The bigger picture

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 10, 2005, 12:09 PM | #

“c) the control of the news and entertainment media by those not belonging to America’s Euro-American majority,”  (—from the log entry)

Yes, certainly since the publication of Prof. MacDonald’s research no one can deny the Jews are right in the thick of the mischief (see Prof. MacDonald’s account of how they, specifically as Jews openly viewing themselves as advancing “what was good for the Jews,” were instrumental in pushing through the 1965 Kennedy-Celler Immigration Holocaust Bill; see how one must almost assume anyone with a Jewish name or identity will support open borders and white Christian race-replacement virtually as a religious tenet, whether he himself be a liberal or so-called “conservative,” how almost anyone with a Jewish name will react to the notion of a national-origins immigration policy the way a vampire reacts to the sunrise, and so on) as is Wall Street and its CCR toadies, Christian groups motivated by who knows what sickness, etc., etc, etc.  But I think the chief culprit in what’s going on is the fact of having extended the vote to women.  Women will never vote to safeguard the nation-state or the race because they cannot see either entity.  You can’t vote to safeguard something whose existence you are unaware of and will always be unaware of.  None of the Jewish “support race-replacement of white Christians because it’s good for the Jews” mischief of the twentieth century would’ve gotten off the ground were it not for the fact that half of voters since the 1920s have been women.  If we had had an all-male electorate in 1965 there’s no way that year’s Kennedy-Celler Stealth Genocide of White Christians Immigration Holocaust bill would’ve passed Congress and been signed by Pres. Johnson.

Posted by Steve Edwards on July 10, 2005, 01:10 PM | #

Gentlemen.

I hate to blow my own trumpet, but there is a raging debate concerning these exact issues on the following blog:

http://www.farisqc.observationdeck.org/

Post title: “How do we protect ourselves? How do we protect our children?”

Basically, it’s me and a couple of others versus the usual coterie of anti-white, pro-replacement, pro-“it’s-inevitable-that-we-must-abolish-our-ethny/culture”, extreme liberals.

It’s a fun debate, especially against minds that are yet to have exposure to the hard rigours of blogs like this one.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 10, 2005, 02:04 PM | #

I went over and checked out the thread, Steve—skimmed through the first couple dozen readers’ comments.  Not bad but I’ll be frank with you, I think we have better-quality stuff over here ...  Hey that guy signing as “Peter” is a real moron isn’t he:

“You people are obsessed with race (what ever that is). Its amazing. Its also misdirected (and sad). I have lived or worked in many countries and I can tell you that of all the demographic variables race is the least important. In fact I doubt whether it exists as a orthogonal domain.”

I like the way “Frank” handled him, though:

“Peter:  Tullamarine, Sydney, Brisbane or Perth. Take your pick mate. Each one has an International airport and you can be re-aquainted with your PLO mates and islamic fundamentalist buddies in no time.  In other words…people like you should F__K off and make Australia a great place to live again…”

Posted by Steve Edwards on July 10, 2005, 02:13 PM | #

You should read the last dozen comments, if you want to see the real clincher.

Posted by Steve Edwards on July 10, 2005, 02:16 PM | #

In any case, you are right, Fred. Before I read this blog, I never bothered to trace multiculturalism back to its first principles AND to its logical conclusion.

As the slightly insane Robert Welch used to put it: “project the lines”.

Posted by Stuka on July 10, 2005, 03:49 PM | #

And no “election” and no “conservative Republicanism” (under whose administration this is taking place) will solve the problem.

True, but what will solve the problem?

BTW, excellent post. You’ve nailed it.

Posted by bb on July 10, 2005, 04:14 PM | #

“You people are obsessed with race (what ever that is). Its amazing. Its also misdirected (and sad)...In fact I doubt whether it exists as a orthogonal domain.”

How loony.  One thing about race that is almost always left unsaid is that one is almost *guaranteed* to be more genetically similar to other members of one’s own race than members of another race.  Indeed, if I were to pick out a random white guy and a random East Asian or Latino/American Indian guy, I would only share about 70% as much polymorphic DNA with the EA/Amerind as I would the white guy (incidentally, I think the Amerind would share about 80% as much polymorphic DNA with an East Asian as with another Amerind, still a significant difference even though these groups are often seen as substantially more closely related than others).  For someone of heavily Sub-Saharan African ancestry, this figure would drop to around 60% or possibly a bit less. 

Take this piece of nonsense from Lewontin:

“for almost all of those [polymorphic] genes, it doesn’t matter from which population you take the sample; they have the same proportions. That is to say, if it’s 75% of Form One and 25% of Form Two in Europeans, it’s 70% of Form One and 30% of Form Two in Africans and 73% of Form One and 27% of Form Two in Asians, and so on. Most genes are like that.”

This is simply not true; these figures would suggest an F statistic not much above 0.01 or 0.02 (if that, given that much of racial/ethnic variation is graded between these locations this might imply an F-statistic of less than 0.01), rather than the overall 0.10 to 0.15 generally found (and the 0.25 to 0.30 F statistic that is found in comparing Africans and non-Africans, and 0.15 to 0.20 found when comparing major groupings, such as Europeans and East Asians or Amerinds).

Lewontin’s combination of distortions bordering on outright lies and tendency to employ and emphasize non-sequiturs (e.g. race does not exist because only 10 to 15% of variation is between ‘races’) has done an enormous disservice to the discourse of race and genetic differences.  What angers me more is that even someone utterly clueless about science should see *BIG RED FLAGS* (pun not intended, really) behind anything poltical or politically tinged coming out of Lewontin, given his open admiration of Lenin and Mao.

Posted by jonjayray on July 10, 2005, 08:54 PM | #

“racial degeneration due to immigration and multiculturalism”

Just to take one point:

Non-Hispanic whites still almost exclusively marry non-Hispanic whites so even your first condition for “racial degeneration” is not met

Posted by Steve Edwards on July 11, 2005, 03:12 AM | #

Say, just on the subject of that thread I linked to:

http://www.farisqc.observationdeck.org/?p=263

That Ashley fellow whom Kubalai so amusingly trashed has argued that:

-Muslims have a human right to immigrate to Australia

-Australia has a moral obligation to accept X immigrants from Y countries because we displaced the aborigines!

I’ve already blown these ridiculous arguments to pieces, but it does serve to remind us what we’re up against. It is pure Marxist nonsense, apparently believed by many “conservatives”, only they have substituted “race” for “class”.

Instead of the “global proletariate” we now have the “global oppressed” whom we must welcome to our lands in massive numbers so as to salve our troubled consciences.

Posted by Kubilai on July 11, 2005, 10:43 AM | #

Thanks Steve.  It looks like I got banned from the site because I tried posting this and it did not go through…

Steve Edwards,

Excellent posts all, especially #54, 55, 71, and 85.

Why haven’t any of the Marxists (cue Ashley) attempted to answer post #55 by Steve?  Would Iceland still be Iceland with a majority of genetically distant immigrants?  Does it have a moral obligation to displace its native population due to some baseless, psychotically derived, purely European “guilt”?  Do the words “enough” ever enter in the vocabulary of Marxists?

Ashley, who I am focusing on due to his extreme Marxist indoctrination, parrots the typical Karl Marx sewage with the buzz words of the day such as “globalization” and “diversity” instead of “proletariat” and “class”.  The class warfare of Marx has been switched with race warfare of western people.  We are to be racially and ethnically blind while our beloved immigrants have nary a clue what that means.  Some Marx quotes for effect…

The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to Socialism.

<object in life is to dethrone God and destroy capitalism.

From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs. - Obviously some third worlders “need” more than westerners

Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels. - native populations here

As to immigration, we need zero from genetically distant people.  Zeee-Row.  Not high IQ, low IQ, or moderate IQ.  The ethnic nepotism practiced by these people is ridiculously high and their ethnic genetic interests always trump ours due to the elite muzzling the native populations.  Muslims may be the most backward and vocal as to what their intent is, though this is no different than the “model minorities”.  One uses a dagger while the other uses a velvet glove and the end result is the same, namely a racial displacement of native populations leading to our genetic and cultural extinction.  These are the results people like Ashley clamour for.  It is time for people to awaken from their comfortable slumber because the roads to significant conflicts are come to a head.  I do not advocate hate or retaliation because there is no need for such futile endeavors.  We need to practice our genetically instilled, yet socially suppressed, group self-preservation because we may be ok, however our progeny will suffer greatly due to our “enlightenment” and “tolerance”. 

As to Ashley’s assertions that Australia (and the west in general) is too “boring” due to a lack of “diversity”, hence the need for untold immigrants, get a dog for Christ’s sake.  It will lower your blood pressure and it won’t harm the damn country you live in.

Posted by this site sucks on December 29, 2005, 07:18 AM | #

BOTH AMERICA AND AUSTRALIA AREN’T WHITE COUNTRIES. THE WHITES WERE IMMIGRANTS. WHITES DON’T OWN THAT LAND. IF THEY DON’T LIKE IMMIGRANTS LIKE THEMSELVES COMING IN THEY SHOULD LEAVE AND GO BACK TO EUROPE AND STOP MAKING WEIRD, STUPID SITES LIKE THIS

Posted by THIS SITE IS STUPID on December 29, 2005, 07:24 AM | #

HELLO, AUSTRALIA IS NOT A WHITE COUNTRY NOR DOES IT BELONG TO WHITE PEOPLE. SO IF ONE RACE INVADED GERMANY AND STARTED SETTING UP IT’S GOVERNMENT THERE DOES IT BECOME A COUNTRY FOR THAT RACE? JUST SHOWS HOW STUPID AMERICAN AND AUSTRALIAN PEOPLE ARE. JUST GOES TO SHOW WHY AMERICA ELECTED A MONKEY FOR PRESIDENT, BECAUSE THEY CAN ALL RELATE TO HIM.

Posted by Matt on December 29, 2005, 09:38 AM | #

It is true that we are all God’s children. God created the world and everything and everyone it, this is true, however he also placed them in the various lands we now call countires. This was his will. God wanted us to live in peace and together on the one planet, however it was also his intention that we be seperated, in order to do so. People should return to the lands that God wanted them to live in. This is the only answer to true world peace.