Language and wealth

Posted by VanSpeyk on July 12, 2006, 07:52 AM | #

How about “correlation is not causation”? Did you investigate the GDP of English-speaking Zimbabwe or Kenya? Contrast that with Magyar-speaking Hungary!

On the other hand, I do think that language structures our thought and so that differences in language structure translate into different thought-structures, so to speak.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 12, 2006, 08:41 AM | #

“ ‘correlation is not causation’ ”  (—van Speyk)

Van Speyk, as to why Rhodesia and Kenya compare unfavorably with Hungary:  is there causation or is it a purely random state of affairs?  If there’s complex causation can you point to the most important component or at least an important one?

Posted by Søren Renner on July 12, 2006, 11:30 AM | #

Cxu vi parolas en Esperanto, JJR?

Posted by Nick Tamiroff on July 12, 2006, 02:02 PM | #

Ninety percent of all inventiveness in the last thousand years can be ascribed to those who spoke English[either as a mother tongue,or a necessary academic form of sufferage].The Greeks,Egyptions,and Romans were the best in the world,until miscegenation,the massive influx of inferiors,and a lazie-fair governing body bought their downfall.But the Italians DID win the World Cup,with an almost White team!Does anyone relate to a world that looks beyound “Me,Me,Me-Now,Now, Now”?

Posted by Nick Tamiroff on July 12, 2006, 02:25 PM | #

Fred-you’re too PC-the problem in Rhodesia is NIGGERS-period.As it is throughout all of “free black-ruled countries”.Get a grip;let malaria,Aids,sickle-cell,and starvation take care of the White mans burden.WE could make good use of the continents resources. The Whites who allowed this crap in Rhodesia and S.Africa to occur,deserve nothing more than what they’re getting.FUCK them-they had a choice-fight,flight,or suck nigger dick.No sympathy here.

Posted by Leonidas on July 12, 2006, 02:50 PM | #

“Language as a proxy for culture?”  More like language being used as a code word for race.  Unfortunately, deracinated Occidentals won’t notice this little trick, so we should expect to hear much bleating about the need to teach English to the third world along with the shedding of giant croc tears for our failure to do so in the past.  Guilt, guilt, guilt!

Posted by Al Ross on July 12, 2006, 03:28 PM | #

The other day I was drinking in the long bar of an old colonial club in South East Asia with an American fellow expatriate. A loud and obnoxious Indian lawyer nearby was ranting and wobbling his dusky head about the bad old days of ‘racism and colonialism’. My Texan drinking-partner turned to the voluble Tamil and said: ” You’re right, the Brits did some pretty stupid things when they ran this country and the dumbest of all was teaching English to bozos like you”.

Posted by Leonidas on July 12, 2006, 03:48 PM | #

“There is no such official body for English, thus both foreign words and newly invented words are added to the English vocabulary every day by individuals and organizations across the globe.”

Bullbiscuits. 

The “Occident” has been redefined to include South America.  Mestizos and Indians are now “Occidental,” according to Bartleby, Webster and the academy’s wordsmiths.  I don’t recall granting these people permission to obfuscate my racial/cultural origins.  I don’t think that South America’s mestizos and Indians gave these anemic-looking b*st*rds permission to do so, either.

How come we haven’t a suitable name to describe ourselves and would it become part of the language if we did?  Where is the word that describes the Semitic hatred of Others?  And if only we can be racist, then where is word that describes racial hatred toward us?

The fact is our language is screened by individuals who share various interests, one of which is animosity toward us.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 12, 2006, 06:25 PM | #

“Fred-you’re too PC-the problem in Rhodesia is NEGROES-period.”  (—Nick)

Nick, that was my point, and in my comment I hoped to draw it (or words to the same effect) out of van Speyk.  I wasn’t being PC, although on re-reading what I wrote I can see how someone might think I was—I should’ve worded it differently.

“The Whites who allowed this crap in Rhodesia and S.Africa to occur deserve nothing more than what they’re getting. FUCK them-they had a choice-fight, flight, or suck nigger dick. No sympathy here.”  (—Nick)

This excerpt from Nick’s comment would seem nicely illustrated by the writing and personal behavior of sickening Nobel-Prize-winning white South African writer J.M. Coetzee who wrote a novel called Disgrace:

Disgrace, [...] published in 1999, won an unprecedented second Booker Prize [...]. The portrayal in Disgrace [is] of a violent, lawless post-apartheid South Africa [depicting] black-on-white violence, [...] painting a grim picture of majority rule as, in effect, the displacement of “white” or “Western” standards of justice and rationality with a “black” hegemony based on vengeance, violence, and fear.

In Coetzee’s novel [...] David Lurie [...] is a middle-aged [white] professor at Cape Town University College, which has been made over to serve the newly enfranchised populations under post-apartheid “rationalization.” As a result, the college is now an intellectually threadbare technical school. When he loses his job [...] Lurie goes to rethink his life at his daughter Lucy’s small farm in the countryside, where she raises flowers and cares for dogs. [...]

Some time after his arrival the farm is invaded by three black strangers who rape Lucy, ransack her house, shoot her dogs, and set her father afire, leaving him with a disfigured ear, a further divestment of his former self. Lurie wants his daughter to report the crime and bring the perpetrators to justice. But Lucy decides that it would be impossible for her to continue living in such a remote and lawless area if she called in the police, as she would be open to future reprisals.

Far from seeking justice, she decides to bear the child she is carrying as a result of the rape. She also deeds her share of the property to Petrus, her [black] former assistant turned coproprietor thanks to post-apartheid land adjustments, and agrees to become part of his extended family, in effect his third wife, in order to secure enough protection to continue to live on the land she loves. The clear implication is that the attack was part of a plan by Petrus to gain complete control of her property. “They see me as owing something,” she says of her assailants. “They see themselves as debt collectors, tax collectors.”

Her father at first objects but then comes to accept the new arrangements. The closing scenes of the novel show father and daughter both reduced to a kind of speechless submission, stripped of control over their lives, dependent on the menacing black power all around them, yet strangely serene and content.

The reader, however, or at least any reader not terminally immersed in white guilt, is liable to be horrified. While Coetzee’s purposes in this novel are ambiguous and not fully worked out, there is no doubt that he intends to raise disturbing questions about the nature of the new South Africa and the place of white people within it. It is common knowledge that attacks by blacks on white farmers in rural South Africa have become rife under the new government. It was this very aspect of the novel that caused the ANC to condemn the book as a racist call to white South Africans to emigrate. And it was this very aspect that the Nobel Committee managed studiously to avoid, following the path of many tiptoeing critics. Instead, the Nobel establishment managed to package the troubling racial theme of the novel as some anodyne parable of spiritual renewal. [...]

Thus whites may well be subject to racial violence in the new South Africa, but this violence must be exempt from moral judgment. [...]

But for the Nobel Committee, if the end of apartheid has unleashed massive corruption in the ruling ANC and widespread violence against whites by some of the newly empowered black population, all that is simply the “history” that cannot be “evaded.” The novel itself clearly endorses this vision. In a spasm of colonial guilt, Lurie says of the intruders who raped his daughter and who may do so again, “It was history speaking through them. A history of wrong.”

Yet this notion of race-guilty whites suffering a deserved punishment at the hands of violent blacks cannot be separated from the racial theme that so angered the South African government —the portrayal of a vengeful black population outside the rule of law. In its complaint to the Human Rights Commission, the ANC argued that the novel, by perpetuating the old white supremacist view of indigenous blacks as primitive, savage, and incapable of moral behavior, purveyed an “ideology of racism.”

So how did a book that dishes up such a brutal picture of life in post-apartheid South Africa manage to garner so much praise from the liberal West? The answer is contained in Coetzee’s portrayal of the fate of the white characters. As [Swede] Wästberg put it, in the novel’s “dystopian” vision, “David Lurie does not achieve creativity and freedom until, stripped of all dignity, he is afflicted by his own shame and history’s disgrace.” The white characters lose everything under the ad hoc black rule presented in the novel, even personal dignity, but there is strength in such loss. It “is a good point to start from again,” Lurie and Lucy come to agree, “to start at ground level. With nothing. No cards, no weapons, no property, no rights, no dignity…. like a dog.”

[...F]rom the remarks of the Nobel Committee and Swedish Academy, we can see Disgrace as offering guilty white readers the opportunity to indulge in self-hatred and to savor the pleasure of contemplating the abasement of Western man and woman, while imagining a spiritual reward for doing so. (In his own life [...] Coetzee has foregone this bracing humiliation and has sought safety in the “cosmetic morality”—not to mention the physical safety and comfort—of the West:  Coetzee [...] is now affiliated with the University of Adelaide in Australia, where he emigrated [...].)

Everyone got that?  After writing this prize-winning novel in which he symbolically extols, through his depiction of this white father-daughter pair, an imagined future for South Africa in which whites will be rightly and very much deservedly transformed into slaves of Negro masters who will steal all their property, make of the white males their beating and burning-alive victims, of the females their rape victims, bearers of their half-Negro rape-begotten children, and primitive African-harem wives in third place after Negro wives in first and second places—after this swine, this white-race insect extols all that as his vision of the right future, the moral future for the New & Improved South Africa he ... (wait for it ...) ... he ( ... is everyone sitting down?  please sit down, everyone ...) ... he moves to white Australia ...  (Vomit bucket, anyone?  Wait, it’s being passed around the room—it’ll get to you, just try to hold it in ... Hey will you guys hurry and pass that around?  There are people who can’t hold it in anymore—hurry up, please ... thank you ...)

Posted by Al Ross on July 12, 2006, 07:05 PM | #

I also read the novel, ‘Disgrace’, and as soon as I became aware that the title wasnt referring to the typically Negroid behaviour described in Fred’s quoted review, the prize-winning book described a near-perfect arc into my waste-paper basket. Unfortunately I then had to retrieve the offending item and return it to the British Council library.

Posted by john ray on July 12, 2006, 09:20 PM | #

“Cxu vi parolas en Esperanto, JJR? “

Why would anyone want to speak the language of such a tiny minority?

Posted by Nick Tamiroff on July 13, 2006, 08:08 AM | #

Fred[and all others],I somewhat apoligize for my choice of words,but I find no benefit in acquiesing to any NEGRO,whether here or in Africa.I spent seven years on the continent,and watched it degrade after de-colonization,into the tribal based morass it is today.Because the NEGRO leadership speaks English[or French],does not make their countries a member of the human race.NEGROES will never achieve,on their own,anything higher than a pile of elephant dung.BTW,I’ve got to check out your referenced book,so I can get more incensed about misceganation,NEGROES,and White idiotcy.Have a nice day-HONKEY LOL

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 13, 2006, 09:45 AM | #

“BTW,I’ve got to check out your referenced book, so I can get more incensed”  (—Nick)

All I can say is ... have the vomit bucket ready!

Posted by Søren Renner on July 13, 2006, 11:07 AM | #

Where is the word that describes the Semitic hatred of Others?

It’s here: LOXISM.

Posted by Søren Renner on July 13, 2006, 11:11 AM | #

“Cxu vi parolas en Esperanto, JJR? “

Why would anyone want to speak the language of such a tiny minority?

If JJR is against it, how can I not be for it? Who will stand with me? Cxu logxas Ana in Novjorko?

Posted by Rusty Mason on July 13, 2006, 11:37 AM | #

Ich verstehe dich nicht, Søren.  What does “Cxu logxas Ana in Novjorko?” mean?  I’m allergic to JJR’s posts like any thinking person, but what are we signing up for here?

Your LOXISM link was caught and logged by my ISP’s naughty-naughty filter.  One more piece of evidence of my depravity, thanks a lot.  But I’m incorrigible—you got text or another link to it?

Posted by Søren Renner on July 13, 2006, 11:59 AM | #

Mr. Mason: So your ISP blocks Alex Linder’s site, does it? Well, if you send me your mail address I will mail you a copy of the page in question. Or does your ISP read your email as well?

Posted by Leonidas on July 13, 2006, 12:24 PM | #

Hello SR,

It’s here: LOXISM.

I googled the word “lox” and found references to liquid oxygen and a Jewish recipe for salmon.  Assuming the latter is the root for ‘loxism,’ what does a Jewish dish have to do with the Jewish hatred of Others?

Just curious.

Posted by Søren Renner on July 13, 2006, 01:38 PM | #

I didn’t coin the word. Linder claims somewhere that there is some connection to a word the Romans used, but that might be a joke—but it does mean (now) “Jewish hatred of Gentiles”. See? They haven’t the power to edit us out of history or language. Or they haven’t seen us yet. Do you feel lucky today?

Posted by Leonidas on July 13, 2006, 03:03 PM | #

Do you feel lucky today?

I’d feel luckier if I knew what the Roman connection to ‘Loxism’ is.  If there is a connection, then I don’t see why it can’t be adopted.  Loxism rhymes (sort of) with toxic, which I find interesting.

Posted by ben tillman on July 13, 2006, 06:10 PM | #

David Lurie does not achieve creativity and freedom until, stripped of all dignity, he is afflicted by his own shame and history’s disgrace.

“David Lurie” is an awfully Jewish name.  Are you sure Coetzee’s message is that whites should feel guilty?

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 13, 2006, 06:57 PM | #

“ ‘David Lurie’ is an awfully Jewish name.  Are you sure Coetzee’s message is that whites should feel guilty?”  (—Ben)

I haven’t read the book.  Lurie of course is often a Jewish name, and your question is actually a good one.  Carol Iannone, who wrote the review which I linked in my original comment, says Lurie’s “apparently Jewish identity figures only in the background.”  I’d say Coetzee was calling on all whites (South African Europeans), not Jews alone, to feel guilty vis-à-vis Negroes and not only to submit but to submit willingly, joyfully, and with gratitude to the fate he imagines the Lurie dad and daughter as suffering.  (Can anyone imagine how sick this man Coetzee must be to want whites to think, act, and end up like that, in utter submission to primitive African Negroes?  This is a very, very, very sick individual.  If he’s a homosexual or a Noël-Ignatiev-type Jew (the type of Jew who is desirous of promoting the genocide of Europeans—Ignatiev, the Jewish neocons, and Abe Foxman are examples) this viewpoint of his would be easier to understand.  If he’s not, it’s mind-boggling.) 

Knowing that Lurie and his daughter are probably meant to be Jewish doesn’t diminish the book’s disgustingness for me (its disgustingness, at least, as outlined in the review):  watching these horrific events and this twisted psychological evolution happen to a Jewish South African father-and-daughter is as nauseating as watching them happen to an Afrikaner or English South African father-and-daughter. 

How could this white author, after advocating the future he advocates for South Africa’s whites, move to white Australia where he and his progeny won’t have to live through it!  Can anyone imagine how low this person is?  Words to adequately describe the lowness of this person are not easy to come up with.  At least Joe Slovo had the integrity to stay on and actually attempt to live in the Negro-dominated mess he helped bring about.

Posted by Nick Tamiroff on July 13, 2006, 10:52 PM | #

Fred,I oftimes believe you are the only one who reads or recognizes the validity of my rants.I am no academic,but do posess an IQ in the top 2%.I have been everything from a fry-cook,engineer,program manager,tile mechanic,and a retired SOB.You are obviously an American who values his country and heritage,and you do a lot to maintain a sense of rationality on MR.You or GW need to kick me in the ass whenever I get too far out of line.The rest-FUCK-EM!!!!!  Semper Fi!  Nick T

Posted by Al Ross on July 14, 2006, 12:46 AM | #

Nick, please dont feel that your thoughts go unread or unappreciated. I, for one, enjoy all your comments.  Also your terminologically exact employment of the word Nigger is validated (as if you cared) by the late Dr. RP Oliver, a professor of Classical Philology.

Give ‘em hell.

Posted by Nick Tamiroff on July 14, 2006, 02:20 AM | #

Thank you AL,and Fred;sometimes I feel like I’m pissing into the wind,but MR is the only place I can fart without being barred.Amren cut me off for using the Sharpton/Jackson/McKinney disallowed N word. GW is gracious and more tolerant.The class of posters here truly impress me[including Dr.Ray] The personal bickering sometimes seems overboard,but I’m here mainly to gain insight from other WHITE countries,how their concepts mesh with mine,and what political routes are availiable to we10&#xth;at have accomplished 90% of the world’s progress.Anyway,thanks for allowing me to piddle in your pond. Semper Fi !

Posted by Nick Tamiroff on July 14, 2006, 02:53 AM | #

Christ,that got screwed up-supposed to read “10&#xth;at have” Oh well-I don’t type worth a shit either.That’s what I had secretarys for[Oh-Oh-just pissed off a feminist] Cheers ! BTW,speaking of femi-nazis,I never hear from the uber-liberal June Gordon on this site.Never mind;she would stand out like an ignorant NEGRO at a KKK rally.  LOL