|
|
|
A murder, a public outcry and some Italian politicians Politicians are the most dreadful cowards. Fear of the fascist left runs through them like Matron’s senna pods through the eponymous 19th Century schoolboy, and with roughly the same effect. But there are times when a fear even greater than that seizes their tender hearts. It has to do with their jobs, and with the electorate - in this present case, the electorate of a country that has passed judgement on over 60 governments since the end of World War Two.
“We will never let this happen again.” An unguarded and pregnant statement. The darkest of all politician’s fears, the one that rips out their wagging, anti-racist tongues, scorches their neo-liberal excuses and leaves them staring at moral extinction, is the fear that the great immigration scam has come home to roost. It’s almost as if they know it must one day. They live with the guilt. As Prodi says, “We will never let this happen again.” But he let it happen til now.
“Everyone hated us before, now we are hated even more.” Another astounding admission. There are 550,000 Romanians in Italy, presumeably most of them hated. One has the feeling that the whole structure is built on sand. Politicians know they have been doing the wrong thing. Immigrants know they are living in the wrong place. Both parties are scared witless of the power of the majority, should it awaken one fine day, shake its head and rise with a steady resolve ... not just a transient display of public outrage. The enemy is not as strong as we sometimes think. Comments:2
Posted by Bill on Sat, 03 Nov 2007 10:15 | # Unrelated post made earlier - sorry. I posted at MR recently, the massive surge in EU immigration has destabilised New Labour’s (EU’s?) immigration schedule, and has knocked it way off balance, causing even more chaos. The numbers from the EU were only supposed to be 13000 per year. Public concern at hugely increased EU immigration has forced non-white immigration off the media/public agenda, so much so, one could be forgiven in thinking third world immigration has ceased to be. I also said the BBC were having great difficulty in dealing with the EU surge immigration narrative, they attempt to get round it by actually being nastily racist to the Polish plumber, (It’s funny how it’s ok to be racist to Whites,) casting them in a poor light as the cause of all our problems. In a way I think it is working, our attention has been vectored to solely EU migration - very clever the BBC. This destabilization has really poked the hornet’s nest, we are hearing critical voices we have not heard before, (lots of liberals among them.) add to this mix, the recently published demographic forecast population growth and the scale begins to fall with a whole raft of a new type of people - who have been cool with immigration – up till now. How soon will it be before the cry go up from these people, “Oh my God what have we done?” It’s also, so sickening to hear these people prefix their criticism of immigration by ....“it’s not racist to talk about immigration” The once thought untouchable, (it won’t affect me) now see the spectra of their cosy suburban - village life being choked by thousands of affordable homes and hemmed in by grid-locked traffic, unable to gain access to hospitals, doctors surgeries, schools, and dentists - are now struck with the reality of it all. This is only the beginning or as Churchill famously said, the end of the beginning – of course, it has yet to get a lot, lot worse. The periods of calm between the raging storms of the immigration debate are getting shorter and shorter - it is a fascinating (and frightening) time to be a fly on the wall in these momentous times watching it all unfold in slow motion. The EU surge is an unintended consequence of Liberal thinking – there will be more 3
Posted by JWH on Sat, 03 Nov 2007 10:24 | # “...by a Romanian immigrant. “ I hope GW doesn’t mind if I briefly reappear to make a correction that has heretofore been ignored. Mailat is not a Romanian. He is a Gypsy, a South Asian. I can understand where the EU and the mass media maintain the fiction of “national citizenship” in which a native Romanian and some guy who looks like Razib or GC, and is genetically similar to them, are both “Romanians”, but this is not so. 4
Posted by JWH on Sat, 03 Nov 2007 10:41 | # Most “Roma” type as genetically similar to South Asians: see here, particularly “genetic evidence” and history sections: A “Czech” gypsy, perhaps eager to blog on GNXP with her fellow co-ethnics: “Bulgarian” gypsies, ready to join the GNXP forum: Another “Czech”: 5
Posted by JWH on Sat, 03 Nov 2007 10:44 | # The two pictures which did not show up can be observed on the wikipedia article, the source of the elderly “Czech” female as well. 6
Posted by JWH on Sat, 03 Nov 2007 10:56 | # more: videos from a GNXP conference? 7
Posted by Bill on Sat, 03 Nov 2007 12:05 | # Something else that has been lying dormant in ‘my documents’ From the blog of Dr. Sanity. “The essence of psychological denial is a refusal to look at or acknowledge reality. Fortunately, reality exists outside of one’s head and is objective and verifiable. It is not altered by whim, desire, lies or myth. This is not to say that people might not believe ideas that do not conform to reality—in fact, they do so all the time. Just like Anna’s description of the child’s ego, the ego of an otherwise normal adult may also resort to childish, immature and primitive mechanisms when it feels threatened. You would think it would be a simple matter to be “in touch” with reality. But it isn’t. It requires a great deal of cognitive effort—i.e. thinking—and often that effort must assert itself over powerful emotions that draw the person away from the real world to a place more comfortable and unchallenging to their inner reality. So, how does a rational person determine what is true and what is delusion? How do you decide if something is a myth or is real? In the case of the Strategy Page list above, people of the left will assert that it is those of us who don’t subscribe to those assertions who are in living in the land of psychological denial. As I already mentioned (and it can’t be repeated too often these days) reality objectively exists outside of any one person’s or group’s beliefs. Psychological denial and the avoidance of an unpleasant reality are certainly not confined to one side of the political spectrum or the other. But what I find endlessly fascinating is how the political left has created and fully integrated specific ideological tools that facilitate ongoing psychological denial. It reminds me of all the paranoid patients I have observed over the years, who effortlessly are able to dismiss or explain away those facts that don’t fit in with their carefully constructed conspiracy theories. If you get too assertive in pointing out those uncomfortable facts, you find yourself in no time fully integrated into the theory. For the paranoid, the case is closed and the argument is finished. The political left has been utilizing the same psychological strategies inherent in the paranoid style since the end of the cold war and the 20th century. The rise of politically correct speech and the dogma of multiculturalism; the insistence on cultural diversity while enforcing a profound homogeneity of ideas and lack of intellectual diversity in academia; as well as the distortions and rationalizations that are currently the hallmark of intellectual debate within our institutions of higher learning and politics—have all combined to dissuade those on the political left from pursuing a course of intellectual honesty and/or emotional insight. This is what makes it so frustrating to debate or argue with today’s typical postmodern leftist. Some are willing to engage in discussion, but you can always count on their complete dismissal of any fact that does not conform to their ideological perspective. No matter how many times you debunk their position (e.g., no matter how many times evidence of Saddam’s WMD’s are found and documented; that evidence has been either ignored or poo-pooed using a variety of rationalizations—and the goalposts are then changed to ensure the safety of the denial)” Bill 8
Posted by zusammen on Sat, 03 Nov 2007 14:17 | # Race realists have failed to skillfully exploit the left’s cognitive dissonance achilles heel. Learn how to troll ‘em, people. 9
Posted by VLC on Sat, 03 Nov 2007 15:54 | # I think most people can make the difference between romanians
and roms / gypsies
http://www.mlahanas.de/Greece/History/RomaPeople.html
10
Posted by VLC on Sat, 03 Nov 2007 15:57 | # Bill, quoting Dr.Sanity:
LOL! the good Dr. is a jewess with her own set of delusions and rationalizations
http://drsanity.blogspot.com/2007/10/in-your-face-moment-for-david-dukes-of.html
11
Posted by Matra on Sat, 03 Nov 2007 16:55 | # Mailat is not a Romanian. He is a Gypsy, a South Asian When I saw this report on the BBC last night that was the first thing I thought of. There was a similar case in Brussels last year. A white Belgian teenager was stabbed to death at a train station. Belgians sick of immigrant crime held a mass demonstration after it was reported that the killer was dark and assumed to be North African. It then turned out he was a Polish Gypsy, though the Gypsy part was left out of most news reports. The head of the police was forced to apologise to the public for giving the impression that a North African was responsible for the murder. The Belgian Minister of Justice demanded that the Brussels judiciary apologise to the North African community for stigmatising them. It ended up being treated as an example of the authorities and public jumping to quickly to racist conclusions. 12
Posted by stari_momak on Sat, 03 Nov 2007 20:03 | # I seem to remember the native English down in Kent having trouble with ‘Slovaks’—dollars to doughnuts the ‘Slovaks’ were gypsies also. 13
Posted by JWH on Sat, 03 Nov 2007 21:40 | # More EU citizens: More likely future careers: conman and pickpocket. 14
Posted by gongstar on Sat, 03 Nov 2007 22:29 | # It’s vibrant enrichment, innit? Look at the story below: if you put low-IQ blacks in schools with whites, they vibrate like anything to express their love and admiration for those who built the country.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/tv/x_factor/article417626.ece We need a Nuremberg Trial at some point to hold the people responsible for this to account. Ethnic violence against whites goes on day in, day out, wrecking lives when it isn’t literally ending them. 15
Posted by VLC on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 01:43 | # I wouldn’t worry about that chimpette, she’ll be a star. Nicolas Sarkozy’s son will probably produce her next album: 16
Posted by Desmond Jones on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 02:49 | # Now if only Italian-Canadians would stand up for their people as well. Sam Gualtieri, 52, of Caledonia, Ont., almost beaten to death by Mohawk Warriors, while trying to evict the vandals from his daughter’s almost completed home.
and in Montreal’s notorious north end; last week’s vicious beating of two white girls at the hands, shoes and boots of a group of girls from another school - most of them black… ...the impetus for this beating - one of the victims has admitted to screaming a racial epithet at a group of black girls in response to having ice cubes flung at her - is an example of the racial, linguistic and socio-economic tensions that are unspoken and tolerated between the two solitudes at these schools, and everywhere else, observers said. That relations are generally calm between the two schools is almost surprising. Lester B. Pearson High School is among the largest in the English Montreal School Board with 1,500 students, “95 per cent of whom are Italian,“one teacher estimated. Many of these students are bused in to the Montreal North school from the more affluent Rivière des Prairies, and they are educated in English. Montreal North has been classified by Statistics Canada as one of the city’s hot spots for crime, where the incidence of violence is significantly higher than in other neighbourhoods. 17
Posted by silver on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 06:00 | # VLC thinks most people (whites, he means) are capable of distinguishing Romanians from Gypsies, yet the very pics he posted to make his point cast doubt on this claim. The first girl in the bottom “Romanians” pic would seem exotic to most western whites (and the rest to most MR-ers, too, if we’re to be honest) and it’s not immediately clear that she’s meaningfully different (“whiter”) from the girl in the foreground of the first “Gypsies” pic. In Romania itself, I can assure people that the former girl would pass (mostly) unquestioned as Romanian and not Gypsy. What distinguishes her to Romanians, then? Apart from subtle morphological hints (that take some practise to recognise), it’s her acceptance as “Romanian” by other (whiter) Romanians. If she’s seen in groups with whiter girls, other Romanians assume that those whiters have somehow “verified” her ancestry—perhaps her parents are more markedly white and the daughter’s appearance is an hereditary “accident”, or she’s somehow otherwise “linked” with the whiter proper Romanian world (“money whitens” but only to a point).
In the western world such distinctions are unknown, and so Romanians are judged on phenotype alone. This has little do with what MR is interested in discussing but I thought it worth mentioning. What’s more interesting is the photo in “The Independant”. Those aren’t gypsies in that photo and if the Italian government decided on an “Italianization” assimilation program one would figure that progeny of such immigrants (if not necessarily the immigrants themselves) would be prime candidates. Rather than pointing this out, however, the comments here are hailing the expulsion. I wonder where 2R (whose in-laws are Romanian) stands on this.
Those who accuse me of “creating rifts” would do better to outline how to deal with those rifts than to accuse me of “creating” them because it’s quite clear those rifts already exist and will continue to do so even without me breathing life into them. 18
Posted by JWH on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 10:08 | # Silver - When are you going to answer as to whether you support “cognitive elitism” as the answer to the problems of the west? Do you also support the immigration of “hundreds of thousands” of “high-IQ Asians” into the USA as well? Just wondering. I believe as well it wss Tommy G who reposted your original “contribtions” to this blog, in which you expressed significant hostility toward white racial survival and racial nationalism (while claiming to be of South Asian ethnic origins), while mysteriously transforming into a “Serbian” anguished over the possibiity that your Nordic Anglo-Australian friends are going to turn against you in some sort of future racial outburst. Disappearing from the forum for several weeks does not make these questions disappear as well. I notice as well that you ignore the pictures from the Roma wikipedia article and concentrate instead on those posted by VLC; an individual truly familair with the Balkans, and the Roma population there, would know that the former pictures (as well as the videos I posted) are more representative of Roma than the more vague specimens you focus on. But, you aren’t Serbian and you don’t live in Australia either, so one can understand the lack of knowledge. “Those aren’t gypsies in that photo…” I thought it was so very difficult to distinguish gypsies from Romanians, how can one be sure then? Or, is that your keen “Serbian” eye? Which is it? You claim to be not “creating rifts” but you entered a thread which has become focused on the gypsy problem and have again started your usual song and dance. I do understand that some of the earlier comments mocking GNXP are likely to have precipitated your return here; it would have been better for you to have waited a while for another thread. But, just like your rage toward Jared Taylor, it just had to be expressed asap. 19
Posted by JWH on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 10:11 | # “I do understand that some of the earlier comments mocking GNXP are likely to have precipitated your return here…” Which was, by the way, an intentional test. Thank you for your comment. 20
Posted by JWH on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 10:19 | # “What’s more interesting is the photo in “The Independant”. How about the “interesting” photos from the wikipedia article? “Those aren’t gypsies in that photo…” How do you know? “...and if the Italian government decided on an “Italianization” assimilation program…” Romanians are not Italians. Roma are not Italians. Therefore: “however, the comments here are hailing the expulsion” makes sense. I understand where you support an “assimilation” program, perhaps assisted by “Jeurasian” miscegenation in the USA, but it would seem that most at “Majority Rights” would prefer that the demographic problems of Italy be solved through measures aimed at the native population, not the import of migrants and their “Italianization”, a process which, as far as one can tell, is not going to mysteriously alter their biological identities. “...one would figure that progeny of such immigrants (if not necessarily the immigrants themselves) would be prime candidates.” Prime candidates for a process that you are advocating, not anyone here. “Rather than pointing this out, however, the comments here are hailing the expulsion.” Why “point out” something which no one here supports, or thinks is possible. “I wonder where 2R (whose in-laws are Romanian) stands on this.” Does this imply that 2R needs to support the migration of one European people into the historic homeland of another? 21
Posted by JWH on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 10:47 | # “The first girl in the bottom “Romanians” pic would seem exotic to most western whites (and the rest to most MR-ers, too, if we’re to be honest).” Note that in the second Gypsy photo, there are whites in the background. The point being, how do you know that the “exotic” girl in the Romanians photo is actually an ethnic Romanian? I presume VLC posted that picture for the other three girls, not the one on the left. Just as the second Gypsy picture was meant to focus on the obviously South Asians in the foreground, not the whites in the back. No one denies that there is an element within the broader Roma population that can overlap the “darker” segments of the native Balkan populations. Let’s consider this. A person familiar with Balkan ethnography - which you, having nothing to do with the Balkans, are not - knows that there are three basic types of “Roma phenotypes” extent there (and which can be observed in those “GNXP video conferences): - The predominant type is that which recapitulates the original South Asian phenotype; these are individuals who appear to have just emerged from bathing in the Ganges; they look completely Indian - A large minority are somewhat “whiter”, but still foreign looking and non-European in appearance, resembling to a great extent Near Easterners/North Africans. These *may* be a result of admixture with European stocks, or they *may* be representative of the original biological diversity of the founding Roma populations - or both - A smaller, but still noticeable, minority, undoubtedly a result of extensive admixture, which could overlap, phenotypically, native outliers, and who are not immediately and obviously “Roma” in appearance The existence of the latter does not invalidate the existence of separate Gypsy and non-Gypsy ethnicities (who all differ in ancestry as well, unless members of the third Gypsy group are merely natives who have adopted the Gypsy lifestyle). It does not prevent one from ignoring outliers and being able to differentiate separate ethnic groups. Nor does it answer questions of genotype and kinship. The point of my original comment is that Romanians should not be held responsible for the actions of “Romanian” Gypsies, and that the groups are not equivalent - regardless of whether one may be able to find, within the populations of both groups, specific outlier individuals who may resemble members of the other group. The ethnic identities and ethnic existence of Romanians and Roma exist independently of whatever “Silver” - or anyone else - thinks of their physical appearance. 22
Posted by JWH on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 10:52 | # A person walking past this crowd (with hand firmly on wallet): would have no problem understanding that they were in the presence of Gypsies and not Balkan Slavs; and that is independent of dress and behavior. Here we see more obvious South Asian types as well as intermediate mixed types as well. 23
Posted by JWH on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 10:57 | # http://migration.ucdavis.edu/MN/more.php?id=1650_0_4_0 Many “Slovaks” living in England are actually Gypsies. Whether or not they are “cognitive elitists” is unknown. 24
Posted by silver on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 11:45 | # “Why “point out” something which no one here supports, or thinks is possible.” Right! Which was entirely my point re Southern Euros in the US. MR is not aimed at them and they need to consider the issues in light of this of this fact. It won’t do any good to claim the US is a “different case”, because if Tom Tancredo can be hailed as a great US patriot then why couldn’t Romance-tongued Romanians be assimiliated into Italian society, especially considering that the distance between a Tom Tancredo and a, say, Paul Craig Roberts is hardly less (and likely much greater) than that of the Romanians in “The Independant” photo and, say, Romano Prodi? That’s the crux of *my* issue: that you, JWH, Desmond Jones etc and I are not exactly in this thing together, and I would prefer that the “silvers” of MR understand this. That’s not to say, however, that the issues this site raises aren’t important to me. They are, which is why I discuss them (here and elsewhere). It seems you, JW, are not able to get over the remarks I made when I first encountered this site. Perhaps you’ve been at the game for so long that you’ve forgotten at just how “brutal” the talking points (like Scrooby’s) seem to an outsider, especially one with no inherent connection with your aims. Rather than use those remarks as a stick to beat me with, you could instead learn from them, and accept that such outbursts can be expected even from potential allies, and certainly from obstructionists. “I notice as well that you ignore the pictures from the Roma wikipedia article and concentrate instead on those posted by VLC; an individual truly familair with the Balkans, and the Roma population there, would know that the former pictures (as well as the videos I posted) are more representative of Roma than the more vague specimens you focus on” Familiar with the Balkans? Um, I’ve lived there. And travelled throughout them. Most Roma are quite easily identifiable though there are some who are problematic. My point, however, was that a fairly large number of *non*Roma would be *mis*identified as Roma by western racialists. Take for instance Serbian folk music idol Ceca Raznatovic (widow of the infamous paramilitary leader, “Arkan”). Every Serb (apart from Stormfront wannabes trying to impress Swedish “compatriots”) would consider her completely Serbian, yet to western eyes she could be misclassified as a Roma or else as non-white. This obviously raises issues pertinent to Serbian majoritarians; I think very few would like to see Serbian society become plagued with race (“whiteness”) issues where none now exist. Serb “racialists” living in the west should consider what impact their views might have on their ancestral homeland, considering it is likely that circumstances may force many of them to have to depart for it. (Majority Rights has a map of the whole Europe in its banner, so it’s not out of place for me to make this point; if strictly western issues are to be debated, that map should be amended.)
It doesn’t “imply” anything. I said I was interested in his views on it. It’s an issue you’re going to have to eventually address whether you like it or not anyway. A large number of nordics are going to want to include spouses or other relatives on the very periphery of Europe (or of “whiteness”) as a prerequisite for supporting WN, and they’re going to demand answers on how these issues are to be treated. I don’t express “rage” at Jared Taylor as much as I begrudge his deliberate vagueness and even outright duplicity. For example, in Late Great..Miami, in bemoaning white Miamians’ plight as the city became overrun with Cubans, was there any concession that the white Cubans were not so much the problem, that they were qualitatively different from the mixed Cubans, that if Cuban immigration had been restricted to white Cubans something of American civilization in Miami might have been spared? No, there was not even a hint of that. Yet the Miami experience was not so different to the New York experience with Jews and Italians. But because Taylor wants the Jews and Italians onside, there’s nary a negative mention of them at all, apart from some “heartburn” they might have caused but which was supposedly clearly only ever going to be temporary.
(I have no idea what you are talking about re GNXP. I never even read that site, let alone post there.) 25
Posted by JWH on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 12:39 | # “Familiar with the Balkans? Um, I’ve lived there” No, you have not. “I never even read that site..” uh-huh. re: Tancredo and Romanians: Obviously you miss the difference between a European nation, which is the repository of an indigenous ethnic type, and a diaspora nation, with a different history and focus. “A different case” is in fact the entire point. “It’s not that they are unanswerable, it’s just that most of you seem more interested in accosting (and discrediting) me rather than discussing and settling points of difference; it’s tiresome answering questions under such conditions. “ Yes. That is why you suddenly disappeared after being asked about “cognitive elitism” and suddenly reappeared in this thread, with the “test” comments intended to uncover the easily inflamed. “MR is not aimed at them…” True enough. “...and they need to consider the issues in light of this of this fact.” MR is merely a blog. “Perhaps you’ve been at the game for so long…” More right than you know. I’ve been in it so long that I know that it is, in practice, merely a “game.” Your Johhny-one-note “contributions” and, more to the point, that some here take you at face value, are merely more evidence of a total lack of seriousness. Does anyone here really believe that in, say, five years, doing things as they have been done, *any* progress will be made. No. Five years from now, MR (if it hasn’t been removed from the internet due to ever more intrusive “hate speech laws”) will be holding exactly the same “debates” - virtually verbatim - with trolls such as “silver.” It is a game. “and I would prefer that the “silvers” of MR understand this. “ How about the “silvers” of GNXP? Or, should that be, the “browns?” “This obviously raises issues pertinent to Serbian majoritarians; I think very few would like to see Serbian society become plagued with race (“whiteness”) issues where none now exist. Serb “racialists” living in the west should consider what impact their views might have on their ancestral homeland, considering it is likely that circumstances may force many of them to have to depart for it. (Majority Rights has a map of the whole Europe in its banner, so it’s not out of place for me to make this point; if strictly western issues are to be debated, that map should be amended.) “ First, I agree with Rnl that the map is “false advertising.” Second, I consider “the west” to include Eastern Europe.” Third, despite your protestations to the contrary, I do not believe you are Serbian, or have any interest in Serbians. “that if Cuban immigration had been restricted to white Cubans something of American civilization in Miami might have been spared?” Putting aside issues of culture, who are these “white Cubans” and what genetic evidence do you have of their “whiteness?” “yet to western eyes she could be misclassified as a Roma or else as non-white.” This is an issue I address and which I strongly disagree with others on. The woman is what she is, regardless of what you or some Stormfronter thinks she looks like. Ethny-identity is based on ancestry and kinship. Shelby Steele does not mysteriously transform into a Greek, and obtain Greek genetics, because Steve Sailer’s wife thinks he “looks Greek.” Mrs. Sailer is not god, neither are you, or the random Stormfronter. Your opinions do not alter a person’s ethnic origins, or their genetics. “...and certainly from obstructionists.” And that is *my* point. Thanks for bringing that up. ” don’t express “rage” at Jared Taylor” Incorrect. When you mentioned the fellow, your rage at being excluded by that white “cognitive elitist” was so palpable it was virtually jumping off the screen. Nothing we haven’t seen before though. 26
Posted by silver on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 12:44 | # “The point being, how do you know that the “exotic” girl in the Romanians photo is actually an ethnic Romanian? “ I don’t know for sure. That photo appears to be taken at some sporting meet or something, so it’s quite possible that the girl is a Roma. However, as I said, “suspect” types seen to be associating with whiters usually means that the suspect’s credentials have been verified. There is still fairly powerful social stigma attached to associating with gypsies, so one suspect, by herself, seen with whiter friends is prima facie evidence that the suspect is not gypsy. (I have seen instances of single gypsies being accepted in groups of nons, but I can’t recall one instance of groups of twos or threes mixing freely, gypsies and nons.) I can speak knowledgibly about this because I *am* Serbian and I have lived there (so JW, do give it up). I’ll relate a personal experience. In Serbia, a friend asked me to take a trip to Bulgaria with him. He turned up at my house with a friend of his, the driver. I was struck by the friend’s swarthiness and kept trying to analyse his features to detect any hint of gypsy genes (typically betrayed by the eyes). I couldn’t really see any but his swarthiness kept me wondering. I eventually concluded that he probably wasn’t gypsy, since my friend was a popular and respected guy and I doubted that he’d take a trip to Bulgaria with a gypsy. (It’s considered impolite to broach this question openly; if he wasn’t gypsy he’d be mortified at my question, and if he was, he’d be offended that I considered worthy of enquiring—they are like negroes in this sense, race is not supposed to matter to you.)
- The predominant type is that which recapitulates the original South Asian phenotype; these are individuals who appear to have just emerged from bathing in the Ganges; they look completely Indian”
I wouldn’t say to “a great extent”, but there is a resemblance. I think the typical Syrian or Lebanese looks less oriental than these gypsies, though. I saw a Lebanese documentary once about a Lebanese gypsy (though nothing of this was mentioned on the program) selling petrol from the back of a horsedrawn wagon. To me, he was clearly distinguishable from the “Arabs” he was selling to.
“The ethnic identities and ethnic existence of Romanians and Roma exist independently of whatever “Silver” - or anyone else - thinks of their physical appearance.” I’m not sure what the point of that as a concluding paragraph was. It’s not like I was disagreeing. 27
Posted by JWH on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 12:51 | # Right. Stories about traveling in the Balkans “proves” “silver” is who he says he is. How about this one: I was walking through Belgrade and I saw a South Asian “cognitive elitist” skickering that he was “silver” and he was tricking naive WNs. There you go. Because I said it, means it is true. By the way, here is the woman that “silver” thinks will be classified as a non-white Roma: What an idiot. What an incredible waste of time. Essentially, the fault lies not with “silver” but with the “leadership” at MR. No, wait, the fault is mine, for not sticking with my resolve to ignore this blog. Stupid, and more stupid. 28
Posted by 2R on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 12:55 | # “Does this imply that 2R needs to support the migration of one European people into the historic homeland of another?”
The answer is no, as a Latvian I don’t support the mass migration of Latvians into any other European Nation. That is, unless that Nation wanted them to. America is another case however. Our enemies in America have made “White People” the targets of extermination. Therefore, together we must become one. We all come from the same motherland of Europe. This is why I prefer the term “Euro” to “White.” If we lived in a healthy White world, North America would be a place for surplus populations of Europeans. Europe is the core, its the main node of the People of Light. America, Australia, NZ, SA, and pockets elsewhere are just areas for surplus populations. That doesn’t mean they don’t have their own myths and histories however. Again Silver is here to stir up trouble. I’m going to sleep now but when I come back, I’ll explain the core (Europe) periphery (USA) model in detail. 29
Posted by silver on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 13:23 | # “First, I agree with Rnl that the map is “false advertising.” Second, I consider “the west” to include Eastern Europe.” “Eastern Europe”, as in “Russia”? St Petersburg, Dostoyevsky, Tolstoy… yeah, laying claim to giants like that is good reason to include the east in the “west”. Not really sure why you’d want a Serbia or a Romania in there, though. Maybe to avoid unsightly “holes” in the map. (Greece I can understand, though the daily cultural “ways of being” of the northern Greeks I am familiar with are hardly different at all from the non-western Macedonians and Bulgarians minutes across the other side of the border.) “Third, despite your protestations to the contrary, I do not believe you are Serbian, or have any interest in Serbians.”“ Then why is it I can speak it? And not just Serbian, but Macedonian and a smattering of Greek, too. Guy, I have even spent a few years living there. I know firsthand of what I speak. Give it up. *Forget* the crack about me being subcon. I came to this blog interested in discussing race issues. I’ve known for a long time that they are important but are just being swept under the carpet where I live (Australia). What I wasn’t prepared for was the, frankly, chilling language with which these issues are discussed on here. I just felt like if that is what things were coming to—dire, dire stuff—then, hell, I’d as soon give up on racialism as see society erupt in violence. I’ve since had to reconsider (come to my senses) because these issues will not benignly resolve themselves. And hell, I’d rather put my own 2c in and risk being dencounced than let the scimitars (who is truly a morally bankrupt human being—by his own admission, actually) and the D Jones’s dominate discourse. “Incorrect. When you mentioned the fellow, your rage at being excluded by that white “cognitive elitist” was so palpable it was virtually jumping off the screen. Nothing we haven’t seen before though.”
Now, when Taylor claims to be including people like me when he speaks up for “whites” it annoys me because I just know that he does not. And I don’t enjoy being played for a sucker. I accept that a rising tide of racialism is going to mean a parting of ways for you guys and I. Because of what that implies, that is not an easy thing to accept but I am beginning to come to terms with it. I do wish you could appreciate how hard it is to have your world turned upside down. I mean, look. I’m now at a marriageable age. As I mentioned, I’m a pretty attractive male specimen and I really wouldn’t have much trouble landing an attractive Anglo spouse at all. But what I am to do? What would life with such a woman signify? Where could it lead? What about children? If it’s not going to be able to last, why even begin it? How I could fight the preservationist fight under such circumstances, when victory would spell doom for my family? See, these are not easy issues to confront, JW. 30
Posted by silver on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 13:32 | # “What an idiot. What an incredible waste of time.” Let people google her themselves, you idiot. If you’ve seen her unphotoshopped, it’s pretty clear that her whiteness could be questioned—as I said, Serb WN wannabes routinely question and scorn such Serbs. I don’t mention her because she’s exceptional, but because plenty of Serbs have similar phenotypes. “Essentially, the fault lies not with “silver” but with the “leadership” at MR. No, wait, the fault is mine, for not sticking with my resolve to ignore this blog.” Why are you so dramatic, JW? It’s not as if the success of your movement appeared imminent only to be derailed by my petulance. Sheesh, how many threads do I even participate in? Or is it that answering my posts robbed you of oh so valuable…seconds, minutes? Come on. 31
Posted by JWH on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 13:55 | # “Eastern Europe”, as in “Russia”? No, idiot, “Eastern Europe” as in “Eastern Europe”, including the, “the non-western Macedonians and Bulgarians minutes across the other side of the border.” “Then why is it I can speak it? And not just Serbian, but Macedonian and a smattering of Greek, too. Guy, I have even spent a few years living there. I know firsthand of what I speak. Give it up.” Who is to blame for our skepticism? Blame your own behavior on this blog and your lies. “Now, when Taylor claims to be including people like me when he speaks up for “whites” it annoys me because I just know that he does not. “ I have no wish to defend Taylor, and you may be correct about hum…OR you may not be. How do you “just know?” Or, is it because you wish it to be so, to push your divisive agenda? “And I don’t enjoy being played for a sucker.” No, you like doing it to others. “I accept that a rising tide of racialism is going to mean a parting of ways for you guys and I. “ You have no idea what you are talking about here. “Because of what that implies, that is not an easy thing to accept but I am beginning to come to terms with it. I do wish you could appreciate how hard it is to have your world turned upside down.” You are doing it to yourself, assuming you are Serbian. When people assert that they consider Serbs to be white, you disbelieve them, always, always attempting to divide. “I mean, look. I’m now at a marriageable age. As I mentioned, I’m a pretty attractive male specimen…” And, humble too. Are you proud of your humility? “...and I really wouldn’t have much trouble landing an attractive Anglo spouse at all. But what I am to do? What would life with such a woman signify? Where could it lead? What about children? If it’s not going to be able to last, why even begin it? How I could fight the preservationist fight under such circumstances, when victory would spell doom for my family?” Who is being dramatic now? “See, these are not easy issues to confront, JW.” No, it’s easier being an intentional obstructionist. “Let people google her themselves, you idiot.” Let them, idiot. You also miss my point: if different pictures of the same person leads different people to hold different “opinions” of their ancestry, then what good is that? If the woman is Serbian, she’s Serbian. If her appearance is so very aberrant to cast doubt that she shares kinship with her putative co-ethnics, have her genetically tested. She can afford it, I presume. There are millions of ethnic Serbs; presumably we are not going to need to examine photos of each one, “photoshopped” or not. By the way, I did observe different pictures of the woman, some in which she seemed more “exotic.” So? “Serb WN wannabes routinely question and scorn such Serbs” Your problem for taking “Stormfront” as some sort of serious discussion site, rather than the pathetic freakshow it actually is. “Why are you so dramatic, JW? It’s not as if the success of your movement appeared imminent only to be derailed by my petulance. Sheesh, how many threads do I even participate in? Or is it that answering my posts robbed you of oh so valuable…seconds, minutes? Come on” Because your stupidity is representative of so much of what is wrong with what you rightly call the “game” (and you can stop the anguish….the “Camp of the Saints” is a 1000x more likely a scenario - and one which we are living under, “slow motion” - than is some anti-Serb racialist explosion). Even the “courtly” Taylor has made his website into a joke by having a comments section for his news items - with commentary which makes MR threads look like a Mensa convention in comparison. “her whiteness “ What’s “whiteness.” Like “westerness” obviously we are talking different languages here. Actually - and this is ironic - you have far more in common with the ‘anti-Serb racialists’ than you imagine, as you have internalized their own definitions of these terms. Your sincerity is questioned because you reject those who you ostensibly should accept as allies. Because, of course, you do not *want* that to occur. 32
Posted by JWH on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 14:07 | # http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceca_Raznatovic I assume “silver” means some of the pictures there. That doesn’t look particularly Roma. if anything the bottom pictures have more of an “Armenian” “Cher-like” look. But, you see, I’m now being no better than Steve Sailer’s wife. I favor extensive genetic testing, including matching genotypes up with phenotypes to see if each has some predictive value of the other (I mean for narrower distinctions, not for the obvious racial ones). But the Sailer method of posting pictures of celebrities (some photoshopped, some not, under different lighting conditions) is not a prerequisite of ethnic identity. Serbs are a European people. If Ceca is an ethnic Serb, and not aberrant, then she is a native European as well. If so, I do not care about Stormfront retards - or you - say what “she looks like”, and my own opinion is no more relevant, assuming all I said above. I do not expect Serbs to look like Swedes, this is not the issue. 33
Posted by JWH on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 14:23 | # “How I could fight the preservationist fight under such circumstances, when victory would spell doom for my family?” You “fight the preservationist fight” alongside those who do not reject you for your (alleged) Serbian heritage. The problem, of course, is that no matter how sincere these others may be, you will always suspect them of harboring an ethnic animus towards you. There is probably nothing anyone can say or do that will change your mind here (and I’m assuming here your sincerity, which I actually do not believe at all). 34
Posted by JWH on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 14:46 | # Silver: contact Taylor directly, or are you afraid he is going to make a “sucker” of you? “here and elsewhere” Where else? what is your “record?” 35
Posted by silver on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 16:33 | # JW, I reply on the assumption that there’s actually something human inside of you; something human which might comprehend the difficulty a man has coming to terms with what he is and what his place in the world is, especially when such realizations come at the expense of what he’d always been led to believe. In short: it’s not fucking easy. So how many times do I have to spell out to you that what I may have said before needs to be considered in this light. Just accept it, forgive it—if you can—and let’s move on.
I know because of my whole life experience, basically. It’s absolutely pointless to me to pretend to share ethnicity with Anglos. We are worlds apart, imo.
You have no idea what you are talking about here.” I’m afraid I do have an idea. You really don’t know anything about the situation down here in Australia, JW. It doesn’t matter, anyway. Look, don’t worry about the stuff I’ve written. It’s entirely understandable that Australians would want to preserve their race and their ways. I admire much of both of those, but the fact is I’m outside them and it won’t do any good to pretend I’m not. I guess that’s life. Pay close attention to what I say next: I’m on your side. I don’t think Serbs or any other southern Europeans have much of a place on that side, not in the *Australian* context, but it doesn’t matter. My hope is that by helping to preserve the Anglo-Saxons I’ll also help preserve the Serbs (and other Orthodox Balkanians, who I really do feel are “my people”), who are sure to find themselves facing a deluge of third world riff raff in coming years. I think if the fight can be won in the west, the east will quickly discard multiculti practises, since the only reason it pretends to adhere to them is to impress the west. That done, I’d gladly move back home. Take this as an admission that you’re right, JW. You, and Jared Taylor, and Fred Scrooby, and Desmond Jones, and GW and….the whole lot of you. I concede it. 36
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 16:36 | #
That 50,000 figure is from that nine-year-old article. Today there are hundreds of thousands, a demographic hit which tiny Ireland (population some 3½ million before Prof. Ferdinand von Whatsisname’s incoming Third-World population transfers began on a large scale around five years ago) — a demographic hit which tiny, fragile Ireland won’t recover from racially, cannot possibly recover from, unless stern measures are taken and taken soon (one such measure being to send the professor packing, no matter where — back to Germany or Poland or Austria or wherever the bastard’s from — or even better, to Port Morseby.) (Oh, and I almost forgot the most important part — put an explosive collar around his neck, the radio-controlled kind that explodes when you try to leave, like the one Arnold Schwarzenegger wore in the film Running Man). By the way, Silver is no Serb or other variety of European: that much has been abundantly clear for a while. I no longer think he’s a ‘ttoid. And he’s not Jewish (though his seething hatred of Euros might throw someone off, as it is a dead-ringer for the seething Euro-hatred which lots of Jews harbor). Neither is he a ‘gloid. I think Silver is a ‘loid and his first reply, to the effect he was a Paki, was the truth. [Glossary: ‘ttoid = mulattoid, ‘gloid = Mongoloid, ‘loid = Australoid (i.e., Subcon, Subcons being largely a mixture of three broad racial groupings, Australoid, Mongoloid, and ‘zoid = Caucasoid)] [Looking just now for the latest on Dravidian racial genealogy, I was nauseated to see how the Wikipedia article has been polluted by Jews or by the Negro or female anthropology majors whom the Jewish college professors dupe into joining the race-denial cult and then whip up into a trance-like state of hallucinatory indignation motivating them to go around to Wikipedia articles inserting the following kind of crap:
37
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 17:03 | # The photo JWH meant to link in his comment of 9:52 AM is I believe this one. 38
Posted by gongstar on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 18:44 | # I really think we’ve reached a milestone in the sea-change as the zeitgeist does a U-turn. It’s easy enough to guess which Sunday paper this might be from:
But the same paper contained this—and written by a Chosenite!
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2204932,00.html Tribal concerns are obviously still at work, but really: a decade ago he’d have excommunicated himself for talking like that. 39
Posted by 2R on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 22:42 | # Every few weeks or so silver comes here and everyone forgets about the last time someone caught him in a lie. We can keep telling silver that we see him as one of us and all he does is accuse us of “wanting to come after Southern Euro’s last.” The only thing I can’t figure out, and what we really have no way of knowing is whether silver works for a “watchdog” organization or whether he just comes here for a hobby? I’m going to presume that he does work for someone as no one would spend so much time here if it was otherwise. What’s particuarlly disturbing is how silver is still allowed to come here and spread poison after so long? This situation is representative of our biggest problem as Europeans, that being, an propensity for suicidal tolerance. If this website, which is supposed to be the vanguard of White survival, cannot see this person as being harmful to our cause, than we truly are doomed? But maybe we can’t help it. Maybe tolerance is to us, as parasitism is to another human cluster? There’s obviously some people here that are way out of my league intellectually. I assume the average person here has at least a masters degree and many others have Phds? And it would seem that these degree’s are in legitimate hard sciences? But I guess this doesn’t matter when it comes down do it, as years of linear algebra and discrete mathematics aren’t enough to make you all realize that the sense of “fairness” you care about, is exactly what’s causing our extermination. So I have learned a lot here ,there’s no question about that. But I think its time for me to go on. To take a break from the “movement.” I need time to think. I’m convinced that Euro’s have a disgusting tendency towards suicidal tolerance. I need to figure out how I can change this in our people? This is our weakness. This is what must be examined. I no longer need to visit WN websites as I now know what are biggest weakness is. I have found my niche. I wish you all luck. Despite our deficiencies, I do believe we’ll overcome our displacement. But we must first overcome our weaknesses, and I will personally work on overcoming our main weakness, which IMO is tolerance. I’m sure I’ll run into some of you in the future…...... TWO RINGS 40
Posted by 2R on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 22:50 | # If someone can fix this, in the second to last paragraph, I meant to say “our” weakness not “are” weakness. Also in the 3rd paragraph can you change “an” propensity to “a” propensity. Thanks, 2R 41
Posted by silver on Mon, 05 Nov 2007 00:51 | # 2R it doesn’t even matter what I think. My whole time here has just been a telling of my experience, a coming to terms with an unwelcome reality. You can ignore that, you can call it deceitful, or whatever. It doesn’t matter as I’m not going to be posting here anymore. To sum up: I can’t ignore the scam that’s being perpetrated on people. Had my kind been the last to be granted leave to remain here I would have remained mum, and pretended, right alongside the lefty clowns that cooked up the cockamamie plot, that the presence of my people here is of untold benefit to the host Anglos. But the government have clearly lost their heads, permitting endless numbers of utter unassimilables to arrive, people in whom I have not the slightest interest, people who swamp and will eventually sink the entire country. I don’t think I’d have any place in a ‘post-revolution’ Australia, but I’ll revolt anyway. One last bit of advice, if you want to engage in activism, the high school populations are probably the best places to direct your efforts. They feel the brunt of the non-white presence more directly than most, given they are forced to endure it for hours every day. Yet they are incessantly told to ignore the evidence in front of their very eyes. A simple case that they ‘have interests’ and an expose of the scam of ‘diversity’ should not be difficult. 42
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 05 Nov 2007 05:07 | # The outfit Danny Sriskandarajah works for (see GW’s comment, first in the thread) is, surprise surprise, I never would have guessed this in a million years!, a Jewish organization! Can it be believed? Will wonders never cease! This one’s called IPPR, described elsewhere in a number of places as “New Labour’s pre-eminent think-tank” or something to that effect. The reason it’s New Labour’s pre-eminent think tank is the Jews who run it have together more or less bought the Labour Party and, as is the prerogative of ownership, certainly give prime ministers their marching orders. And their marching orders include keeping the borders open, Negrifying places like Newcastle that are too white for Jewish tastes, and squelching Brit discontent even before it can be voiced. Oh and they’re also stamping out Christmas, as their Jewish tribemates over here are busy doing (Jews loathe Christmas):
Lord Hollick, a Jew, founded it (yes I know that sounds incredible) and bought his life-baronetcy by buying New Labour together with other Jews (ditto). From the web-site: “With Lord Eatwell, Lord Hollick spent two years establishing the institute, which was publicly launched in 1988 with Tessa Blackstone as its first chair and James Cornford as its first director.” Lord Eatwell, doubtless also a Jew (I haven’t looked him up but with that name, are you kidding? What else can he be???), also bought his life-baronetcy. I did look up Tessa Blackstone and she’s ... well, I don’t want to rub it in, but ... No, I won’t do it. You’ll have to look up Lady Blackstone’s ethnicity for yourselves. I mean, I’m a snitch, but not without limit ... My guess is Carey Oppenheim and Lisa Harker, IPPR’s two co-directors (see their pix at top of the page Danny is on), are ... , or are married to ... . (No, I said “my guess” — I haven’t looked them up.) From the site:
Wait, “London and Newcastle”? Just a minute — is Ted Cantle affiliated with this outfit? Sure enough, google “Ted Cantle” IPPR and lots of stuff comes up. So the Jews in the Newcastle office couldn’t stand looking out onto a homogeneous Euro city and had to make an issue of it: remember the Jew Cantle going out of his way to call that city “hideously white” and insist it needed Negrifying? So it turns out he works with this Jewish outfit. +&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&ie=UTF-8”]Here‘s a report for them which Cantle worked on, apparently touting the increase of partially race-replaced areas of the U.K. known under the code-term “Neighborhood Renewal Areas.” Cantle wants as many of these as possible, and an end to homogeneous Brit areas. Scroll nearly a quarter of the way down here to ITV to see Lord Hollick, the Jew who gave Tony Blair his marching orders on open borders and doubtless all else he cared to. Here‘s his Wiki entry. From Jew Watch:
Scroll four-fifths of the way down the page to PUBLISHING:
Now, look at IPPR’s Board of Trustees: we see “Lord Gavron of Highgate.” So this Jewish businessman also bought his baronetcy by the same bribes through which he and his cronies controlled Blair and “New Labour” and control Gordon Brown now. So did this Lord Puttnam on that list who is also Jewish I believe; so did Lord Eatwell on the list and doubtless numerous others here (Neil Kinnock, now Lord Kinnock, is a toady of these same string-pullers) and this of course must be only the tip of the iceberg of the overall degree of Jewish power over the British government. As everyone knows, there is also considerable Jewish influence over the U.S. and French governments. Eurosphere race-replacement is being orchestrated primarily by the Jews, I would say. Obviously some Jews don’t like race-replacement, and a number of these are protesting as vociferously as they can. But the Jews who like race-replacement and want it brought to completion are stronger. So, Danny isn’t really to blame for his brazenness. He’s merely a lowly employee of the Jews and is following his marching orders: word has come down from above that race-replacement is the goal, and race-replacement it shall be! 43
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 05 Nov 2007 05:28 | # Excuse me, where I put “baronetcy” above, that was wrong, I believe: what these Jewish businessmen got with their bribes were full peerages, so they are barons (non-hereditary life peerages) entitled to sit in the Lords I think, and not baronets. 44
Posted by JWH on Mon, 05 Nov 2007 10:46 | # “JW, I reply on the assumption that there’s actually something human inside of you..” No, there is not. Instead there is a skepticism in that “silver” refuses to answer simple questions. For example, his stand on “cognitive elitism” and the immigration of “hundreds of thousands of Asians” into the USA per year. Easy questions. He can even lie to us and tell us he is against these things, but, perhaps, like the burning rage against Jared Taylor, it cannot be so easily hidden? If he has discussed these issues elsewhere, why not link to these discussions? On stormfront? on “moot stormfront?” On GNXP? Where? “I don’t think I’d have any place in a ‘post-revolution’ Australia, but I’ll revolt anyway.” Now he is eager to “revolt” against multiracialism. Before, he was so shocked about the “chilling” talk on this blog, he posted the most anti-white, anti-nationalist tripe one can imagibe, reveling in white dispossession. But, let us be “human” and forget this sudden turnaround. From extreme anti-racist to “revolting” nationalist in one easy step. If only it was that easy! ” I don’t think I’d have any place in a ‘post-revolution’ Australia, but I’ll revolt anyway. “ Well, as he doesn’t live in Australia to begin with, that makes sense. By the way, does anyone believe there is going to be a “revolution” in Australia, or in any other ex-western nation? Perhaps if one postulates that the non-whites will revolt and kill the remainder of deracinated, cowering whites, yes, there will be. ” I no longer need to visit WN websites as I now know what are biggest weakness is. I have found my niche. ...I wish you all luck. Despite our deficiencies, I do believe we’ll overcome our displacement. But we must first overcome our weaknesses, and I will personally work on overcoming our main weakness, which IMO is tolerance. ...I’m sure I’ll run into some of you in the future…......” Another thoughtful commentator lost, because of the policies here? This is why this is all a “game”, as “silver” unwittingly underscored to us, and why “silver” is wrong about a “revolution.” “Revolutionaries” are serious, and pursue their goals with crystal clarity. “By the way, Silver is no Serb or other variety of European: that much has been abundantly clear for a while. ...I no longer think he’s a ‘ttoid. And he’s not Jewish (though his seething hatred of Euros might throw someone off, as it is a dead-ringer for the seething Euro-hatred which lots of Jews harbor). Neither is he a ‘gloid. ...I think Silver is a ‘loid and his first reply, to the effect he was a Paki, was the truth.” Very good, Fred. At least one other person here is getting a glimmering. Put that together with “silver’s” obsession with Taylor, his interests in intra-white division, the timing of his leavings and comings, and perhaps some other things can be figured out as well. “The photo JWH meant to link in his comment of 9:52 AM is I believe this one.” Yeah, Fred, “silver” will tell us that those look just like Serbian singers. Can’t tell the difference. Well, not important. What is important: are the South Asians in the picture, “cognitive elitists?” “If this website, which is supposed to be the vanguard of White survival, cannot see this person as being harmful to our cause, than we truly are doomed?” 2R, this is only a blog. There is no “vanguard” or White survival here, or anyone else. Once you are “in the game” for a while, as “silver” so eloquently put it, you realize that what currently exists is a farce. “Pay close attention to what I say next: I’m on your side.” Sure. Cut down on those mestizos, increase the “high-IQ Asians.” Using “triangulation.” Got it. Heard it before. Fred has got it right. 45
Posted by JWH on Mon, 05 Nov 2007 11:39 | # Speaking of pernicious South Asians, such as the Roma and others, here is one of Razib’s latest semi-illiterate scribblings, attempting to critique Kevin MacDonald: “i’ve read two of macdonald’s books (the first two in his trilogy). he’s a good collector of facts, but i know enough about certain periods (e.g., antiquity) to note that he’s doing a might good job loading the die to support his thesis. that’s not even taking into account the fact that his understanding of evolution seems pre-quantitative (typical for most racialist scholars). finally, he regularly imputes bad motives to anyone who disagrees with him, jew or non-jew (e.g., pointing to john derbyshire as a classic example of a conditioned gentile intellectual in his rebuttal to a mildly skeptical review in AMCON MAG). i’ve also seen mac donald in action on e-lists to see that the quality of his arguments doesn’t pass the snuff when it comes to pointed critiques (his responses often involve digging up a rabbinical opinion from 17th century poland or something). as for pinker’s response, your point is not without total validity. though i do give him some slack considering that mac donald does basically shield himself from any jewish criticism by the nature of his theory and so put himself outside the bounds of normal scientific discourse (i.e., jewish critique is basically what one would expect from the way jews are hard-wired, it isn’t in good faith, etc.). but, after seeing mac donald in action i am also inclined to believe that the evo-psych community probably new his modus and inclinations back in 2000 when the slate affair broke in a way that we, the public, did not. david slone wilson i’ve noticed no longer cites his work (i checked the bibliographies) anymore, so he probably didn’t know back then.” If Razib is actually more intelligent that a typical Roma - with whom he shares considerable genetic heritage - it certainly doesn’t show from what passes for his “writing.” 46
Posted by JWH on Mon, 05 Nov 2007 11:44 | # By the way, this ignorant, semi-literate Bengali alien is being supported by “the Unz Foundation.” Obviously, this support is not predicated by the recipient of the support demonstrating any intellectual promise whatsoever - one is likely to find a more insightful commentator from a Balkan gypsy camp. Is, therefore, the support predicated on the use of GNXP to spread particular memes? Would David B. like to comment on the alleged lack of political underfooting of GNXP’s “non-agenda science?” After all, GNXP - which has routinely attacked MacDonald and Salter, pushed assimilationist tactics for nonwhites, trashed Unz’ bogeyman of white nationalism, promoted Asian immigration, promoted miscgenenation - is said by David to have “no policy” on any matter. 47
Posted by Tommy G on Mon, 05 Nov 2007 14:08 | # “Now he is eager to “revolt” against multiracialism. Before, he was so shocked about the “chilling” talk on this blog, he posted the most anti-white, anti-nationalist tripe one can imagibe, reveling in white dispossession. But, let us be “human” and forget this sudden turnaround. From extreme anti-racist to “revolting” nationalist in one easy step. If only it was that easy!”—JWH Or course there is no way of knowing for sure; but maybe silver IS an ethnic Serb and is suffering through an ‘identity crisis’? After all, he shows many classic symptoms of this condition. IE - his repeated complaints he will never be accepted in the ‘anglosphere’. 48
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 05 Nov 2007 15:41 | # Tommy, the main reason he’s not a Serb is no Serb on the planet harbors the fear he’s “not white enough.” The Serb, or Bosnian, or Croatian, or Montenegrin, or Macedonian, or Slovenian, or even Albanian, who harbors that fear doesn’t exist — the thought that he’s “not white” or “not white enough,” or concern over “ultimately not fitting into Anglosphere society because of his duskiness or physical appearance or ethnicity,” the sort of thing that Silver says is eating out his entrails, never entered a Serb’s head. Ever. All Serbs consider themselves fully white and never in a thousand years would wonder if they were “white enough” for a millisecond, let alone agonize over the question. There are a number of other strong reasons as well, why Silver’s not Serb or European. He’s also not Negro, Oriental, or Jewish. 49
Posted by gongstar on Mon, 05 Nov 2007 16:36 | #
Typical. What the typing Bangla saves on not using capitals, he loses 20 or 30 times over with his gobbledygook, which doesn’t even say what he wants it to say. He does to the English language what his low-IQ cousins are doing to large parts of London: turns it into a slum.
MacDonald’s got two very important things Razib lacks: courage and a respect for truth before self-interest. He knows the Jews are powerful and isn’t going to get on the wrong side of them. 50
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 05 Nov 2007 16:39 | # Gongstar ........ he’s already on the wrong side of them .................. 51
Posted by Tommy G on Mon, 05 Nov 2007 18:32 | # “All Serbs consider themselves fully white and never in a thousand years would wonder if they were “white enough” for a millisecond, let alone agonize over the question.” I agree, Fred, all NORMAL Serbs consider themselves white. But let’s put ourselves in the shoes of a very insecure, ‘swarthy’ mediterranean type youngster, who emigrated to Australia where blond hair and blue eyes are the norm. I can see how that type of person/personality may very likely develop the distorted self-image of a non-White misfit—especially if the kid is continually teased for looking a bit different. I know when I was growing up we used to tease some the Italian kids and call them negroes because they had a darker complexion than the norm. However, none of those kids - that I’m aware of - developed an irrational complex that caused them to feel less than white. Perhaps its because where I live [Detroit, Michigan] there are plenty of negroes to draw the distinction from. If silver is in fact an ethnic Serb who has a problem believing that he is fully white, I have the perfect remedy for his condition. He can spend six months living in the black ghetto-slums of Detroit. After that experience, he will never again have any ambiguous thoughts about whether he is white or not. The “groids” will teach him real fast just how white he really is. 52
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 05 Nov 2007 22:02 | #
The problem with this, Tommy, is Serbs aren’t swarthy and that goes for the Moslem Bosnians as well: they’re not swarthy. It seems to be a not uncommon notion around the blogosphere that they are dark, Arab-looking or Turk-looking. But they aren’t. They’re completely Euro-looking, specifically Slav-looking to a degree. That’s not swarthy. Why they’re not Turk-looking, given that the Turks occupied them for long periods, can only be because somehow race-mixing and race-replacement were avoided during those occupations, and they managed to marry only among their Slavic selves. Thank God — they kept their race from going out of existence. But whatever the reason they’re not dark, the fact is they’re not. They’re normally white-looking. Silver’s anguished self-absorption along these lines can only be because he’s swarthy, which rules out Serbian as his race. I think he’s a Subcon. Wasn’t there a Subcon signing as “Malcolm” here who claimed he was a Dutchman (who argued with J Richards for the longest time)? Silver reminds me of him. I don’t think Silver is Razib but it’s been years since I’ve seen Razib’s writing style, as I keep strictly away from his blog, so I’m not a good judge. 53
Posted by VLC on Tue, 06 Nov 2007 00:10 | #
agreed, that one seems to have some turkish blood or something though from that distance it’s hard to tell. I found those pictures of romanians by searching for ‘romanian’ + ‘team’, there were lots of pictures but most were kind of small. I wasn’t going to spend 2 hours to get the right picture to make my point, which is that you can distinguish a roma from a romanian by looking at them so all this talk in the western media about problems with “romanians” living in Italy is misleading and probably deliberately so. The sensitive leftists who act as reporters don’t want to perpetuate ‘stereotypes’ about the criminality roms carry with them everywhere they go. That’s a big No-No
A cognitive elitist desi living in Serbia studying in Australia ? an albanian ? If Silver is really a serb (I think Fred Scrooby at 02:41 PM is right) and he’s worried about being accepted by anglos he must be the only one. Atypical, it’s. Although our kind of race discussions are something most of them - those living in the Balkans I mean - would find strange and irrelevant you can bet none of them could remain calm if of one of their daughters brought back a nigger and said that he’s her boyfriend. Those who live in Western Europe, North America or Australia know better than not to think in racial terms because they experience the ‘diversity’ that our traitors throw at us. 54
Posted by Tommy G on Tue, 06 Nov 2007 01:00 | # “Serbs aren’t swarthy and that goes for the Moslem Bosnians as well: they’re not swarthy… They’re normally white-looking. Silver’s anguished self-absorption along these lines can only be because he’s swarthy, which rules out Serbian as his race. I think he’s a Subcon.”—Fred Scrooby Well, Fred, I certainly have to agree with you that Serbs are not swarthy; therefore, silver at the very lest is of mixed race (like I originally thought). He MAY have a Serb parent and one who is a Sub-con. That might explain the tug of war, or conflict, going on within his conscious (and understandably so). Either that, or he is, like you say, a Subcon. A Subcon who tried in vain to foment division amongst WN’ists at MR. 55
Posted by JWH on Tue, 06 Nov 2007 01:47 | # “I don’t think Silver is Razib…” It wasn’t Razib I had in mind. It wasn’t Razib who had the creepy obsession with Jared Taylor’s racial exclusiveness. In any case, “silver” is far too articulate to be Razib, who writes like a retarded five year old. 56
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 06 Nov 2007 13:44 | # Returning to the topic of the post, the following a comment on the Guardian’s thread to an article titled Italy’s immigration tipping point. The article is written by Alessandra Buonfino, who is Head of Research at the leftist think tank Demos, and who describes her area of specifically interest as “belonging, migration and emotions”. The comment was left by someone with the blog-handle eturgot (not me):-
The implication here is that peaceful Romanians should be welcomed in Italy. But, then, why not peaceful Roma? There must be peaceful Roma, after all. The plain fact is that one is either for population transfers into Italy and every other Western nation - and one is for it for whatever reason, be that low labour cost, an abstract ideal of equality, Jewish EGI, etc - or one is against it on principle and in absolute. Crime is not the issue, of course - just the trigger for some native sleepers, if a very useful trigger. The problem with it is that it enables embarrassed mainstream politicians to address the symptom while leaving the disease well alone. In the end, if the path of Incremental Change is to be followed, ordinary Europeans have to be brought to choose between their own interests and the interests of the elites and their foreign pets. The only alternative is a full-scale Revolution that does not rely on the usual political mechanisms. And what chance that? 57
Posted by required on Thu, 08 Nov 2007 18:57 | # America, Australia, NZ, SA, and pockets elsewhere are just areas for surplus populations. Um, no. America is for Americans. Australia is for Australians. Etc. In a sane world, American immigration policy would be determined by Americans. Not Jews. Not Latvians. That doesn’t mean they don’t have their own myths and histories however. You don’t say? 58
Posted by required on Thu, 08 Nov 2007 20:27 | # JWH, Obviously you miss the difference between a European nation, which is the repository of an indigenous ethnic type, and a diaspora nation, with a different history and focus. “A different case” is in fact the entire point. America’s “focus” is different, how? We are a “proposition nation”? A “nation of immigrants”? Crossing the Atlantic renders EGI irrelevant? Please explain. 59
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 12 Nov 2007 17:28 | # Required, JWH is simply saying it’s a graver form of damage to our genetic patrimony if the original Euro races( * ) are genetically tampered with in their ancient homelands than if, say, inter-Euro mixing goes on in the Euro diaspora. I think lots of people see that. Lawrence Auster, for example, has said racial transformation of the European homeland is a more serious problem than racial transformation of North America, and he’s right of course: it’s undeniable that cutting down the tree at the trunk does more serious damage than cutting off a branch. Other point: could you please choose a pen name and stick to it for all comments thereafter, in all threads? You’ve posted under other names I believe, one being “North-” something or other, I think someone said. May we expect you to continue posting under “required” from now on? That would be helpful, for reasons that should be obvious. (Would mind saying the names you’ve posted under previously?) ( * what JWH would call genetically-distinct ethnies I think, not races; my own preferred term is races) 60
Posted by JWH on Mon, 12 Nov 2007 17:46 | # ‘Matra is not “this blog”. Matra is one poster at this blog. As far as I can tell, GW has more than tolerated your name changes as well as your petulance/whining. Feeling you were “hypocritically” singled out by Matra gives you no excuse for not defending assertions you’ve made on this site in the meantime. ‘ Of course, no answer is forthcoming to my very direct question. Why is that? Speaking of whining, it’s interesting that Kubilai’s comments here about problems his Greek parents had adjusting after migrating to the Americas was labelled “whining” by some, while “silver’s” even more extreme hyper-selfcentered ethnic whining was ignored by the same individuals. It would seem that “silver’s” overall message of division was better received than Kubilai’s one of cooperation. No, I am not going to “defend” anything here when I am singled out as being “dishonest” for doing no different than others. If that’s “whining”, too bad. “As far as I can tell, GW has more than tolerated your name changes as well as your petulance/whining. “ GW can tell me, at any time, not to comment here under any name, and that’s fine. 61
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 12 Nov 2007 17:48 | #
For any newbies: I view true Euros and true West-Central African Negroes as sufficiently different to qualify as distinct species (if that sounds shocking, bear in mind I’m talking about distinct species of human, not distinct species belonging to different genera; bear in mind also that there is a completely serious movement afoot among some scientists to re-classify chimpanzees as humans — not the same species as us, of course, but humans). I view the different kinds of Euros as distinct races. “Ethnie” strikes me as either ambiguous or redundant. I’m not sure how it’s supposed to be used. The reason races aren’t ambiguous given that there are gradients is the same reason other categories aren’t: there are gradients for all of them. As Professor Richard Feynman said, if you want to quibble about definitions you can say a chair is ambiguously defined: for various reasons having to do with chemistry and physics you can’t say exactly where the chair stops and the space surrounding the chair begins. If you want a category to be ambiguous for political reasons you’ll always be able to find a way to do so, and to find Euro dupes like Professor See The Boring Disgrace to swallow whatever “boob bait for the bubbas” you come up with. As P.T. Barnum said, “There’s one born every minute; You can’t cheat an honest man; Never give a sucker an even break or smarten up a chump; No one ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American people.” He was talking about the likes of Professor C. Boring Disgrace. 62
Posted by JWH on Mon, 12 Nov 2007 17:54 | # By the way, Fred, thanks for stating the obvious about my point, in a brief fashion. I’d be more than happy to post a longer, more detailed explanation, which I’ve had sitting around for several days. But, in lieu of my “petulant whining”, I’m going to wait for a clarification from Matra on the subject of commenting. I don’t know, when someone accuses you of dishonesty, perhaps an explanation is needed? 63
Posted by Matra on Mon, 12 Nov 2007 17:54 | # Now, Matra can explain why his call for honest and ethical commenting policies apparently are directed only to me and to no one else. That’s not a rhetorical question; I actually expect an answer. I really don’t know who else you are talking about. There used to be a poster using numerous aliases who always made the same post: the English-speaking world is finished; things are going swimmingly in Holland, Norway, Austria and France; buy and study European language tapes then move to Europe; and then there was usually a sob story about Hindus taking middle class jobs. I did call him on it at least once here and once on another blog. Though he used so many names one time only I can’t recall any of them off the top of my head. Since JWH seems to be monitoring these boards so closely he’ll know whom I’m referring to. His style and subject matter were so unique, like JWH’s under other names, that it was easily recognisable to me but others - perhaps not frequenting this site as much as I had been doing - were responding to his posts, and JWH’s, apparently unaware of who was posting them. If there are others here using multiple names I’m not aware of who they are as I don’‘t read them all and I haven’t noticed someone making the same point over and over in the same style using different names. If someone is constantly using different names and confusing others then fine, go ahead and name them. I really don’t see why JWH is getting so hot under the collar. 64
Posted by Matra on Mon, 12 Nov 2007 17:59 | # If ‘required’ has posted here under other names it is news to me. I think I’ve only seen his name here two or three times. 65
Posted by required on Mon, 12 Nov 2007 18:12 | # Let JWH speak for himself. it’s a graver form of damage to our genetic patrimony if the original Euro races( * ) are genetically tampered with in their ancient homelands than if, say, inter-Euro mixing goes on in the Euro diaspora. I think lots of people see that. Those who “see that” probably haven’t thought the issue through very thoroughly. Lawrence Auster, for example Lawrence Auster is a Jew. Lawrence Auster is a creationist. I can think of people better qualified to offer advice on European preservation. To answer your questions: no, no, yes. GW runs this site. You don’t. 66
Posted by required on Mon, 12 Nov 2007 18:29 | # Of course, no answer is forthcoming to my very direct question. Why is that? Matra has responded. What delaying tactic will you come up with now? It would seem that “silver’s” overall message of division was better received than Kubilai’s one of cooperation. I did, in fact, point out silver as an example of incompatibility before I stopped reading his posts. GW can tell me, at any time, not to comment here under any name, and that’s fine. Ditto. GW was mentioned in my post because you bizarrely requested an “answer” from him re: Matra’s comment. 67
Posted by JWH on Mon, 12 Nov 2007 18:35 | # “GW was mentioned in my post because you bizarrely requested an “answer” from him re: Matra’s comment.” As you say, GW runs the site. I guess a clarification from the person who runs the site is “bizarre.” Got it. “Matra has responded.” Words were written. I don’t consider that a response. “I did, in fact, point out silver as an example of incompatibility before I stopped reading his posts.” I guess we lost track of the different names you’ve been using. “What delaying tactic will you come up with now?” Wrong again: First, I have consistently critiqued the idea of “propositionism” on this blog and attempts to link my comments to some sort of approval for “the proposition nation” or the “creedal nation” does nothing but reflect poorly on those who attempt such an absurd linkage. Second, given a sufficiently broad definition of “immigrants”, America is indeed “a nation of immigrants”, but this is irrelevant to my argument. Third, of course, the sarcastic question as to whether EGI disappears upon crossing the Atlantic can be answered in the negative. Nowhere did I state that EGI was unimportant in the New World; all of my comments over the years on this topic indicate otherwise. The nations/regions of Europe are the repositories, the specific homelands of indigenous ethnic groups. It is vitally important that these nations/regions are maintained in a strictly ethnically homogenous manner, so that the original European ethnic stocks have “preserves” in which they can be maintained in perpetuity. Thus, EGI in the European context means that even the migration of closely related European ethnies is to be discouraged. Indeed, given that English guys like Guessedworker disapprove of even “Scottish interference” in the affairs of England, a strict ethnic homogeneity would seem to fit well with European nationalism and EGI requirements. America is not the original homeland of any indigenous European ethny, although of course it was founded by particular ethnies, especially those of British derivation. The groups indigenous to the Americas are the Amerindians. This does not mean EGI is unimportant in diaspora colonies. Obviously, exactly the opposite is true. EGI is important everywhere. Of course, the “ethnic” in EGI means “ethny” rather than ethnicity, which are not the same thing. An “ethny” may in fact be an ethnic group, or a sub-ethnic group, or, in the opposite direction, a race or subrace. Different contexts influence the ethny under consideration. Of course, ethnicity as such is important, esp. in Europe. However, given demographic data previously posted on this blog showing that every Euro-American ethnic group analyzed exhibits predominantly ethnic outmarriage (as expected, inversely related to their proportion of the population), this means that the typical Euro-American is multi-ethnic. Therefore, while mono-ethnic nationalism may still be viable in places like Canada and Australia (“silver”, take note), it is highly unlikely that a strictly “European ethnic homogenous” model would work in the USA. Therefore, in response to “silver,” I stated that a strict rejection of intra-European migration in Europe does not necessarily lead to a rejection of a multi-ethnic Euro-America, which is a reality for most Americans of European descent. In other words, the difference is that “European EGI” in Europe means strict ethnic homogeneity, while in the USA it may well mean that of a broader racial group, consisting of multiple European ethnic groups. Salter states that a perfect pursuit of EGI is not feasible; we do the best we can in particular contexts. What is appropriate for England, Germany, or Italy may not be specifically appropriate for the USA, and vice versa. 68
Posted by JWH on Mon, 12 Nov 2007 18:40 | # “I really don’t see why JWH is getting so hot under the collar. Posted by Matra on Monday, November 12, 2007 at 04:54 PM | #” Nah, calling someone dishonest for posting under different thread names, while tolerating the same behavior from others, no reason why the person designated as dishonest should want an explanation. Strange set of ethics you got there. ———————————————————————————————————————— “If ‘required’ has posted here under other names it is news to me. I think I’ve only seen his name here two or three times.” Very observant. Very logical also. The point is that he’s been posting under *different* names, so of course you’d only see the name here “two or three times.” 69
Posted by JWH on Mon, 12 Nov 2007 19:46 | # One clarification: if there are mono-ethnic Euro-Americans who want to preserve their genetic interests through strict ethnic endogamy or even territorial separation, fine. That doesn’t alter the major difference that exists between Europe and the USA. Even with globalism and open EU borders, the vast majority of Europeans are of mono-ethnic descent (and have a tighter link to blood and soil in their homelands). Given outmarriage data, it is reasonable to presume that a majority of Euro-Americans are multi-ethnic, and that figures into the EGI equation, as Salter explains in “Fitness Portfolios II.” Of course, there are major similarities between the European and American cases, in that the average person of different European ethnicity is not the fundamental problem faced by ethnic Europeans, although the elites, often co-ethnic elites, are indeed a major and fundamental problem. 70
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 12 Nov 2007 19:47 | # “Required” waxes all snappish and cocky suddenly, in a way that seems totally uncalled for. Cocky’s great if you can back it up with substance. Time will tell if “Required” can (why do I doubt it? ... In any event it’s already looking highly unlikely). Just to get his replies to my reasonable requests clear: “Could you please choose a pen name and stick to it for all comments thereafter, in all threads?” “No.” “May we expect you to continue posting under ‘required’ from now on?” “No.” “Would you mind saying the names you’ve posted under previously?” “Yes.” 71
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 12 Nov 2007 20:14 | # It detracts in a number of ways from the discussions if a participant posts under different names instead of one. Certainly it’s OK to do if the individual has anonymity concerns that somehow aren’t served by sticking to one name (one can imagine situations where that might be the case). Otherwise all participants should choose a pen name and stick with it. And no need for “Required” to tell me, as he did above, “GW runs this site. You don’t.” It’s not a question of who runs the site, but a suggestion by one participant, a suggestion moreover which I’m sure others agree with. Again, if there’s some good reason for switching which can’t be disclosed, fine — keep switching. Otherwise, don’t. 72
Posted by required on Mon, 12 Nov 2007 21:29 | # Second, given a sufficiently broad definition of “immigrants”, America is indeed “a nation of immigrants”, but this is irrelevant to my argument. Under a sufficiently broad definition, every country is “a nation of immigrants”. Under a meaningful definition, there is a rather large difference between America’s Northwestern European colonists/settlers/founders who hacked a country out of virgin forest and your immigrant ancestors who arrived 10+ generations later and strolled off the docks straight into tenements and factories. The nations/regions of Europe are the repositories, the specific homelands of indigenous ethnic groups. It is vitally important that these nations/regions are maintained in a strictly ethnically homogenous manner, so that the original European ethnic stocks have “preserves” in which they can be maintained in perpetuity. As you know (1) races are not static, and (2) national borders in Europe do not perfectly demarcate different racial types. Southern Scots are likely more closely related to the Northern English than they are to Highlanders, modern Scottish nationalism notwithstanding. I much prefer a Europe of nation-states to, say, the EU. Nationalism has benefits. And, where allowed to exist undisturbed over the long term, nations may be considered “races in the making”. But let’s not pretend national identity corresponds more than roughly to microrace today. Thus, EGI in the European context means that even the migration of closely related European ethnies is to be discouraged. I’d prefer minimal international migration within Europe, but that’s not the end of the question. I suspect that migration from S. Italy into N. Italy is doing more damage to N. Italian EGI than numerically comparable immigration from Austria would have done. Nationalism/industrialization/urbanization/cheap transport have caused increased levels of migration within countries, particularly within the past two centuries. Maybe the intra-national racial variation that is being lost is rather inconsequential. Regardless, it’s happening. An American with ancestry from several NW European countries doesn’t necessarily have a less “coherent” racial background than someone who is, say, “100% Italian” (but half-Venetian, half-Neapolitan) or “100% German” (Bavarian/Prussian). America is not the original homeland of any indigenous European ethny, although of course it was founded by particular ethnies, especially those of British derivation. England is not the “indigenous” homeland of Anglo-Saxons. It’s rather unlikely modern Sicilians predominantly descend from “indigenous” Sicilians. The genetic landscape of Europe has been reshaped markedly in historical times. It was likely reshaped repeatedly in prehistoric times. From the standpoint of EGI, it makes no difference whether the ethny is on “indigenous” territory. (Actually, it might to the extent the ethny is better adapted to its “own” territory; but (1) the environment of North America is similar to that of Europe, (2) European technology allows us to cope with most environments anyway, and (3) high rates of natural population increase among American colonists directly demonstrate they were well-suited to the new land.) However, given demographic data previously posted on this blog showing that every Euro-American ethnic group analyzed exhibits predominantly ethnic outmarriage (as expected, inversely related to their proportion of the population), this means that the typical Euro-American is multi-ethnic. The typical American is overwhelmingly of Northwestern European extraction. Mixing with S. Euros is hardly a foregone conclusion. And that’s what we’re talking about here—not mixing between English- and Scandinavian-derived Americans. In other words, the difference is that “European EGI” in Europe means strict ethnic homogeneity, while in the USA it may well mean that of a broader racial group, consisting of multiple European ethnic groups. While organizing along the lines of European national background is not indicated for majority Americans, this doesn’t mean ethnicity is not relevant in America. America does have an ethnic core, consisting of the descendants of the original colonists and later northwestern European immigrants who have assimilated. Southern Euros are a small minority among American whites. Southern Euros have a heightened tendency to view themselves as distinct from mainstream American whites. Genetic studies (and working eyes) demonstrate S. Italians are distinct from Northwestern Europeans. Regardless of outmarriage, blocs of self-identified “Italians” remain, particularly in the North East. The vast majority of Americans have no S. Euro ancestry. Salter states that a perfect pursuit of EGI is not feasible; we do the best we can in particular contexts. Sure. But let’s stop speaking in generalities. What is your idea of “appropriate”? 73
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 12 Nov 2007 21:38 | # Sorry, I don’t see any substance. What in the hell is “Required” agitated about? Anyone know? 74
Posted by Matra on Mon, 12 Nov 2007 22:05 | # “Matra has responded.” JWH:Words were written. I don’t consider that a response. I gave a full response. Nah, calling someone dishonest for posting under different thread names It was your decision to do that, not mine. while tolerating the same behavior from others Like who? I already responded to this above. Read it again. no reason why the person designated as dishonest should want an explanation. When a regular poster changes names that in itself could be described as dishonest. Strange set of ethics you got there. It is even stranger that you would go on a month long huff about all this. Matra:“If ‘required’ has posted here under other names it is news to me. I think I’ve only seen his name here two or three times.” JWH:Very observant. Very logical also. The point is that he’s been posting under *different* names, so of course you’d only see the name here “two or three times.” No, the point is (obviously) that if I’ve only read a couple of his posts - and they were all short ones, from what I recall - how would I instantly know that he’s been posting here before. For example here is ‘required’: Um, no. America is for Americans. Australia is for Australians. Etc. In a sane world, American immigration policy would be determined by Americans. Not Jews. Not Latvians. Am I supposed to know right away that based on that entry he’s been here before? JWH appears to think so. The statement could have been made by other posters here - myself included - who agree with the sentiment but it is hardly such a unique viewpoint and style as to immediately single out the poster as a long time regular here. Here’s another one:America’s “focus” is different, how? We are a “proposition nation”? A “nation of immigrants”? Crossing the Atlantic renders EGI irrelevant? Again. I’m I supposed to immediately pick up on who that is? Desmond Jones? The guy who used to post as Northerner? Again, is the above viewpoint and style so unique that it should be immediately obvious who is saying it? 75
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 12 Nov 2007 22:26 | # Required, Some questions:- 1) Have you posted here previously, invariably attacking JWH’s pan-European Americanism, as “Northerner” and “AA”? Your clarity on this issue would clear the air, and allow the debate to return to a pure conflict of ideas - which is what we want here. Personally, I would support ethno-particularists in America who wish to preserve their distinct bloodlines. But ... (2) how is this to be achieved in modern America, beyond a few very local and long-settled groups in the Appalachians and what-have-you? (3) How are the boundaries of genetic distance to be established, and rendered politically and culturally viable? (4) What is your attitude to that considerable majority of white Americans who, by choice or genetic admixture, find themselves excluded from the “preserve”. Are Meds or near-Meds equally worth preserving, and therefore somehow to be encouraged to mate with others like themselves? Or are none of them worth saving from negrification? (5) If, for whatever reason, it transpired that you can’t have what you want, would you lend your support to JWH’s vision of a broader European rampart? On the free speech issue, incidentally, I want these very significant issues to be addressed, and no one is going to get banned however stubbornly he cleaves to his position. The debate is much bigger than any of us, and so too important to lose for such paltry personal reasons. 76
Posted by JWH on Mon, 12 Nov 2007 23:01 | # Like who? I already responded to this above. Read it again” For crying out loud, Matra, in responding to Fred Scrooby with “no, no, yes”, “required” has stated that he’s planning to continue doing what he’s done before and post under different names. And, this is the *second* time I’ve brought this up; the first time the only one to respond was GW, not yourself. “Personally, I would support ethno-particularists in America who wish to preserve their distinct bloodlines” Personally, I would support those who choose to do so in America, but I’d also support those - in America, not Europe - who may choose a mate of a different European ethnicity. No doubt that EGI is maximized with a co-ethnic mate. But it’d be an accomplishment to get Euro-Americans to stop crossing across inter-continental lines, and there has been an enormous amount of intra-continental mating already. One possible answer is to extend Lowell’s Imperium/Dominion distinction to intra-America, not merely for relations among established nations in the white world (as he supports regionalism, anyway, it is consistent). Thus, within the larger “Imperum”, you have various regions or nations with local autonomy and concentrations of biological and cultural characteristics. These would be, however, all part of an over-riding structure that would provide “insulation” from the other civilizational blocks out there: Chinese, Islamic, Hispanic/Latino, whatever. Euro-America may choose to divide itself up into various “dominion” regions. Certainly, micro-ethnies like the Amish will continue to wish to be separate and should be allowed to be so. Others can assort themselves within the larger structure. This would balance the wish for some to be more concentrated with respect to EGI against the requirements for security and economies of scale, an would ensure that all groups of European derivation are part of the program and are being preserved - and preserved within a viable polity consistent with First World standards. Americans of mixed ethnic descent may be more comfortable in a more generalized Euro-American polity. Or not. The major danger facing ethnic Europeans is not, in my opinion, the existence of different European ethnic groups in America. 77
Posted by JWH on Mon, 12 Nov 2007 23:06 | # “JWH’s vision of a broader European rampart?” It’s important not to misrepresent any positions. A “broader European rampart” does not in any way include panmixia or a generalized borderless superstate, or a disregard for particularisms. It does, however, include a “program” which represents the preservation and advacement of all peoples of European descent. Mixed ethnic Euro-Americans are also “peoples of European descent.” There are some other details of GW’s questions/points I may quibble with, but that’s enough for now. 78
Posted by JWH on Mon, 12 Nov 2007 23:32 | # There is another complication to these issues: ethnic preservation vs. assimilation. One can imagine two conflicting opinions: 1.Intra-European intermarriage should be discouraged for reasons of EGI or phenotype, etc. Also, to facilitate endogamy, ethnicities should maintain their distinctive identities. 2.Intermarriage is an important marker of assimilation. Individuals thinking of themselves primarily, or only, as white Americans or Americans is also an important marker of assimilation. Assimilation of European ethnic groups in America is considered a positive, and groups are castigated if it is believed that they are insufficiently assimilating/assimilated. The problem occurs when the same person/group holds both opinions simultaneously (although rarely if ever both expressed at exactly the same time). Thus, “group X” is attacked for not intermarrying and for maintaining too strong of a particular identity; on the other hand, the critics actually do not want “group X” to intermarry with other groups and discourage members of the group from adopting an “American” identity. This applies not only for the USA. There has been criticism of white ethnic groups who have not assimilated into white Canada, and who maintain a particular ethnic identity. But, is it desired that they actually assimilate? I seem to remember Anglo-ethnic mixes as being referred to as “curs”, so there is a problem. It seems inconsistent to attack a group for not assimilating while at the same time strongly desiring that they do not assimilate. 79
Posted by required on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 00:47 | # 1) Have you posted here previously, invariably attacking JWH’s pan-European Americanism, as “Northerner” and “AA”? Yes. I think most of your questions are framed wrong. Briefly, though: * It’s not a question of preserving European nationalities in America. What I’d like to see preserved is my country’s racially NW European, culturally American (old?) majority. * Preservation will happen, to the extent it does, by majority Americans choosing mates of like background (which already occurs much more often than not). That’s the only outcome that really matters. * Preservation of “Meds” in America is not high on my list of priorities. * “Narrow” preservationism doesn’t necessarily rule out broader alliances. But, right now, the benefits are unclear to me. 80
Posted by JWH on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 00:52 | # “Under a sufficiently broad definition, every country is “a nation of immigrants”. Under a meaningful definition, there is a rather large difference between America’s Northwestern European colonists/settlers/founders who hacked a country out of virgin forest and your immigrant ancestors who arrived 10+ generations later and strolled off the docks straight into tenements and factories.” That is still irrelevant to the argument. No one here has justified any program using PC bromides. That’s just nonsense. “As you know (1) races are not static, and (2) national borders in Europe do not perfectly demarcate different racial types. Southern Scots are likely more closely related to the Northern English than they are to Highlanders, modern Scottish nationalism notwithstanding. I much prefer a Europe of nation-states to, say, the EU. Nationalism has benefits. And, where allowed to exist undisturbed over the long term, nations may be considered “races in the making”. But let’s not pretend national identity corresponds more than roughly to microrace today.” The point of which is? One can promote regions, rather than established nation states, the point remains that there are “ethnies” (in the broad sense) that exist in Europe that should be preserved to the extent possible. Of course change occurs over time, but I believe that my answers to David B on that point underscored the importance of not amplifying natural change by unneeded migration. The fact that the migration may be between “NW Europeans” does not magically erase the genetic differences between those groups. Perhaps, perhaps not. In any case, regionalism would allow for a Padania and an Ausonia; there is no requirement that nations such as Italy, Germany, or Scotland must exist as current intact entities . “Nationalism/industrialization/urbanization/cheap transport have caused increased levels of migration within countries, particularly within the past two centuries. Maybe the intra-national racial variation that is being lost is rather inconsequential. Regardless, it’s happening.” Agreed, and it may not be inconsequential. It doesn’t however erase fundamental differences between Europe and the USA. “An American with ancestry from several NW European countries doesn’t necessarily have a less “coherent” racial background than someone who is, say, “100% Italian” (but half-Venetian, half-Neapolitan) or “100% German” (Bavarian/Prussian).... A strict interpretation of EGI, as your original comments implied, sure does include “mixing between English- and Scandinavian-derived Americans.” Just because someone labels these groups as “Nordish” and comments on their relative assimilability does not erase differences in genetics and genetic interests between NW European groups. The fact that someone may derive ancestry from these groups themselves is also not a reason to disregard the genetic differences between them. One wonders if GW would welcome displacement of English by Swedes. What’s different about America then? “England is not the “indigenous” homeland of Anglo-Saxons. It’s rather unlikely modern Sicilians predominantly descend from “indigenous” Sicilians. The genetic landscape of Europe has been reshaped markedly in historical times. It was likely reshaped repeatedly in prehistoric times.” The standard anthropological definition of “indigenous” is those groups associated with particular homelands at the beginning of the age of discovery (~1500). Without some reasonable cutoff, then no group is “indigenous” and Pakistanis may as well argue that Anglo-Saxons were simply immigrants like themselves. I’m using the standard definition of indigenous. One may as well argue that there are no true Europeans at all, only the Neaderthals were. Where were your objections when GW cited UN protection of “indigenous peoples” as including Europeans? “From the standpoint of EGI, it makes no difference whether the ethny is on “indigenous” territory. (Actually, it might to the extent the ethny is better adapted to its “own” territory; but (1) the environment of North America is similar to that of Europe, (2) European technology allows us to cope with most environments anyway, and (3) high rates of natural population increase among American colonists directly demonstrate they were well-suited to the new land.) “ It makes a difference if an ethny as a “historical claim” to a territory which can be used as a repository for its preservation. In the real world, EGI cannot be separated from history, politics, and culture. EGI must be pursued with the realities at hand. EGI does not exist in isolation. “While organizing along the lines of European national background is not indicated for majority Americans, this doesn’t mean ethnicity is not relevant in America. “ True enough. “America does have an ethnic core, consisting of the descendants of the original colonists and later northwestern European immigrants who have assimilated. “ “Assimilation” does not magically erase EGI differences, unless you refer to a panmixia. “Southern Euros are a small minority among American whites. Southern Euros have a heightened tendency to view themselves as distinct from mainstream American whites.” As per posts, above, do you favor assimilation or not? “Genetic studies (and working eyes) demonstrate S. Italians are distinct from Northwestern Europeans. Regardless of outmarriage, blocs of self-identified “Italians” remain, particularly in the North East. “ And different Northwestern European groups also differ in genetics (and to the keen working eye, on average, on phenotype as well). True enough, those differences are less than those between N and S Euros. But who here is promoting a European model for America? Blocs of self-identified “Irish” also exist in the North East, and blocs of “Germans” and “Scandinavians” exist in the Mid-west. These groups are distinct and exhibit, on average, Fst differences between them, not to mention (likely) differences in genetic structure. “The vast majority of Americans have no S. Euro ancestry.” The vast majority of Americans have, for example, no Finnish ancestry, and genetic studies show the Finns to be quite distinct. But they are “95% Nordish” and, hence, “assmilable” - according to some. “Sure. But let’s stop speaking in generalities. What is your idea of “appropriate”? “ I’ve made some suggestions. In general, I support Euro cooperation. I support all Euros who favor preservation to cooperate for mutual survival. Surely, as well, if you constantly complain about S. Euros not assimilating, you’d welcome S. Euros who consider themselves middle class white Americans? Or not? You keep on sliding between criticizing Italians for not assimilating and yet seem to oppose the very same assimilation you make a litmus test for acceptability. Or do you accept “assimilated, Americanized” Italians? If not, why blame them for not assimilating? 81
Posted by JWH on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 00:58 | # “1) Have you posted here previously, invariably attacking JWH’s pan-European Americanism, as “Northerner” and “AA”? Yes.” That’s quite clear, isn’t it Matra? Any comments? “I think most of your questions are framed wrong. Briefly, though: * It’s not a question of preserving European nationalities in America. What I’d like to see preserved is my country’s racially NW European, culturally American (old?) majority.” NW Europeans are not a genetically homogenous ethnic group. There are Fst differences between different NW European groups. These groups in Europe would not appreciate being displaced by each other; the people of Norway were putting the offspring of German soldiers and Norweigen women into mental hospitals. GW and Desmond Jones are no fans of the “100% Nordish” Irish Catholics. Therefore, why do differences in EGI (and culture) among these groups disappear with crossing the Atlantic? Actually, the *only* difference between my views and his is the boundary of the mult-ethnic Euro-American group. Both views are *not* consistent with strict ethnic EGI as in Europe. “* Preservation of “Meds” in America is not high on my list of priorities.” I’m shocked. 82
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 01:09 | #
That’s what I’d like to see. I’m not NW European but Central and Eastern European (and, if you want to get technical, some Hebrew thrown in). But I don’t want this country to be like me. I want it to continue to be the Anglo-Saxon/NW Euro country it’s been (and was supposed to remain before the Jews got their paws on its immigration laws). That’s the country my grandparents came to. The Jews want to go around making countries like Brazil? Let them make their own country like Brazil. I don’t want to live in Brazil. Go make Israel like Brazil, Jews! Get your paws off my country! You like Brazil so much? Go live there! Move! Go away! Whatever you Jews do, leave my country’s demography alone please! 83
Posted by required on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 01:27 | # It seems inconsistent to attack a group for not assimilating while at the same time strongly desiring that they do not assimilate. No contradiction necessarily exists. One can observe that some groups assimilate slowly or not at all. One can take this as an indication of their incompatibility. Maybe assimilation was originally the preferred outcome. Maybe circumstances change. Maybe one acquires new information. Maybe assimilation was never particularly desired, but was expected nonetheless (with no impediments being given by the immigrant-receiving nation). For crying out loud, Matra, in responding to Fred Scrooby with “no, no, yes”, “required” has stated that he’s planning to continue doing what he’s done before and post under different names. Not quite. I responded that jewby can’t “expect” shit. That’s not to say I won’t pick a different name if/when I decide to post again. But I’m not “planning” anything. And, this is the *second* time I’ve brought this up; the first time the only one to respond was GW, not yourself. Poor, oppressed “Holliday” being discriminated against yet again. there has been an enormous amount of intra-continental mating already. How about we don’t conflate English-German-Scandinavian mixing with NW Euro-SItalian mixing. Existence of the former does not imply we should smile upon the latter. 84
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 01:45 | #
Then I for one vote for you posting elsewhere. There’s something wrong with you if you can’t keep a pen name: either some sort of dishonesty or just general oppositional-defiant unpleasantness. No matter which, I don’t think the thread quality will suffer in your absence. 85
Posted by JWH on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 01:55 | # “No contradiction necessarily exists.” Yes, a contradiction exists because I was *not* referring to opinions of different people over time, I specifically referred to the *same* people/groups inconsistently holding both opinions *simultaneously.* I also specifically asked for your opinion on the matter. Tackling strawmen doesn’t answer the question. “Not quite. I responded that jewby can’t “expect” shit. That’s not to say I won’t pick a different name if/when I decide to post again. But I’m not “planning” anything…Poor, oppressed “Holliday” being discriminated against yet again.” Yes, the point about “discrimination” is exemplified by the double standards employed here, which the above comments underscore. “How about we don’t conflate English-German-Scandinavian mixing with NW Euro-SItalian mixing. Existence of the former does not imply we should smile upon the latter. “ How about we don’t ignore EGI differences among NW European groups? The whole point of this sub-discussion was your question if EGI disappears if one crosses the Atlantic. Apparently, EGI does magically disappear if all the groups in question are NW European, and the reappears if one of the groups is S. Italian. I’m glad we got that cleared up. 86
Posted by Desmond Jones on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 02:52 | # The point has never been differences in EGI, but the degree to which immigration of a foreign people reduces the random native EGI by one child equivalent. It also has to, as GW and Jefferson pointed out, encompass volume. Even the black phenotype in the UK was “bred-out” over time. Mass migration of any foreign people will be difficult; Ben Franklin and the Germans; the Know-Nothings and Irish Catholics and in Canada, French-Canadians and Irish-Catholics. Salter’s chart does show a significant difference in European groups vis-a-vis reducing child equvalents. It takes 18 Poles to reduce English EGI by one child equivalent versus 53 Germans to 74 Dutch. There are also other impacts, like free riding, on a majority population when faced with a significant minority population whether distant or proximate; i.e. French Canadians. Where to draw the line? 6, 30, 50, 70? It’s possible a diaspora European mixed or cur population will draw the line differently than Grant’s “unalloyed” old stock American population. It’s evident in Salter’s table. A European EGI appears to be less impacted by immigration of non-European Caucasians (6) than the Irish are by say, Greek immigration (4.7). As an aside, if Irish-Catholics are 100% Nordish, then why the variance in IQ means (92 v. 100) and certain health related outcomes more common in West Scotland (Irish Catholic immigrants) than the more Nordish Scots? 87
Posted by required on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 03:58 | # One can promote regions, rather than established nation states, the point remains that there are “ethnies” (in the broad sense) that exist in Europe that should be preserved to the extent possible. Agreed. The fact that the migration may be between “NW Europeans” does not magically erase the genetic differences between those groups. Genetic differences between Danes and Englishmen are quite a bit smaller than those between Danes and Sicilians (due to history and geography, not “magic”). It doesn’t however erase fundamental differences between Europe and the USA. Forces relating to race formation and conditions necessary for racial preservation are the same regardless of territory. Cultures differ; migration rates differ; but the fundamental forces are the same. Simply asserting that extant European nation-states are “real” and America is not doesn’t make it so. A strict interpretation of EGI, as your original comments implied, sure does include “mixing between English- and Scandinavian-derived Americans.” Just because someone labels these groups as “Nordish” and comments on their relative assimilability does not erase differences in genetics and genetic interests between NW European groups. Except: One wonders if GW would welcome displacement of English by Swedes. What’s different about America then? No one “welcomes displacement” by anyone. The standard anthropological definition of “indigenous” is those groups associated with particular homelands at the beginning of the age of discovery (~1500). This is the first I’ve heard of this “standard anthropological definition”. Wikipedia: “The term indigenous peoples has no universal, standard or fixed definition, but can be used about any ethnic group who inhabit the geographic region with which they have the earliest historical connection.” Regardless of any potential scientific utility, I see no ethical reason for freezing the map in 1492. Pakistanis may as well argue that Anglo-Saxons were simply immigrants like themselves. Exactly my point. The English, hopefully, would take issue with said Pakistanis. I take issue with immigrants disputing my right to the country my ancestors settled/created. It makes a difference if an ethny as a “historical claim” to a territory which can be used as a repository for its preservation. It’s not either/or. The British and other Northwestern Europeans retained their historic lands at the same time they settled North America and Australia. NW European EGI are damaged when S. Euros migrate into NW Europe. They are similarly damaged when S. Euros migrate into former reservoirs of NW Europeans elsewhere in the world. “Assimilation” does not magically erase EGI differences, unless you refer to a panmixia. True as far as it goes. Nor does “national identity” in Europe magically erase intra-national EGI differences. But NW Europeans are relatively similar to begin with and have freely intermarried in America. As per posts, above, do you favor assimilation or not? At this stage in the game, no. I see no benefit. Ethnically/racially conscious NW Europeans no longer control America. Assimilating S. Euros would merely dilute loyalties and shift phenotypes away from NW European extremes toward those of the non-European masses. One small problem would be removed, at some cost, and many bigger problems would remain. The vast majority of Americans have, for example, no Finnish ancestry, and genetic studies show the Finns to be quite distinct. But they are “95% Nordish” and, hence, “assmilable” - according to some. “Some” is not me. Surely, as well, if you constantly complain about S. Euros not assimilating, you’d welcome S. Euros who consider themselves middle class white Americans? Not if they look like Enrico Loverso. Not if they’re the type of Greeks one can mistake for Pakistanis. Actually, the *only* difference between my views and his is the boundary of the mult-ethnic Euro-American group. Both views are *not* consistent with strict ethnic EGI as in Europe. Not really. As you’ve said, EGI don’t exist in a vacuum. There are good practical/historical/cultural reasons for the view I’m arguing. If by “strict” EGI, you mean taking into account only genotype and not culture/history/practicality, picking countries as your unit of comparison and grabbing Fsts from Cavalli-Sforza is not particularly “strict” or accurate. 88
Posted by silver on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 05:34 | # I said I wouldn’t post here anymore, but I can’t leave alone the patent idiocy being strewn around in my absence. “But, let us be “human” and forget this sudden turnaround. From extreme anti-racist to “revolting” nationalist in one easy step. If only it was that easy!”—JWH” JW, it wasn’t some “sudden turnaround”. I’ve long felt that race is a topic sorely in need of realistic treatment—but realistic and *humane* treatment. And with respect to the latter, yes, what I encountered on this blog certainly was chilling. That is what provoked the squid-ink (though a couple of points I touched on remain not only valid, but crucially important). As much as I have no desire to live my life around negroes or subcons, I remain adamant about granting them their humanity. What has been a difficult realization for me is that the same reasoning that would separate an Anglo-Saxon from a subcon can be applied to separate an Anglo-Saxon from myself, and, more importantly, that doing so is completely justifiable. Naturally, I wish to secure the same rights for myself and for my own people; thus my quid pro quo resolve to advance the “nordicist” agenda in Australia.
“How about we don’t ignore EGI differences among NW European groups? The whole point of this sub-discussion was your question if EGI disappears if one crosses the Atlantic. Apparently, EGI does magically disappear if all the groups in question are NW European, and the reappears if one of the groups is S. Italian. I’m glad we got that cleared up.” EGI differences between NWEs are minor, negligible. EGI differences between NWEs and SEs are far greater. I think someone who (like yourself) understands that EGI doesn’t exist in isolation (the “E” isn’t as fixed as the “G”, and culture and history matter, or can be made to) should be able to understand how crossing the Atlantic and becoming American would neutralise intra-NWE differences. NWE and SE/EE differences are also diminished, but not nearly to the same extent. 89
Posted by silver on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 06:07 | # “Or course there is no way of knowing for sure; but maybe silver IS an ethnic Serb and is suffering through an ‘identity crisis’? After all, he shows many classic symptoms of this condition. IE - his repeated complaints he will never be accepted in the ‘anglosphere’.” Not in a *racialized* ‘anglosphere’, not on a *racial* basis. Otherwise, I already find acceptance; that’s not the issue. An Australia poster here, Steve Edwards, agreed that the phenotypic differences were so large he had no idea where to begin describing them. I grew up in the country and NO Australian EVER had any difficulty in recognizing myself and other SEs as different (even ones phenotypically less distant than myself). As “required” says above: “There are good practical/historical/cultural reasons for the view I’m arguing.” I agree. That is not to say historical and cultural reasons don’t exist for a SE assimilationist stance, but they don’t strike one as a particularly good one—not when the phenotypic differences are what they are. “the thought that he’s “not white” or “not white enough,” or concern over “ultimately not fitting into Anglosphere society because of his duskiness or physical appearance or ethnicity,” the sort of thing that Silver says is eating out his entrails, never entered a Serb’s head. Ever. All Serbs consider themselves fully white and never in a thousand years would wonder if they were “white enough” for a millisecond, let alone agonize over the question.’ It doesn’t matter what *Serbs* think. You’re right that most are unabashed about proclaiming their “whiteness”. But that’s simply “whiteness” as distinct from being negro, asian, mestizo or subcon. I can assure you the ones in Australia are hardly of the view that there are no important differences between themselves and Anglo-Saxons. “But whatever the reason they’re not dark, the fact is they’re not. They’re normally white-looking. Silver’s anguished self-absorption along these lines can only be because he’s swarthy, which rules out Serbian as his race.” Fred, you’re just flat-out wrong about this. Flat-out wrong. I think it’s *you* who is anguished, which is why you’re so insistent that Serbs (and other SE or SEEs) are “perfectly white”, because if *they* are, then you surely are. Let’s take Tom Sunic, who is popular around here. If you for one second think that the Anglo-Saxons I grew up with wouldn’t have seen any significant differences between him and themselves then prepare your deposit for the swampland I have to sell you. Just this weekend I was attending a birthday celebration at a theme castle in rural Victoria. Part of the program included an Anglo-Saxon comedian playing the role of “court jester”. As we were enjoying pre-dinner drinks in the courtyard, he went about poking lighthearted fun at random guests. Coming to a Serbian uncle of a friend of mine, he made some crack about thinking the uncle was “Chinese”, because of his eyes. Now, the man in question had nothing “Chinese”, or even really “Turkic”, about his eyes at all—which is why the joke wasn’t ever going to cause any serious offence—but his phenotype was clearly of the SE variety. It requires a fantastic suspension of visual acuity to pretend the differences between NWE and SEE are so negligible that they can be unquestionably subsumed under an all-encompassing single “white” idenity—regardless of what Serbs themselves may think. 90
Posted by silver on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 06:48 | # “However, none of those kids - that I’m aware of - developed an irrational complex that caused them to feel less than white.” Well, how would you know? They were hardly going to come up to you and tell you, Tommy. Duh. I think the best evidence that they so feel is that, as Desmond Jones noted, Ukrainians and Italians are happy to co-operate with subcons and negroes to, as he put it, dispossess Anglo and French Canadians. Now, if they didn’t feel estranged from the Anglo majority, why would they do that?
That would have to be part of it, I’m sure. Detroit, Michigan is not country Victoria, however, where the people furthest from the Anglo-Saxon norm were SEEs. (Aside from a handful of Aborigines.) As I’ve said many times, the US, because of the large numbers of negroes and mestizoes, is a very different case from Canada and Australia, which, in turn, are different again from Europe itself. 91
Posted by JWH on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 12:08 | # Now, I am *really* “surprised” by the “other shoe dropping” and “silver” suddenly reappearing to support required’s views. I’m shocked. Very good of “silver” to preach to me about “neglible” differences in EGI between certain groups. So predictable, as to be amusing. and required’s points 1-7 do not change that: again, “NW European EGI” is actually the EGI of different groups. Sorry, when Germans and Swedes came to America they damaged the British-American EGI as well. That cannot be evaded. There is a difference of degree, not one of yes/no. “Genetic differences between Danes and Englishmen are quite a bit smaller than those between Danes and Sicilians (due to history and geography, not “magic”).” No one denies that. But there *are* differences between Danes and Englishman which exist both in England and in the USA. The “Atlantic” doesn’t erase those. “But NW Europeans are relatively similar to begin with and have freely intermarried in America. “ One can say the same about Europeans in general. “picking countries as your unit of comparison and grabbing Fsts from Cavalli-Sforza is not particularly “strict” or accurate. “ No, of course not. Instead, your personal opinion of what people look like is more strict and accurate. “At this stage in the game, no.” Then you have no legitimacy to complain about a lack of “assimilation” for those groups. Let’s ditch the genetic charts entirely and utilize Steve Sailer’s wife’s opinion as the metric. No, wait, this says it all: and… Explain how that works. Spontaneous genetic mutation? “It’s evident in Salter’s table. A European EGI appears to be less impacted by immigration of non-European Caucasians (6) than the Irish are by say, Greek immigration (4.7).” You are mixing two different tables together. How do you know what the numbers would be for *Irish* and NECs? In any case, the CS data are obviously “wrong” - or does their “wrongness” depend on who uses them, and for what purpose? “As an aside, if Irish-Catholics are 100% Nordish, then why the variance in IQ means (92 v. 100) and certain health related outcomes more common in West Scotland (Irish Catholic immigrants) than the more Nordish Scots?” Ask McCulloch. “I said I wouldn’t post here anymore, but I can’t leave alone the patent idiocy being strewn around in my absence.” Yes, as if the timing of your anger at the “patent idiocy” is just coincidence. 92
Posted by JWH on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 12:24 | # Except: Not relevant from the standpoint of “crossing the Atlantic” and comparing European and American EGI. Most Puerto Ricans trace their origins to Iberian, Africa, and Amerindian roots. Doesn’t change the differences in genetics between those groups. (2) Most Americans have no S. Euro ancestry. Not relevant to the question of intra-NWE differences (3) Genetic distances tend to be much smaller among NW European countries than between NW Europe and S. Europe. Smaller is *not* non-existent. EGI is a relative metric as well. If you are going to focus on NWE’s, then those differences become highly significant. (4) Treating a European country as a single, pan-mictic population, while convenient for purposes of comparison, likely ignores quite a bit of important nuance. Possibly so, but I find it highly unlikely, on average, that intra-English differences will be greater than that between English and other NWEs. Bavarians, by the way, are not NWEs. No doubt that Germany as a whole is variable, but we are talking about NWEs here, not Central Europeans. (5) Genetic distances based on Cavalli-Sforza’s calculations are rather crude to begin with. Fine, let’s get more data, but it is unlikely to be discovered that the CS data are fundamentally wrong. (6) Personal appearance / phenotype is not entirely unrelated to genetics. Not entirely related either. (7) In the absence of high-resolution genotype data, appearance/phenotype is probably the single best independent source from which to infer relatedness. One can use group genetic data as a personal proxy, and use personal genetic data if the group data are considered ineffective. Personal opinions on appearance are going to be more “crude” and fraught with error than even CS’s 13 year old data. 93
Posted by silver on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 15:07 | # “Explain how that works. Spontaneous genetic mutation?” Culturally: The same way a Nick Griffin and I would (probably) be able to have a hearty conversation were we to encounter each other at, say, Bangkok International Airport rather than, say, in a Leicester pub. The same way an American AmRener can reassure outraged Brits that Polish and Bulgarian immigration will go swimmingly because those people are “white”, and lament only that they’re not coming to America instead, for how he’d welcome them.
When Norwegian-descended boy meets English-descended girl, neither of them notices. When they learn of their respective descents, neither of them cares. 94
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 15:43 | # I would advise everyone to ignore Silver unless there’s some excellent reason for responding to him. He’s a walking-talking pile of malicious bullshit — and likely not even completely mentally sound. He is not what he claims to be racially, either. But JWH was perfectly correct in noting it was no coincidence he popped up again just where Required was staking out his position of stringent rejection of the least drop of southern Euro admixture for the white North American population: one of Silver’s aims is, as 2R I think (as well as others) pointed out, to try to drive a wedge between northern and southern Euros. There’s nothing wrong in principle with such a wedge, but things are not at the stage where that would be helpful to our side. This truly slimy character is, I would say, best ignored. To permit him to deviate these threads onto his preferred topic is to permit him to waste everyone’s time. As for Required, there’s right away something wrong with the guy for refusing to agree to stick to one pen name. I think he’s unsavory in his own way. I think JWH has already given him more attention than he deserves. 95
Posted by required on Tue, 13 Nov 2007 19:07 | # Sorry, when Germans and Swedes came to America they damaged the British-American EGI as well. Maybe. But the same would go for Scotch-Irish immigrants with respect to English settlers, or even immigrants from different regions of England. The “British” are not pan-mictic. However:
How many times shall we go through this? Of course there are differences between Danes and Englishmen. There are also differences between East Anglians and the Cornish. There’s no particular reason for assuming the typical East Anglian is more similar to the typical Cornish than to the typical Dane.
Not to the same degree.
What part of this don’t you get? Drawing borders around some territory doesn’t magically instantly homogenize its inhabitants (nor make them distinct from those on the other side of the border), even in Europe. NW Europe has experienced massive internal migration just within the past 2000 years. Some groups of NW Europeans are almost certainly more closely-related to people in other NW European countries than in their own country. There’s no reason to ignore history and physical anthropology just because it’s convenient to use a single sample to represent a country for purposes of international comparison. Those international comparisons may be valid when you’re comparing England to Greece. But when comparing neighboring NW European countries, some “controls” in the form of genetic distances between different populations within the countries would be nice. See the studies I link below for graphic demonstrations of genetic overlap between individuals of different North/Central European nationalities.
Central Europeans cluster with Northern Europeans. Southern Europeans cluster with Jews and Armenians.
Fine, let’s get more data, but it is unlikely to be discovered that the CS data are fundamentally wrong. I said his estimates are crude, not “fundamentally wrong”. Anyway, we have more data. See above. 96
Posted by silver on Wed, 14 Nov 2007 14:35 | # Nice studies, but nothing a pair of functioning eyeballs couldn’t detect. One only had to have been present at the variety show I attended over the weekend in rural Victoria, along with a dozen or so other Serbs and Macedonians. The tension was quite palpable as we on one side, and the Anglos on the other, waited in the foyer. Ordinarily, very few sane SEs ever venture into what is typically unwelcoming, even hostile, Anglo territory. But we were roped into it by my idiot cousin, who is married to a negro. People insane enough to marry negroes, of course, pretend no one in the world any longer notices or cares about race, so they do silly things like drag SEs to functions in out-of-the-way locales otherwise populated almost exclusively by Anglos. Who knows, the experience might have even snapped Fred Scrooby out of the fantasy One European Race world he lives in, in which one has to strain his eyes to tell a SE from a NE—the one in which only “activist” slime like me could sow dissent among otherwise naturally harmonious relations. 97
Posted by required on Tue, 20 Nov 2007 03:47 | # A new study confirms and extends the above results:
Excerpts:
98
Posted by Matra on Tue, 27 Nov 2007 21:39 | # The idea of mass expulsions has been a “damp squib”:
http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article3198887.ece The good news from the above article is that Northern League politicians are pushing for local control over who can live in cities and towns. But just like in the US the national government is fighting that idea by playing the racism card. It is hardly surprising that no matter what country we are talking about it is almost always the case that the authorities at the local level are more responsive to public demands on immigration issues than those at the national and, especially, transnational levels. The problem is the ruling classes never run out of (convenient) excuses - global warming, War Against Terror, etc - to convince the public that there needs to be further centralisation of power. 99
Posted by Romanian Gypsy on Sat, 07 Aug 2010 22:03 | # All of you who are not gypsy and have been talking about gypsies have no idea what you are talking about. I AM a Romanian gypsy and I’m not running around stabbing people and stealing wallets. Those people who try to explain gypsies who aren’t gypsies themselves are like the people who try to describe prison and have never even been in a county jail. One who is a pure Romanian cannot be a gypsy, but one who is a gypsy can easily pass as a Romanian. And for all those of you who have been saying how easy it is to distinguish Romanians from gypsies you are wrong. It is not uncommon for gypsies to have blonde hair or blue or green eyes like some of the “whiter Romanians” and it is not uncommon for a Romanian to be “dark” like a gypsy. There is a mystery surrounding gypsies that will never be understood. We easily assimilate into the cultures we live in and become a part of that culture. Just because I am gypsy does not mean that I am not American. I am both at the same time. All people are people no matter what theodor race. Post a comment:
Next entry: Countdown
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement not implied. Immigration
Islamist Threat
Anti-white Media Networks Audio/Video
Crime
Economics
Education General
Historical Re-Evaluation Controlled Opposition
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Europeans in Africa
Of Note MR Central & News— CENTRAL— An Ancient Race In The Myths Of Time by James Bowery on Wednesday, 21 August 2024 15:26. (View) Slaying The Dragon by James Bowery on Monday, 05 August 2024 15:32. (View) The legacy of Southport by Guessedworker on Friday, 02 August 2024 07:34. (View) Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) — NEWS — Farage only goes down on one knee. by Guessedworker on Saturday, 29 June 2024 06:55. (View) |
/180px-
/250px-
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 03 Nov 2007 09:41 | #
The Independent asks:-
Interestingly, reported crime in Romania has dropped by 26% since EU accession. So where are the missing offenders now? Not magically reformed, surely.
And a word to Danny Sriskandarajah, for whom I have not the slightest respect. You are an immigrant in my country, Danny. We English can, over time, assimilate other Northern Europeans drawn from the same genetic rootstock as us, and Slavs and southern Europeans, too, in reasonably small numbers. Non-Europeans are another matter. All Non-Europeans since the docking of the SS Windrush in June 1948 are immigrants. And they are unassimilable, since they portend genetic change to who we are, and that was never explained to us, never consented to by us, and will never be accepted.