Nick. He also believes his duplicitous treatment of Jews and Blacks, where one can be summarily maligned as a group while the other cannot. Do you believe it, Nick? If not, then why are you his advocate in such matters? 19
Posted by Kulturkampf on September 03, 2006, 01:28 PM | # For some interesting discussions of how allergic conservatives are to the race issue, see this essay by Kevin Lamb: http://www.vdare.com/misc/050922_lamb_events.htm ...and the recent debate between Jared Taylor and John Derbyshire: http://www.amren.com/media/Race-Cons/Race-Cons.htm Derbyshire’s an interesting figure: a mainstream conservative writer who’s also an occasional race realist (to the chagrin of National Review, which has spiked a couple of his articles that point to the obvious about IQ differences). Certainly, he’s no Jared Taylor, but anyone who tells the truth about race, even from time to time, is doing some good. Derbyshire also has a Chinese wife . . . apropos of which, does anyone else not think that it’s a purely personal matter if JJR’s son has an Asian girlfriend? I’ve said before that I deplore the man’s obvious shit-stirring, and was pleased to see his ‘Han contributions’ post deleted. I also think that the establishment’s tax-funded efforts to promote miscegenation are truly stomach churning. However, if an individual decides to indulge in interracial dating, is it really anyone else’s business? Of course, JJR has strived to make the details of his son’s love life everyone else’s business. But, even so, the ‘whites-for-whites’ idea isn’t one that sits easy. It smacks too much of ideological interference in someone’s private life. Or maybe I’m just a multiculti liberal? (NB. I do accept that the crux of this issue is what happens in the aggregate when different races interbreed, but is that a justification to pick on individuals?) 20
Posted by On Holliday on September 03, 2006, 01:53 PM | # “unless of course you are also about to prove how workers benefit from u/e benefits.” Yes, when they become unemployed due to the “free market” and “skilled immigration” and “outsourcing”, then they benefit. In a homogenous nation, social benefits are a form of insurance, spreading risk throughout the population. One can never predict the ups and downs of the “market”, no? Of course, one could imagine u/e benefits being privatized, in the same manner as life insurance policies. I have no fundamental problem with that, except that my anecdotal experiences with insurance companies - private actors all - is that they try and find any excuse not to fulfill their contractual obligations to pay claims. This necessitates the hiring of lawyers - all very “efficient.” 21
Posted by On Holliday on September 03, 2006, 02:08 PM | # “Or maybe I’m just a multiculti liberal?” Obviously, yes. Hey, since Ziv et al like to talk incest, I can do the same. If a family wishes to practice incest - who are *you* to say nay? What about pedophilia (which some here -shockingly -apparently think isn’t that big of a deal)? Now, a person who commits the crime of miscgenation not only injures their own and their family’s genetic interests, but harms that of co-ethnics, particularly of the mixing takes place in a nation in which is majority of the ethnicity of the co-ethnic doing the mixing. Further, such a person, and their family, puts forth a bad example, a behavioral sink, in which such degraded behavior is considered “normal.” Of course, I understand that such mixing is approved of by MR bloggers and commentators, so I am in the minority here. Readership, take note. 22
Posted by On Holliday on September 03, 2006, 02:14 PM | # “What a splendid response within an hour or so to my post I think I have really got the holiday man’s goat” Not at all, Dr. Ray. Believe me, I am quite pleased with this post, which is all I could have hoped for, and more. You’ve done more to delegitimize the really harmful memes here with your pro-miscgenation propaganda than any of your other posts over the last several years. Excellent! “In other words, Dr. John Ray *approves* of his son’s choice in women” Of course I do. She is steady, very bright and hard-working. Beat that!” I can’t. That’s great. This post, and your continued ability to “rub salt in the wounds” does a wonderful job of driving a wedge between the sane racialists and the aracial conservatives. It also puts doubt in the mind of the sane racialists that the more unbalanced material here is of any worth. Good job. More, please. Racial readership: spread the link to this post around. Thank you. 23
Posted by Stanley Womack on September 03, 2006, 05:39 PM | # Speaking of life in a backwater, I wonder how JJR feels about this bit of information. It is circulating on the Internet, and I’d certainly appreciate some clarity as to its truth. Just scroll down. =========
7 have been arrested for fraud 19 have been accused of writing bad checks 117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least two businesses 3 have done time for assault 71, repeat 71, cannot get a credit card due to bad credit 14 have been arrested on drug-related charges 8 have been arrested for shoplifting 21 currently are defendants in lawsuits, and 84 have been arrested for drunk driving in the last year Can you guess which organization this is? Scroll down,
It’s the 535 members of the AUSTRALIAN PARLIAMENT IN CANBERRA. ===== Is this true, JJR? 24
Posted by john ray on September 03, 2006, 06:00 PM | # “pleased to see his ‘Han contributions’ post deleted.” I deleted it myself 25
Posted by john ray on September 03, 2006, 06:02 PM | # “I enjoy your postings,and especially the mouth-foaming responses of your many critics” I enjoy those too. They crack me up! 26
Posted by john ray on September 03, 2006, 06:03 PM | # “Derbyshire also has a Chinese wife” So does Chris Brand. You are surrounded by TRAITORS! All four of my wives had blue eyes. 27
Posted by john ray on September 03, 2006, 06:06 PM | # “Not at all, Dr. Ray. Believe me, I am quite pleased with this post” The Holiday man thinks he is Machiavelli 28
Posted by john ray on September 03, 2006, 06:07 PM | # “It’s the 535 members of the AUSTRALIAN PARLIAMENT IN CANBERRA” Urban legend. Usually said of the US Congress 29
Posted by Rnl on September 03, 2006, 06:10 PM | # On Holliday wrote: The racially-inclined readership ... In other words, most of the people who post here. You’re constructing a conflict that barely exists. Alex Zeka, for example, is part of the “racially inclined readership,” whether you agree with his free-market views or not. The obnoxious (and surprisingly stupid) JJR is in a category by himself. The blog owner should eject him. If wants to argue in favor of multiracialism, he should do so. But since he doesn’t present arguments for his implied positions, he is at best valueless and at worst a disruption. 30
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on September 03, 2006, 06:42 PM | #
This is where I (and others) diverge. Business. Private Life. Rights. (fill in abstract here). They all take a second seat to survival. In what way is this unclear, or anything other than manifestly true and imperative? Man is what he is. He is not abstract, he is an organism. All this abstract shit can take a walk insofar as it interferes in my fundamental interests as an organism. 31
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on September 03, 2006, 06:56 PM | # Re JR’s typical snobbery-as-argument comment about traitors above: Well, yes actually, they are traitors. I’ve long opposed that term but recently come to understand it as accurate, in both common usages (miscegenation and general Uncle Tom behavior). One of my “moral” tests is, “would it be okay if everyone did it?” It certainly isn’t comprehensive, but it’s a start, and it’s obvious that miscegenation fails. Would panmixia with Martians be okay? How about if Martians invaded Earth; what if a human sold them critical defense information in return for saving his own skin? Wouldn’t he be a traitor to the human race in the eyes of 99% of the human population? If you answer yes, follow the logic into the racial arguments. 32
Posted by karlmagnus on September 03, 2006, 07:34 PM | # If Martians were gentically superior, panmixia with them, in order to wipe out the genetically inferior human stock, would be from a moral darwinian POV the right thing to do. 33
Posted by onetwothree on September 03, 2006, 07:48 PM | # Don’t ignore the facts on the ground. The kid likes math and poetry. What do white women think about men who like math and poetry? I ask you: What do white women think about men who like math and poetry? Not much. 34
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on September 03, 2006, 07:52 PM | # Even accepting your moral Darwinism as an imperative, you’ve rewritten my analogy. Even accepting the rewriting along with the moral Darwinism, you haven’t addressed the point. 35
Posted by Svyatoslav Igorevich on September 03, 2006, 07:57 PM | # Also, I fail to see the distinction, in proximate or ultimate terms, between the Martians destroying us and the Martians making us into Martians. Proper experimentation requires a control group btw. 36
Posted by john ray on September 03, 2006, 08:24 PM | # “One of my “moral” tests is, “would it be okay if everyone did it?” Kant’s “categorical imperative” if I mistake not “What do white women think about men who like math and poetry?” They LOVE men who are into poetry 37
Posted by john ray on September 03, 2006, 08:26 PM | # Amusing that this entire thread is in response to ONE word in my post—“Asian” 38
Posted by Daedalus on September 03, 2006, 09:01 PM | #
Impressive family values. 39
Posted by stari_momak on September 04, 2006, 12:10 AM | # I had a bit of the yellow fever as a young man, but I grew out of it. I think any white guy who fancies Asians after age 25 has some very particular physical issues, or at least thinks he does, if you get my drift. 40
Posted by Steve Edwards on September 04, 2006, 01:08 AM | # Actually, I’m going to dissent on this one. John Ray was most certainly NOT being dishonest this time round, and he was reflecting on a personal experience that he clearly cherished, so I clearly cannot criticise him. And as I’ve previously argued that there can be no moral objection to any freely entered private contract between consenting adults, ipso facto there can be no ethical grounds for opposing miscegenation. So all the best to John Ray’s son, I say, and I hope his mathematical abilities take him far. 41
Posted by Daedalus on September 04, 2006, 02:24 AM | #
There is nothing morally objectionable about pornography, prostitution, or drug addiction? These are all market transactions and, of course, the market is GOD, right? 42
Posted by Steve Edwards on September 04, 2006, 02:54 AM | # Nope - I certainly think those activities are stupid, but not unethical. 43
Posted by Alex Zeka on September 04, 2006, 05:05 AM | # “Yes, when they become unemployed due to the “free market” and “skilled immigration” and “outsourcing”, then they benefit. “ Fool! In a nationalist country there would be virtually no immigration and no outsourcing. A proper policy would be to ensure that industries do not migrate abroad, rather than dealing with the fall out like some nanny. The proper model for government is the father not the mother or the nanny. Now, in your ideal world, how would you deal with the perpetually unemployed? Would u/e benefits cease after a certain period of worklessness? If not, what incentives will welfare kings have to get back into work, and welfare queens to find themselves a proper man? “Of course, one could imagine u/e benefits being privatized, in the same manner as life insurance policies. I have no fundamental problem with that, except that my anecdotal experiences with insurance companies - private actors all - is that they try and find any excuse not to fulfill their contractual obligations to pay claims. This necessitates the hiring of lawyers - all very “efficient.” “ Actually, this is more or less what is to be found in Singapore. There, the ‘welfare state’ consists of compulsory savings accounts, i.e. each worker (and all men work) has to put I think 10% of his paycheck into the bank. This rsults in: a. a safety net for when they are out of work; b. nobody not having an incentive to find work; c. unusually high savings rates, which are the motor of economic growth (no matter what self-interested consumerists tell you). This is the best alternative yet devised, and has in practice been enormously successful (look at Singapore’s GNP, and most of that is hard industry, or its miniscule u/e rates, or even its low levels of stress). Incidentally, the Economist has been on the city state’s case for quite some time, telling it to ‘unleash its animal spirits’. What it’s missing is that in Singapore the state owns most industry, but the entrepreneurs, not gov’t created equality officers, control all of it. If you want to, we can continue this discussion in the forum or wherever, now that both of us have gotten over our knee-jerk reactions to one another. 44
Posted by Alex Zeka on September 04, 2006, 05:13 AM | # Sorry, delete the “fool” at the start of my comment above. I wrote that before properly reading what Holliday had written. Apologies to Holliday. 45
Posted by Alex Zeka on September 04, 2006, 05:22 AM | # “There is nothing morally objectionable about pornography, prostitution, or drug addiction?” I don’t like to speak of morality. It’s all a bit airy and vague for my liking. However, the activities mentioned above are not commiserate with leading a productive, upstanding life (what would have once been called virtuous) and so are to be discouraged. Producing goods and services does not fall into that category, although over-consuming might, which is why I prefer a tax on consumption to a tax on production. Is the market GOD? It is when it comes to economic decisions. 46
Posted by Daedalus on September 04, 2006, 05:29 AM | # Libertarianism masquerading as an ethical system is absurd. What vice, what defect of character, does libertarianism not sanction? Avarice. Obsequiousness. Malice. Cowardice. Licentiousness. Vanity. Treason. Injustice. What disreputable practice does libertarianism not condone? Prostitution. Pornography. Miscegenation. Blasphemy. Adultery. Fornication. Homosexuality. Libertarianism has nothing of substance to say about morality. Indeed, libertarians dispense with the virtues and vices altogether, lionizing instead the pimp, the usurer, the drug peddler, the whore, the gambler, the drunk, and so on. What do libertarians stand for aside from license and lawlessness? This puts them at odds not only with the world’s great religions, but classical and non-Western philosophers generally, and even the conceptions of morality of the world’s most primitive tribes. Fortunately, libertarianism is so repulsive to the natural moral sentiments of most people that it is not, never has been, and never will be a viable political ideology, which is all libertarianism strives to be. Ultimately, libertarianism is a political proposition: insofar as power exists, it should be restrained, unless someone is physically harmed; which is as mindblowingly utopian as any socialist social engineering scheme. This follows from the belief that there is really no such thing as morality, or that moral sentiments should be perverted to promote a moral and political vacuum. Who would want to live in such a wasteland? Generally, opportunistic types of poor character or extremely intelligent people who manage to delude themselves with their own abstractions that such a society could ever work. Intellectuals are uniquely susceptible to this sort of naïveté, and the world has long suffered for it. Liberals want to use government to bulldoze over Western civilization and raise up nonwhites over its ruins. Conservatives insist that they do it a little slower and make money in the process. Libertarians prefer to rot the moral foundation of society with excessive permissiveness until it collapses under the sheer weight of its own decadence, losing all our liberties in the process. 47
Posted by On Holliday on September 04, 2006, 05:57 AM | # “In other words, most of the people who post here. You’re constructing a conflict that barely exists. Alex Zeka, for example, is part of the “racially inclined readership,” whether you agree with his free-market views or not. “ OK. Correction: the racially inclined readership who are a) actually concerned about race, and b) express this concern in a manner that is not either disgusting and/or humiliating for the blog. 48
Posted by Ray of Sunshine, sole owner of this blog on September 04, 2006, 06:18 AM | # The last time I afforded you peons a glimpse of my enviable liefestyle, there was a regrettable tendency towards the end of the thread to drift away from the MQ- the Me Question- towards discussions of paltry abstractions. I hope that will not recur. Confine yourself to talking about Me. Guessedworker adds: Anyone who tries to derail this thread—indeed, this blog—by not sticking to the Him Question will be admonished. What do you think this is, a serious website for the discussion of politics and race? For pity’s sake! 49
Posted by On Holliday on September 04, 2006, 08:18 AM | # “Sorry, delete the “fool” at the start of my comment above. I wrote that before properly reading what Holliday had written. Apologies to Holliday.” Why, no apology is needed. I in fact *have* been a fool with respect to “Majority Rights” but not, alas, for the reasons concerned with this debate. That’s changed, though. 50
Posted by john ray on September 04, 2006, 09:30 AM | # “Fool! In a nationalist country there would be virtually no immigration and no outsourcing. A proper policy would be to ensure that industries do not migrate abroad, rather than dealing with the fall out like some nanny’ An autarkist! A genuine intellectual dinosaur! And a disciple of Mussolini to boot 51
Posted by john ray on September 04, 2006, 09:31 AM | # “The last time I afforded you peons a glimpse of my enviable liefestyle, there was a regrettable tendency towards the end of the thread to drift away from the MQ- the Me Question- towards discussions of paltry abstractions. I hope that will not recur. Confine yourself to talking about Me. Guessedworker adds: Anyone who tries to derail this thread—indeed, this blog—by not sticking to the Him Question will be admonished. What do you think this is, a serious website for the discussion of politics and race? For pity’s sake! Posted by Ray of Sunshine, sole owner of this blog “
Do better 52
Posted by On Holliday on September 04, 2006, 09:52 AM | # ““Fool! In a nationalist country there would be virtually no immigration and no outsourcing. A proper policy would be to ensure that industries do not migrate abroad…” What you describe is not a “free market.” 53
Posted by Daedalus on September 04, 2006, 10:30 AM | #
International trade has obviously always been absolutely vital to American prosperity. 54
Posted by Daedalus on September 04, 2006, 10:53 AM | # Friedrich List, genuine intellectual dinosaur, in The National System of Political Economy: http://www.econlib.org/LIBRARY/YPDBooks/List/lstNPE9.html
55
Posted by Phil Peterson on September 04, 2006, 03:15 PM | # Hello everyone! I pop in for a ten minute cameo again. Trust all is well here. I see that not much has changed - or the more things change, the more they stay the same I suppose. (chuckle) Daedalus, You really should be blogging here. While I can’t say I have agreed with everything you have written at MR, I find myself in agreement about 95 percent of the time - that is probably a higher percentage than almost anyone on this blog (even among the regular bloggers). I particularly found this exquisite: Libertarianism masquerading as an ethical system is absurd. What vice, what defect of character, does libertarianism not sanction? Avarice. Obsequiousness. Malice. Cowardice. Licentiousness. Vanity. Treason. Injustice. What disreputable practice does libertarianism not condone? Prostitution. Pornography. Miscegenation. Blasphemy. Adultery. Fornication. Homosexuality. Libertarianism has nothing of substance to say about morality. Indeed, libertarians dispense with the virtues and vices altogether, lionizing instead the pimp, the usurer, the drug peddler, the whore, the gambler, the drunk, and so on. What do libertarians stand for aside from license and lawlessness? This puts them at odds not only with the world’s great religions, but classical and non-Western philosophers generally, and even the conceptions of morality of the world’s most primitive tribes. Fortunately, libertarianism is so repulsive to the natural moral sentiments of most people that it is not, never has been, and never will be a viable political ideology, which is all libertarianism strives to be. Ultimately, libertarianism is a political proposition: insofar as power exists, it should be restrained, unless someone is physically harmed; which is as mindblowingly utopian as any socialist social engineering scheme. This follows from the belief that there is really no such thing as morality, or that moral sentiments should be perverted to promote a moral and political vacuum. Who would want to live in such a wasteland? Generally, opportunistic types of poor character or extremely intelligent people who manage to delude themselves with their own abstractions that such a society could ever work. Intellectuals are uniquely susceptible to this sort of naïveté, and the world has long suffered for it. Liberals want to use government to bulldoze over Western civilization and raise up nonwhites over its ruins. Conservatives insist that they do it a little slower and make money in the process. Libertarians prefer to rot the moral foundation of society with excessive permissiveness until it collapses under the sheer weight of its own decadence, losing all our liberties in the process. This is so good, I am going to save it on a word file and (with your permission) reproduce it during the course of appropriate debates. I hope the rancour with John dies down. I can no longer concede that he adds any real value to the blog in terms of intellectual rigour but he is an interesting (and eccentric) character to have around and a good man at heart. And the decision to retain him is GW’s as he owns the blog. It is not for us to decide that, though we may all do our best to dissuade him if we think it necessary. My own way in dealing with John’s posts after an initial flurry of thread battles (when I had the time to post here) has been to ignore what he posts because most of what he writes isn’t worth responding to. And I think one makes a more powerful statement that way than by trying to counter his banal arguments (which are usually re-hashed and repeated countless times over). On the subject of John’s son choosing an East Asian girlfriend, I can’t say that I would be as approving as he, had it been my own son (and were I John’s age, as opposed to being decades younger than John). But what John does with his own children is not of much concern to me or ought to be for us. If anything, I have never shared John’s penchant for posting intimate pictures of family on the internet or sharing intimate details of personal life or details of financial success (in the very relative working class sense). Having said that, I would disagree with Steve and others of the Libertarian bent who say that miscegenation is purely “individual choice”. It wasn’t in many nations until recently. As late as 1967, anti-miscegenation laws existed on the statute books of many American states. Their existence didn’t make the United States a totalitarian society – it was a free country and Americans were almost certainly freer then than they are now. Does that teach us something? Diversity and Multiculturalism are the agents of tyranny. Diverse “societies” ultimately collapse into tyranny because that is the only way such societies can be governed. There is perhaps no more powerful refutation of libertarian fantasy than that. Steve, Alex and all the guys here of a slightly Libertarian bent, I was like you too just a few years ago. We all learn with time. Our ideas must be informed by things higher than prejudice. I have friends who are libertarians and they seem incapable of ever moving beyond their libertarianism because to them it seems like they have discovered the gospel truth. A real education lies in being able to see the limitations of all societies, their shortcomings and their problems. Anyway, Im flying back to the East tomorrow. Hope to catch you all again soon. 56
Posted by AncientVengeance on September 05, 2006, 11:57 AM | # ‘Libertarianism’ is nothing but an excuse for anthropologically subhuman behavior. According to libertarian worshippers of the free market, mere commercialism, removed from all context, is intrinsically good. In other words, morality and culture are subordinated to a sort of dysfunctional Judaic nihilism and dance around the golden calf. This is the type of internal parasitism and slavish pariah philosophy that has corrupted the West. One day the liberals, libertarians, socialists and marxists will be thrown back into the position rightfully theirs at the very bottom of society as slave-laborers so the least moral damage can be done to the worthier members of society. 57
Posted by Fred Scrooby on September 05, 2006, 12:42 PM | # Nice to see you, Phil. Thanks for that first-rate comment, and have a safe journey! 58
Posted by Alex Zeka on September 05, 2006, 01:20 PM | # Holliday, And how do we prevent industries from migrating abroad? By decreasing taxes and regulations on them! See, you’re starting from the assumption that I’m an ideological libertarian. Almost every single economic renaissance in history, from H.vii to Salazar to Pinochet to Chamberlain, even including Mussolini and other such ‘fascists’, was achieved by giving greater economic freedoms at home. You choose: a welfare state or national grandeur. This isn’t libertarianism, this is just plain economic history. JJR, I’m more than happy to be a disciple of Mussolini. If you actually read up on the man’s policies, you’d discover that his pragmatical streak ensured that he quickly jettisoned his socialist beginnings when it came to the hard task of running a country. Alas, this pragmatical streak swiftly deserted him when it came to foreign policy, which is were his real failure lay. Phil, An excellent ccomment. Can I just defend myself from the charge of being a libbo? If you look at the thread that started this, you’ll discover that I was defending the free market on strictly pragmatical grounds. I’d like to return to that when Holliday seemers down a bit. 59
Posted by Daedalus on September 05, 2006, 01:33 PM | # Libertarianism is the final collapse of the rotten carcass of liberalism into anarchy and theoretical incoherence; the prelude to a resurgence of authoritarianism. Plato’s masterful critique of liberal democracy is still valid in our own times. http://www.constitution.org/pla/repub_08.htm
60
Posted by On Holliday on September 05, 2006, 01:39 PM | # I do need to seemer down. I’ll do that when I find out what “seemer” means. 61
Posted by rustymason on September 05, 2006, 02:07 PM | # The excerpt from Plato is eerie, like reading Tocqueville’s Democracy in America. Reading writings like this (and 1984 and Brave New World) and then watching my country fall apart around me is like watching a train-wreck in slow motion. I’ve a good idea of what’s going to happen next and why, but I’m unable to stop it or to warn others. Worst of all, I’m unable to get out of the way. 62
Posted by ben tillman on September 05, 2006, 03:45 PM | # “And as I’ve previously argued that there can be no moral objection to any freely entered private contract between consenting adults, ipso facto there can be no ethical grounds for opposing miscegenation.” So a contract for the payment of money in exchange for the murder of a person is morally acceptable? You are ignoring externalities. Miscegenation also has external consequences. It is not hard to find it wrong even under libertarian doctrine. 63
Posted by Nick Tamiroff on September 05, 2006, 05:00 PM | # Seemer= S o E veryone E lse M ust E mulate R ajah. LOL {take a break!] 64
Posted by Calvin on September 06, 2006, 06:43 AM | # Can I make a couple of observations on JJR’s denunciation of Nazism as “socialist”? Socialism was a movement that arose as a corrective to outrageous abuses of labour. The most evil of these abuses was the enslavement of children in Victorian mills, where they were regularly beaten with iron clubs (billy-roller), scalped and maimed in machinery and murdered through industrial negligence. Most of our ancestors belonged to this ill used group. Socialism is not the quintessence of evil that JJR portrays. Socialism became maladaptive when socialist ideals were usurped to serve the ends of an elitist group. When this happened Socialism was transformed into Marxism, Bolshevism and Communism. In assessing which of these socialist camps Nazism belongs to (adaptive or maladaptive), perhaps the best way to proceed would be to compare the living conditions of the average worker in Soviet Russia, with the living conditions of the average worker in Nazi Germany. I think that JJR might find some striking differences. 65
Posted by On Holliday on September 06, 2006, 07:02 AM | # “The most evil of these abuses was the enslavement of children in Victorian mills, where they were regularly beaten with iron clubs (billy-roller), scalped and maimed in machinery and murdered through industrial negligence” But, Calvin, those were the offspring of no good white yobs. Now, if noble South Asians were similarly abused in North England’s textile mills, JJR would be the first to raise the red flag of revolution. But, working class white yobs? Who cares? 66
Posted by Daedalus on September 06, 2006, 07:11 AM | #
It’s rather the other way around. I can think of few things more repulsive than reducing human beings to mere factors of production, as they used to say, to “turn the penny.”
67
Posted by Calvin on September 06, 2006, 08:30 AM | # “It’s rather the other way around. I can think of few things more repulsive than reducing human beings to mere factors of production” The great Anglo-Celtic Victorian social reformers sought to elevate human beings from a state of animalistic servitude to the status of human beings. People like Marx and Engles invented a form of “socialism” that was simply designed to transfer the services of these slaves from an Anglo-Celtic elite to a non-Anglo-Celtic elite. 68
Posted by Fred Scrooby on September 06, 2006, 09:31 AM | # Daedalus, that point by Prof. Chomsky is one Jim Kalb often makes in explaining his tradcon view of what’s gone so dreadfully wrong with liberalism-dominated modernity, which wants at every turn to suppress, to extirpate if it can, to kill, all human manifestations and values that don’t directly lubricate or perfectly enmesh with hyper-“rational” markets and bureaucracies: that includes traditional personal and public morality and religion, the traditional racial compositions of longstanding communities, traditional cultural standards and especially traditional particularist ethnoculture, the traditional nation-state, and so on. I agree with a number of commenters here who say they are basically sympathetic toward socialism. I’ve always been. I realized after reading Melinda Jelliby’s piece that socialism, in order to work—at any rate, the kind of socialism I’m after—needs to be “national” in the traditional racial/ethnocultural sense. I was so happy after reading that piece because I’ve always liked socialism (not extreme socialism, but a reasonable socialist dimension to society) and wanted it to work. Her ideas showed me how it could. In the same vein, I’m interested in Spenglerian Prussian Ethical Socialism. Next entry: Derbyshire: Race and Conservatism Previous entry: Did the Nazis ban IQ tests? |
|
Existential IssuesWhite Genocide ProjectOf note
Recent CommentsAlso see trash folder. assundaGymn commented in entry 'A Line in the Sand' on 05/23/12, 08:41 PM. (go) (view) GlablePax commented in entry 'University official sentenced for child porn, blackmail' on 05/23/12, 08:23 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 07:47 PM. (go) (view) cuiseur automatique seb commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/23/12, 07:43 PM. (go) (view) Swan commented in entry 'Indian beauty' on 05/23/12, 12:52 PM. (go) (view) Lee John Barnes commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 12:45 PM. (go) (view) Swan commented in entry 'More on the Indian beauty question' on 05/23/12, 12:31 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/23/12, 11:43 AM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 11:32 AM. (go) (view) Mellaba Pechios commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/23/12, 07:55 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/23/12, 03:51 AM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 10:40 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 10:40 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 10:26 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 10:23 PM. (go) (view) 7 Year BA commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 09:19 PM. (go) (view) DARYL commented in entry 'A repeatable comment for mass-pasting on American public message boards' on 05/22/12, 08:57 PM. (go) (view) Thorn commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 08:31 PM. (go) (view) Church of Jed commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 07:40 PM. (go) (view) Selous Scout commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 05:56 PM. (go) (view) Silver commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 11:37 AM. (go) (view) AnalogMan commented in entry 'Golden Dawn - Greece' on 05/22/12, 11:29 AM. (go) (view) Wandrin commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 07:42 AM. (go) (view) Srakotraqu commented in entry 'A repeatable comment for mass-pasting on American public message boards' on 05/22/12, 07:30 AM. (go) (view) Wandrin commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 07:19 AM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 06:26 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/22/12, 02:34 AM. (go) (view) Stephen commented in entry 'Why Hitler hated Jews' on 05/21/12, 06:33 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/21/12, 02:02 PM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/21/12, 04:46 AM. (go) (view) James Bowery commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/20/12, 11:17 PM. (go) (view) indian strategy commented in entry 'The Indian/Chinese IQ puzzle' on 05/20/12, 05:17 PM. (go) (view) Bill commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/20/12, 12:51 PM. (go) (view) Wandrin commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/20/12, 09:15 AM. (go) (view) Hymie in Afula commented in entry 'Beyond the 14 words' on 05/20/12, 07:24 AM. (go) (view) Recent Posts
General NewsScience NewsScience CategoriesAll CategoriesThe WritersEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages. LinksEndorsement not implied. Controlled Opposition Crime
General
Immigration
Islam Jews
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Whites in Africa |
Posted by On Holliday on September 03, 2006, 08:44 AM | #
Thank you John Ray for the wonderful post.
Indeed, this picture of little Ray with his beautiful Asian girlfriend:
http://jonjayray.auserver.net/joesam.jpg
pretty well sumarrizes *everything* that “Majority Rights” and “conservatism” are all about.
Get a good look at that picture, readership, one long good look.
Thank you again, Dr. Ray, for assisting in the proper development of this blog.