The Bear’s Lair: The costs of political impossibility

Posted by Geoff Beck on October 03, 2005, 09:34 AM | #

Without having read the article, I agree with Gordon Hanson, a political solution to the immigration invasion is impossible.

The only group that wants to restrict immigration is a subset of Euro-American representatives. The number of White votes are not enough to overcome the unified anti-Euro voting blocks: Jewish, Black, and Mestizo.

Graphs of voting here

There is only one solution: secession and balkanization. Euro-Americans unite or die, unite or die, unite or die.

Posted by Ben Tillman on October 03, 2005, 09:39 AM | #

Blacks also support immigration restriction, but their elites are even more corrupt than ours.

Posted by Martin Hutchinson on October 03, 2005, 09:40 AM | #

Geoff, you’ll find that there’s substantial support for immigration restriction even among Hispanic US citizens and legal immigrants.  The economic damage to domestic low skill workers from high illegal immigration is unquestionable, as Hanson was careful to document.

High skill, legal immigration is a somewhat different (though related) question.

Posted by Geoff Beck on October 03, 2005, 09:46 AM | #

Ben,

Yes. I think there are, indeed, large numbers among the Black population that support immigration restriction. But their ?representatives? sure don’t vote that way.

Still, I also think many Blacks see their chance to finish off the White man for good - and I have no doubt such thinking also runs strong among the Mestizo and Jewish groups.

Posted by Geoff Beck on October 03, 2005, 09:49 AM | #

Martin,

> you’ll find that there’s substantial support for immigration restriction even among Hispanic US citizens and legal immigrants.

I think that is largely an illusion, to comfort the sleeping white masses:

Again - BY THEIR DEEDS YOU SHALL KNOW THEM - when it comes time to vote the Jews, Blacks, and Mestizos cast their votes for Euro-American oblivion:

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/1510/

Martin, I’m not going to fool myself.

—————————————————————————————
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1173790&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312

WILLIAMSBURG, Va. Sep 30, 2005

Oswaldo Martinez, a 33-year-old illegal immigrant, was ordered Thursday to receive language training at a state mental hospital to make him competent to stand trial in the rape and murder of 16-year-old Brittany Binger.

Binger was grabbed from behind, choked and sexually assaulted

Posted by Fred Scrooby on October 04, 2005, 12:26 AM | #

“Finally, since all economic activity consists of an exchange of information between buyer and seller, and much of the information exchanged depends on a shared culture and knowledge base between the two sides to the transaction, increasing the diversity of a culture is likely to increase the informational costs of economic activity, and the probability of fraud of one kind or another.  This effect is difficult to measure, and it may be small, but it is highly unscientific for economic elitists to dismiss altogether the notorious popular opposition to rapid increases in the population’s diversity.”  (—from the Bear’s Lair column)

James Kalb in his important article, “

,” as well as in others of his writings, also expresses this fundamental idea: 

“Attempts to abolish deeply rooted human tendencies are necessarily tyrannical; ‘rule by the people’ is absurd when a government that loses confidence in the people can dissolve it and form a new one. Such attempts inevitably fail, and succeed only in destroying traditional restraints. Attempts in Russia to abolish the profit motive ended, after unparalleled brutality and massacre, in lawless greed and mafia rule. It is not clear why attempts to abolish ethnicity should be more successful.  Rather than attempt a utopian transformation of human nature, it seems better to accept the distinctions men find important and let them deal with them in customary ways that make sense to those involved; abuses and extreme cases can be dealt with as such. Things classified as racism—ethnic loyalty and dominance—are necessary features of social life. Something as closely related as ethnicity is to men’s habits, attitudes and loyalties is plainly relevant to participation in a common effort like carrying on a business.[21] The fact that men universally take ethnicity into account in choosing associates is the best possible evidence that it makes sense for them to do so.”

Posted by Fred Scrooby on October 04, 2005, 12:46 AM | #

Since I refer to James Kalb’s essay, “Anti-racism

,” in my comment above, I’ll just mention here that it is one of the central essays of the entire restorationist/tradcon movement.  This essay cannot be too highly recommended.  Here’s how it begins:
______

“Racism is the worst of sins, the gravest of public dangers, the most repellent of spiritual disorders. Any taint of racism soils and discredits in all respects.”

Some such view is fundamental to public life today. The emphatic opposition to racism that is now obligatory gives the “race card” extraordinary potency.[1] If you are not part of the solution then simply by living your life from day to day you are participating in “institutional racism.”

The nature of anti-racism is rarely discussed analytically, so it appears to be less a matter of doctrine than feeling and general orientation. Nonetheless, as a view that dominates public policy it has definite content. As such, it holds that there is a definite thing called “racism,” backed by power and constituted by contempt and hatred for those who differ, but for which race relations would be harmonious if indeed differences were noted at all.

Anti-racism is not at all middle-of-the-road, although resistance to it is thought extremist. Its principle is not live-and-let-live but eradication of the universal practice of ordering life by reference to feelings of extended kinship. On the colorblind reading of civil rights law that is the most conservative view now tolerated, it is illegal to treat ethnicity as relevant to social relations that matter. More advanced readings of the law, that recognize the continuing power of ethnic ties, call for government to equalize advantages by suppressing ethnicity in the case of whites and enhancing it for others. It is simply assumed that government can carry out such a program fairly and effectively and that men will accept it indefinitely.

All over the world, anti-racism is enforced by anti-discrimination laws and prohibitions on hate speech and hate crimes. Human rights treaties make anti-racism part of the law of nations,[2] and it has forced white South Africans to give up a position that once seemed impregnable. Respectable French intellectuals would rather abandon French particularity than seem to ally themselves with Le Pen.[3] British TV is now as multiracial as American, and there have been serious official proposals there to make private racial comments criminal.[4]

Although now considered fundamental, anti-racism is a recent growth. Many dictionaries did not include the word “racism” before the Second World War.[5] The 1968 convention was the first the Democratic Party held without whites-only delegations. One of the first Roman Catholics to identify racial segregation as a sin died just last year.[6] The dimension anti-racism adds to moral life is thus novel.

It is a dimension that gives race relations a very special position. The anti-racist sees racism as pure pathology, like smallpox. It would be all gain if it and everything that might lead to it were utterly destroyed. Racism is thought to transform everything it touches. It turns insults into crimes and makes even atrocities more ghastly. The crimes of leftist regimes are thought no more comparable to Nazi outrages than a botched surgical operation to a brutal murder. It is not thought odd when The New York Times finds glory in its connection to Walter Duranty[7] while attacking the Swiss for insufficient anti-Nazism.

Unparalleled evil though it is thought to be, racism is seen everywhere, whether there is evidence for it or not.[8] As long as some groups are collectively unequal to others, the world is racist, and the harder it is to find an explanation that can be publicly accepted, the more fundamental and pervasive racism must be. Accusations of racism always stick, at least a little, and no matter how reckless or even cynical never hurt the accuser. Even false accusations can be valuable, because they draw attention to important issues.[9]

In current practice, anti-racism is aimed at whites. In their case, racism includes not only hatred and abuse, but any distrust of others, any special concern or preference for whites, any recognition of whites as a people. Anti-racism also imposes on whites an obligation to sacrifice their interests to those of nonwhites. If a white does something at odds with black interests or desires, for example if he fails sufficiently to favor “affirmative action,” he is racist or at best insensitive.[10] In contrast, public statements by blacks can be revoltingly bigoted without consequence.[11]

Permitting to some what is forbidden others seems to relativize racism and thus deny that it is ultimate pathological evil. It also suggests that anti-racism draws support from anti-white bigotry. The suggestion is correct.

Posted by Welleran on October 04, 2005, 06:33 AM | #

One thing I want to say - if you want me to read these, you really MUST put them up in some format other than Word.  I absolutely will not download Word documents from random places on the internet and anybody who pays the slightest attention to security issues will understand why.

Posted by Geoff Beck on October 04, 2005, 09:18 AM | #

I’m with you Welleran, I have never downloaded a single word document Martin has posted.

Sometimes he has interesting perspectives on events. Too bad.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on October 04, 2005, 12:28 PM | #

I dunno, I’ve clicked where it says “Open file” for every one of his columns since he switched, and I’m still here—the Gedapo hasn’t taken me away yet ...  Are you guys sure it’s so dangerous???  (Martin’s columns are without fail very well worth a read, incidentally:  they’re always excellent.)

Posted by Phil on October 04, 2005, 05:20 PM | #

Whats the problem with word?

Posted by Geoff Beck on October 04, 2005, 05:45 PM | #

> Whats the problem with word?

What wrong with plain text, everyone else uses it?

For me, I don’t want to monkey around with the MS bloatware anyway. I don’t even own their flawed, maggot infested software.

Posted by john rackell on October 04, 2005, 08:09 PM | #

It is so easy in Word to save a document as an htm page and post it on the http server that not to do that is strange. It’s more work just like clicking on a pdf, waiting for Acrobat to load. Marginally slower, and marginally less likely to want to read it. HTML is almost instantaneous. Why be contrarian with what everybody uses for the web.

Plus word is a prime vector for viruses - people will think twice about following the link. I do.

[If you save as filtered htm it strips personal info from the generated htm source code]

Hey, Mr. MH, the prudentbear used to link to your every week to your Bear’s Lair column when it was published at Washington Times. Now I don’t see it there anymore. Why not let them know about it? More traffic for your website, and your book, may be pick up a few hits for MR. You seem a dyed in the wool optimist compared to some of the financial commentators at prudentbear.

Why did Wash. Times stop publishing BL, if it’s not rude to ask?

Posted by Martin Hutchinson on October 04, 2005, 09:39 PM | #

Thanks for the tip about htm; I will try that next week. There’s not much formatting in the document anyway.  Pdf is fiddly, and I didn’t feel like paying Acrobat’s not-negligible subscription for what is probably a temporary fix anyway.

Washington Times stopped running BL because I left UPI (which has the same ownership.)  The column is still looking for a new dues-paying home; negotiations are ongoing. meanwhile it goes out on the GC website, via MR, and to about 200 e-mail recipients (who get it as a word file, so maybe don’t read it either!)I didn’t know prudentbear linked to it; a pity they’ve stopped—I will e-mail them if and when a new home is found.

Posted by Geoff Beck on October 04, 2005, 10:54 PM | #

Martin,

The respectable conservatives strike again: Harret Miers found Christ and became a Republican. LOL!

Posted by Martin Hutchinson on October 05, 2005, 10:12 AM | #

The problem’s not respectability; GWB isn’t in any meaningful sense a Conservative. Goodness knows what Miers’ true beliefs are, but she’s very unlikely to have the intellectual heft to stand up to the battering of the media, except when ordered to do so by GWB.  A future Souter/Stevens, in other words, which means if GWB makes no further appointments he will have shifted the Court significantly to the left and reduced its quality (O’Conner was at least reasonably center-right, and pretty good, and Rehnquist was outstanding. And before you issue a diatribe against all the Rehnquist Court’s rulings for the last 19 years, he never had the votes—even with O’Connor, they had only 4 out of 9.)

By the way, Network Solutions won’t let me upload htm files into their “Scrapbook” cache, so we’ll just have to stay with Word for now. If you don’t trust Network Solutions’ cache (they are I think the largest amatuer website design company, and appear a perfectly OK outfit) then I’m afraid you’re cut off from BL until it finds its new permanent home, hopefully soon. My apologies.