Asian culture

Posted by jonjayray on Saturday, 15 October 2005 06:52.

I think there is a fair possibility that David will take this post down as soon as he sees it.  He is exceptionally tolerant but he has his limits.  I occasionally get censored here for being too Leftist and I occasionally get censored on Tongue Tied for being too Rightist—which I see as a good indication that I am on the right track!

Neither David nor Scott (of Tongue Tied) liked my exhibition of old Nazi posters however but for different reasons I suspect.  You can still find the exhibition here, however.  Note that you may have to use the backup links at the bottom of the page if the pix don’t come up promptly.  The archive I initially use to source the pictures from seems to be having bandwidth problems at the time I am writing this.

Anyway, after that rambling introduction, let me get to the point of this post:  There is a constant emphasis on this blog to the effect that everyone else is tribal and we Anglos are the only fools who are not.  I don’t dispute that there is a lot of tribalism about but it is not what rules Asian culture—and Asians are a rather large slice of the earth’s population.  As anybody who really knows Asians will be aware, Asian culture is a culture of reciprocity.  Like everybody else, they do like it best if you come from their own language group but that fades into insignificance if there is an exchange of favours involved.  And they are acutely conscious of any obligation that they incur or may be thought to incur.  And I want to illustrate that with an anecdote.

In my big post about my racial attitudes written last month (See here), I said this:

And the claim that Asian cultures are tribal is a grave misconception. Asian culture is a culture of reciprocity. So if you treat them well or do them a good turn you generate enormous feelings of obligation in return. So when I walk into an Indian shop where I am known and buy three samoosas for my lunch I will occasionally get a fourth one popped into the bag as a gesture of goodwill. What is problematical about a culture like that?

At the bottom of the same post I also mention a bit about the Japanese Sushi Train restaurant that I regularly dine at and I note the typically Japanese impassivity of the chefs there.  Because I am such a frequent customer there, however, reciprocity has now come into play there too and has overcome even Japanese reserve.  Not only does one of the normally silent chefs say a few words to me now and then but I have even been given free sushi on a couple of occasions.

In other words, because I do them the slight favour of being a frequent customer, they feel under an obligation to me and reciprocate with friendliness and the odd dish of free food.  I am not remotely of their tribe.  They do not treat me well because of my tribe.  They treat me as an individual and treat me unusually well because I treat them well (from their perspective).  What was that saying that some old prophet once said?  Something about “Do unto others…”  It works, tribe or no tribe.

Tags: Immigration



Comments:


1

Posted by Welleran on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 07:42 | #

What Scrooby et al will respond with is that this is all nice but irrelevant and those Asians are taking positions in the economy that could have been filled equally well by whites, and because of how hard they work they will squeeze out white competitors.  After that the subject of race replacement may be brought up again, your previous post on it notwithstanding.

The economic argument assumes the economy is a zero-sum game, which is not true.  Had those asians not come along and opened their stores, there is no guarantee that whites would have opened western restaurants in place of them (or if they had, that they would have opened as many - you might have had one eatery in a place that, with the asian immigrants, has three or four).

This boils down to a question of definitions.  Do you go for the rising-tide-lifts-all-boats type of good - which is what happens in a globalized free market - or only-what-happens-to-my-kind-matters type of good?  Scrooby is focused exclusively on that second type, and probably questions whether the first is even possible.


2

Posted by john fitzgerald on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 08:04 | #

I lived with a Chinese family in Sydney for a short time, they’re certainly nationalistic. As to reciprosity I don’t
think there’s much difference between
europeans and asians.
I’d recommend Ways that are dark: The truth about China by Ralph Townsend
to anyone wanting to learn about China.


3

Posted by jonjayray on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 08:09 | #

“I lived with a Chinese family in Sydney for a short time, they’re certainly nationalistic”

The Han think we are barbarians and I see their point of view but they also have the good sense to treat everybody as individuals


4

Posted by stari_momak on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 08:26 | #

Not only does one of the normally silent chefs say a few words to me now and then but I have even been given free sushi on a couple of occasions.

JJR, selling his heritage for a mess o’ sushi.


5

Posted by john rackell on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 08:46 | #

JJR, selling his heritage for a mess o’ sushi.

An article that may be worth reading. It puts posts like this into some perspective -

Beyond Sushiology: Does Diversity Work?
by Peter Skerry

“If your friends and colleagues are like mine, they tend to orient their domestic travel plans around cherished ethnic restaurants. So do I. But many carry their enthusiasm a step further, seeing the extraordinary variety and quality of ethnic cuisine now available in the United States as evidence of the unalloyed benefits flowing from our racial and ethnic diversity. I call this syndrome “sushiology.” “

http://www.brook.edu/press/review/winter2002/skerry.htm


6

Posted by Kubilai on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 08:59 | #

JJR, selling his heritage for a mess o’ sushi. - Stari

Exactly my thoughts when I read this touchy, feely piece of “enlightenment”.  East Asians are extremely polite and superficially non-confrontational.  In particular as neighbors, they will always smile, always say hi, always wave, and always try some degree of small talk.  They also will never, or nearly never bring about arguments in order to keep the peace.  That is when they view matters as unimportant, such as neighborly civility etc.  John, in his thickness, doesn’t realize that he was giving the Japanese establishment money for an extended period of time, by his own admission, and they FINALLY warmed up to him to grace him with small talk and a couple of bits of sushi.  LOL Geezus!

In another post, JJR mentions proudly he had 4 wives with blue eyes and in the same breath wants to delegate brown eyed browns and yellows for the young ones standing in line behind him.  He’s had the luxury of picking relatively (or predominately) ethnically pristine mates while feasting at the proverbial mating trough and now says, “don’t worry lads, the slop is just as good if not better!”.  JW is right in his assessment of men like JJR.  Selfish bastards to the core.


7

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 11:08 | #

John, let me acknowledge your skilfull but quite unnecessary attempt to pull my editorial teeth before I bite you.  I won’t bite you since, in my heart, I know you would much prefer to bite yourself if and when the need really arises!

Reciprocity is not extended as fully as you surmise for the simple reason that there are no chip shops in Zhezhiang.  Only ever exporting your population is not reciprocal behaviour.


Welleran, economism is not the lifeblood of the West, and aliens working here is but a small part of the story.  Those aliens come with their own EGI.  That’s the heart of it.  Either our interests are sovereign in our own homelands, or they are opposed by the interests of peoples who have come unasked amongst us.

Criticise us for ranking our EGI above our economic interests, if you wish.  But do not criticise per se unless you can disprove Salter’s thesis.


8

Posted by James Bowery on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 11:20 | #

I think it was JW Holiday brought up the fact that JJR’s status is largely the result of his land holdings.

There is something important to understand about people with large land holdings—and by “large” I mean land holdings beyond that required for the subsistence of a nuclear family:

They support parasitic governments because the cost of maintaining their land right is subsidized by those governments. 

They are also fundamentally driven to acquire slaves since they have too much land for they and their sons to keep productive.

This is precisely the combination of attributes of large land holders that leads to horrors like the system of plantations in the American south which not only displaced yeoman farmers and their sons from their lands but imported the scourge of Africans to the United States—an act for which the heirs of those plantation owners should be made to pay reparations—to the descdendants of the yeoman farmers.

Having said that, the corrupting character of large land holdings is possibly the main explanation for why there aren’t tens of thousands of enclosed communities of Euro-dervice peoples cropping up all over the world.

The large land owners are selling everyone out for their own short-term gain.

When the time comes they should be the first to be brought to trial.


9

Posted by Svigor on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 11:50 | #

What is problematical about a culture like that?

It isn’t ours.

What’s so hard to understand?  The only people who will create a civilization highly compatible with Europeans is…wait for it…European.

If I was African I’d be saying the same thing about Europeans. Sure, for now the gravy train seems to be running nicely, but where are the guarantees?  History shows it’s anything but an inevitability.  What happens when Europeans tire of Africans?  What are the options of a people depending on another people?

John, essentially you seem to be saying we should all adopt Han babies.  That might strike you as absurd but it’s the truth, since Nationism is love of family writ large.


10

Posted by Svigor on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 11:55 | #

This boils down to a question of definitions.  Do you go for the rising-tide-lifts-all-boats type of good - which is what happens in a globalized free market - or only-what-happens-to-my-kind-matters type of good?

I think you’re comparing apples and oranges.  Free markets don’t require free movement of labor, and they certainly don’t require the dissolution of national sovereignty.

If globalism means I don’t get to have a Nation, then yeah it can definitely take a long walk off a short pier.

Rising tides are fine, as long as they aren’t attacks on my Nationhood masquerading as free markets.


11

Posted by Svigor on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 11:59 | #

Reciprocity is not extended as fully as you surmise for the simple reason that there are no chip shops in Zhezhiang.  Only ever exporting your population is not reciprocal behaviour.

Yes, and if they were truly polite and reciprocal they’d never have come into European living spaces.


12

Posted by Svigor on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 12:04 | #

Btw John, if you tried to put up a bunch of Nazi imagery, maybe I’ve been giving you too much credit all this time.  Then again, context is king so I guess I’ll never know.


13

Posted by Martin Hutchinson on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 14:17 | #

This pride in our own race and culture is all very well—though I’m not sure I really share much culturally with the French—but what if our own culture is destroying itself, possibly by race replacement, but more immediately by folly and evil.  I am talking of course about the appalling David Cameron, who appears to ahve been a user of hard drugs, and has said he’s happy to take the Tories down to 25% if he can get rid of daily Mail readers by doing so (actually if he does that, it will take Tory support down to 3%, but that’s another question.)He appears also to be a punk rock fan.

There comes a point at which one just has to get fed up with the filth and degradation being instilled into both British and American life by the dominant lower orders of the media and their upper-class-trash pupperts like Cameron, and say “Thank God for Asians” a culture in which Koreans are cellists, Japanese conduct symphony orchestras and everybody works hard and stays off drugs.

My son is currently determined to move to Tokyo after college if current trends continue.  I don’t think he’d like Tokyo, but I see where he’s coming from.  Fortunately, there’s always Singapore.


14

Posted by Svigor on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 15:30 | #

So, your solution to the culture war being waged against us, a war in large part motivated by a desire to destroy our race, is to raise the white flag and jump out ahead as a race-destroyer?

Forgive me for not seeing the sense in that.


15

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 15:58 | #

I’m not sure I really share much culturally with the French

There was, of course, the Hundred Years War.  And I still drink Eleanor’s wine.


16

Posted by Andrew on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 17:47 | #

Asian Culture is good for Asia, like Indian culture is good for India, etc. does not mean Western cultur needs to capitulate and resign to it. Replacing our historical ventures and force another is not an argument, it is wishful thinking by some, how we turn that Ideological mind set in defence of Our culture, greater minds better pull their finger’s out, and fast.The witch doctors are taking control and Islam is the foot soldier to do its Looting.


17

Posted by John S Bolton on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 18:48 | #

The EGI men have still not shown why a very small percentage of the genetically distant must conspire to damage the majority interest. At the same time, it should be easy to see that a people in posession of nearly all the land, from which an exportable surplus of staples today derives, are sitting on a shaky throne, and will need at least some help from the genetically distant of most rare merit and compatibility. The position of total exclusion can hardly say the burden of proof is not on them, who take the difficult and extreme position. They also contradict Salter on this. There will always be a few genetically distant who can do more for the majority interest than what a total exclusion would allow, although restaurant services below the rank of haute cuisine, are not examples of this.


18

Posted by Mark Richardson on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 20:17 | #

Conversation last week in my Year 12 class:

“Sir, do you know——-, the new Chinese boy?”

“Yes.”

“You know he divides the world up into whites, blacks and yellows. And he thinks yellows are the smartest followed by whites.”

“Really?”

“He even tried to compliment me the other day. He told me I was the smartest white girl he’d ever met.”

(Followed by general condemnation of new boy’s comments by white girls in class who viewed this attempt at flattery as derogatory.)


19

Posted by Mark Richardson on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 20:24 | #

Something that never gets raised on the issue of foreign restaurants is this.

In Melbourne we have some very successful Mexican restaurant chains. This is despite the fact we have no Mexicans (I’ve never met one anyway - I presume they all end up in the US).

The restaurants are owned by Australians and staffed by Australians. No-one thinks twice about this situation. If you want to eat Mexican you go to an “Australian” Mexican restaurant.

If this is possible for Mexican food, why would it not have been possible for other foreign cuisines?


20

Posted by AD on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 20:28 | #

The EGI men have still not shown why a very small percentage of the genetically distant must conspire to damage the majority interest.

If there were a set in stone cut off point to the ‘very small percentage’ then we might have a reason to discuss benefits vs costs of ‘diversity’. But there isn’t, and a non-white in a white country will almost always vote or lobby for more non-white immigration and less white power.

In New Zealand the ‘Asian community’ rallies against the NZ First party. The NZ First party does not advocate removing ‘kiwis of asian decent’ from NZ. They are anti-immigration, period.The ‘Asian community’ hates them because if NZ First had enough power they would stop the Asian community from growing further.

Do you think the people who originally killed immigration restriction in western countries actually thought that ‘minority communties’ would forever be happy with minority status?

It goes against human nature, history and all logic.Give an inch they take a mile.Immigration breeds immigration.


21

Posted by Mark Richardson on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 20:32 | #

AD, do you remember when One Nation was first established and called for reduced immigration? As I recall, Chinese community leaders threatened to take over the party by flooding it with new members.


22

Posted by Martin Hutchinson on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 21:02 | #

Mark, that used to be true in London too.  I remember a most embarassing dinner at a Mexican restaurant in Islington at which my then Argentine girlfriend (pure Anglo/Irish on both sides guys, relax!) insisted on talking to the waitress, the maitre d’ and eventually the chef in Spanish, only to discover that none of them spoke a word of it!


23

Posted by AD on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 21:09 | #

At the same time, it should be easy to see that a people in posession of nearly all the land, from which an exportable surplus of staples today derives, are sitting on a shaky throne, and will need at least some help from the genetically distant of most rare merit and compatibility.

The connection between the EU,USA,Canada,Australia and New Zealand being the only idiots that mass import aliens has nothing to do with the type of land they possess. There are closer comparisons between the EU and China than the EU and Australia in terms of arable land(or any number of other comparisons).

Or are you saying that we have some moral obligation to nations who are overpopulated?

The position of total exclusion can hardly say the burden of proof is not on them, who take the difficult and extreme position.

If that is classed as an ‘extreme’ position then our nations were founded on ‘extreme’ positions. The proof you say is ‘our burden’ is our history up until 30 or 40 years ago.We don’t need ‘help’, things were immeasurably better when we had no help. Any ‘help’ we have ever gotten has proved in the long run to hurt us aswell as the ‘helpers’. The benefits never outweight the cost.

There was a rape/murder of a White woman by an East Asian in Melbourne recently. That murder would never have happened if our ‘extreme’ position were in place. That single death(not counting the thousands of other rapes/murders that are a result of hostile aliens), makes any benefit of non-white immigration redundant.


24

Posted by Amon on Sat, 15 Oct 2005 23:58 | #

In Melbourne we have some very successful Mexican restaurant chains. This is despite the fact we have no Mexicans (I’ve never met one anyway - I presume they all end up in the US).

Likewise, the closest thing I’ve ever seen to an Arab was a Sephardic Jew. I’ve *never* seen a real Arab.


25

Posted by jonjayray on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 00:51 | #

Well, a lot of those comments gave me a laugh but I will have to come back later to do replies

I do enjoy the comments here.  There is far more thinking in them than the gargabe I sometimes get from the Left.  I will try do do a few more replies to comments on my “grouch” posting later too.  I have just acquired a new girlfriend so I don’t have as much time for blogging as I did.


26

Posted by Andrew on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 00:52 | #

I would have thought the Anglo sphere (Less Liberalism) would prove to be miles in advance when it comes to instituting Epistemological advancement, But liberalism is the head on brick wall stopper, or the tyrannical implementation of the Communist social justice. Remember Asia’s per head of population and achievement, and the non existence of liberalism’s heart tugging emotional strapping, and the fact of the mere competition for the Asian population would kill to get an education, where as our Brain-dead academic’s have become less intelligent and worship existentialism instead of Intellectual advancement. Not all by Anglo’s choice, tyrannically implemented by those less capable of originality, so they steal everything by any means.
If there are more than a billion people in China, and the Western world is one quarter of that, then mathematics’ becomes easier to figure out who is the Race liar. Our intellectuals are steam rolling us out of existence seemingly by Ignorance or arrogance and our Masters have sold our sovereignty and our soles to another, for the mere price of pathological and psychotic Ideology. That was cheap. How about now, some real social justice? Pay them back for their good deeds to Universal citizenship! Jettison them into it, so Project Settee can not find them on the radar. Preferred direction is towards the sun.The only bright Idea any of the pricks will ever have.


27

Posted by Andrew on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 01:05 | #

John Muhannad Ray has turned polygamist,and he still maitains his wealth after all those wives, hmmm, what is the secret?(suitable for publication of course)


28

Posted by Freddy on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 02:35 | #

“In New Zealand the ‘Asian community’ rallies against the NZ First party. The NZ First party does not advocate removing ‘kiwis of asian decent’ from NZ. They are anti-immigration, period.The ‘Asian community’ hates them because if NZ First had enough power they would stop the Asian community from growing further.”

Incredibly cheeky & arrogant of them, at least by white standards. As someone said earlier on the comments section of this site (in reference to teh Jews) “what’s theirs is theirs, & what’s ours is theirs too.”
We’ll probably be a province of China in 50 years. White New Zealand has basically given up the ghost.


29

Posted by jonjayray on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 09:40 | #

“John Muhannad Ray has turned polygamist,and he still maitains his wealth after all those wives, hmmm, what is the secret?(suitable for publication of course)”

LOL

I am a serial polygamist only.  One lady moves on and another one soon takes her place.  But the reason my 4 marriages did not send me broke is that I am generous anyway and treat women honourably—so we remain friends.

I logged on here to do a few replies but I am too tired.  New girlfriends need more time and energy than old girlfriends.


30

Posted by Steve Edwards on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 12:41 | #

Of course, every story carries a powerful subtext. Like, say, this:

“So when I walk into an Indian shop where I am known and buy three samoosas for my lunch I will occasionally get a fourth one popped into the bag as a gesture of goodwill. What is problematical about a culture like that?”

Naturally, this anecdote is not intended to be taken in isolation; on its own it is a fairly boring story, and hardly worth a second thought.

Every subtext begins with a “therefore”. Thus, John Ray is really saying - “I occasionally get a free samoosa from an Indian shop, therefore it would be of no practical concern if Australia became majority Indian.”

Once again, we see the common fallacy of generalising the personal - that is to say, extrapolating from some vaguely benign experiences to an entirely different set of circumstances entailing the overthrow of an entire nation. If I think I have this right - we should replace Western Civilisation with some Dravidian-Hindi-Turkic mosaic, simply because one individual is known to enjoy a short-lived, intermittent, inner warmth throughout some of his mundane daily tasks (such as eating).

Again:

“Not only does one of the normally silent chefs say a few words to me now and then but I have even been given free sushi on a couple of occasions.”

Beautiful story. Just terrific.

See, all of John’s rationalisations for overthrowing the ethno-cultural basis of “Australia” have a common thread of selfishness throughout. What disturbs me is that he has recently moved away from personal greed as his primary motivating basis (e.g. if immigration increases, JJR’s rental properties can gain higher returns), to a desire for attaining some vague aura of emotional contentment - if it feels right for me, it’s good for everyone.


31

Posted by Phil on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 13:44 | #

My son is currently determined to move to Tokyo after college if current trends continue.  I don’t think he’d like Tokyo, but I see where he’s coming from.  Fortunately, there’s always Singapore.

Martin,

I am as appalled as you are by the cultural wasteland that Britain and America have become.

However, I don’t think you need to go to Asia to find places where sanity still prevails. There are swaths of Germany, Austria, Switzerland and also France that are far superior to anything Asia will ever be. And even more so, no matter what you may think, you are actually closer to them than to the Asians.

Secondly, I think you are living in a time warp. The newer generation of Japanese is much more hedonistic and infinitely more “American” than the previous one. Taiwan has gay pride parades now. Have a look at the things that happen as part of Shanghai’s “night life”. Some of my friends just returned from mainland China and had some very interesting observations about it all.

The only reason Asia has less of this filth than us is because they started later. What we are witnessing before us are the products of the mass entertainments of democracy. No power on earth can reverse the destruction of good taste. Trust me. Not even the ChiComs.

I went to Bavaria last year and it felt so different and so good compared to England that I felt like never coming back again. Yes the Germans also have problems. But there are parts of Germany that are much better than England any day.

And there are still places of sanity left in Eastern Europe. So all in all, not everything is lost. Moving to Tokyo is certainly not the answer (aside from the fact that the sheer overcrowdedness of Tokyo is itself a curse for any man who has to live there).


32

Posted by Svigor on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 13:59 | #

The EGI men have still not shown why a very small percentage of the genetically distant must conspire to damage the majority interest.

Nonsense.  Given the data, the non-EGI men have not shown why a very small percentage is any different from a very large percentage in this regard, or why a very small percentage of the genetically distant are necessary.  What with the much ballyhooed digital age I fail to see why they have to have their asses parked in our living space.  Let them teleconference if they’re so damned important.  Or, since the west still holds the cards, let whatever research they’re so vital to be carried out on their soil not ours, with the genetic flow favoring us and not them.

I think our currently dilemma has shown we have a tendency to be too forgiving and too accepting.  Better a no exceptions rule imo.


33

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 15:49 | #

“What Scrooby et al will respond with is that this is all nice but irrelevant and those Asians are taking positions in the economy that could have been filled equally well by whites, and because of how hard they work they will squeeze out white competitors. [...] This boils down to a question of definitions.  Do you go for the rising-tide-lifts-all-boats type of good - which is what happens in a globalized free market - or only-what-happens-to-my-kind-matters type of good?  Scrooby is focused exclusively on that second type, and probably questions whether the first is even possible.”  (—Welleran, first comment in the thread)

What I’m against is forced race-replacement of the traditional races of communities, nations, and nation-states.  If Welleran can arrange his economic rising tide so as not to involve the forced replacement of traditional white races with non-white ones (or with mixed ones) I’ll be satisfied:  let him open all the Chinese restaurants he wants (my favorite cuisine, by the way—that and Italian).  If he can do that, incidentally, let him explain how.  Does he see a need for an upper limit to non-white immigration coming into white countries or does he feel, Blunkett-like, that there is “no theoretical upper limit” to it?  If the latter, he and I have nothing more to say to each other, being in different universes, mine where race is acknowledged to exist and seen as having importance and his where it’s utterly ignored and, to the extent anyone accidentally notices it, is considered completely without importance so that if the population of Germany, for example, or England, or Israel, or Australia, or Nigeria, or Norway, or Pakistan, or Vietnam, or the United States were completely replaced with Chinamen it would make no conceivable difference whatsoever to anything that could possibly be imagined.   

”[...T]he subject of race replacement may be brought up again, [John Ray’s] previous post on it notwithstanding.”  (—Welleran)

Yes, how prescient of you.  You’re right.  Forced race-replacement is going to be brought and keep being brought up till it’s no longer the official policy of the United States and all white nations influenced by the United States. 

Fifteen years ago California was white.  After fifteen years of an official government policy of obligatory race-replacement spanning the administrations of Bush, Clinton, and Bush again, California is Mexican.  The official plan is to force the same racial transformation or similar ones on the rest of the United States until the whole country is non-white by at the latest the year 2050.  Welleran may be blind, deaf, and dumb to that reality but others aren’t. 

I’ll be damned if I’m going to stand by and say nothing while the exact same racial transformation as was forced on California (or something analagous to it) is forced by D.C. on the rest of the country.


34

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 16:06 | #

“I went to Bavaria last year and it felt so different and so good compared to England that I felt like never coming back again. Yes the Germans also have problems. But there are parts of Germany that are much better than England any day.  And there are still places of sanity left in Eastern Europe.”  (—Phil)

Yes but remember, those are only snapshots, as has needed to be pointed out to John Ray many times in other contexts.  Those places are on a conveyor belt leading toward destruction and have to get off it NOW if they want to live.  They are perilously close to bringing irreversible situations on themselves.  There’s still time for them to save themselves but there won’t be for much longer.


35

Posted by Phil on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 16:34 | #

I’ll be damned if I’m going to stand by and say nothing while the exact same racial transformation as was forced on California (or something analagous to it) is forced by D.C. on the rest of the country.

Fred,

While I agree that race replacement is occurring, I disagree with the idea that it is being “forced” on the majority (though clearly it is being forced on a minority).

It is true that if asked point blank whether they consent to race replacement, the vast majority of voters will say no. BUT, by their silence, their refusal to do anything about it and by their unwillingness to make their displeasure sufficiently clear, they acquiesce in this process. And acquiescence may not be the same as express consent but is amounts to implied consent. And for the moment, implied consent is all that is needed because immigration serves the interests of a broad range of people (though by no means the majority).


36

Posted by Phil on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 16:37 | #

Those places are on a conveyor belt leading toward destruction and have to get off it NOW if they want to live.  They are perilously close to bringing irreversible situations on themselves.  There’s still time for them to save themselves but there won’t be for much longer.

I think Europe’s chances of survival are much better. America less so, I would say.

In Germany there is a strong undercurrent of anti-immigration opinion. Also, it is not as easy to become a German citizen as becoming an American citizen.

And Eastern Europe hasn’t had a a flood of immigrants yet (though it may in the near future).


37

Posted by jonjayray on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 18:13 | #

“Once again, we see the common fallacy of generalising the personal”

That is a reasonable criticism in isolation but it is out of context.  I use anecdote to make vivid how the law-abiding and pro-social characteristics of Hindu Indians and the Han work out in practice.


38

Posted by jonjayray on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 18:16 | #

“no chip shops in Zhezhiang”

There will be.
They already sell Xmas trees at Xmas

The Chinese ape the West like mad these days


39

Posted by jonjayray on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 18:20 | #

“JJR’s status is largely the result of his land holdings”

I have sold all my real estate some time ago.

I am into the stockmarket now and doing even better there.  Property has had its big boom now.  It will be years before it has another one.  That is the way Real estate works.

BTW I made all my own money.  Nobody ever gave me a red cent


40

Posted by jonjayray on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 18:21 | #

“unless you can disprove Salter’s thesis”

Value judgments can’t be proven or disproven


41

Posted by jonjayray on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 18:24 | #

“if you tried to put up a bunch of Nazi imagery”

Context is king.  See here:

http://jonjayray.netfirms.com/posters.html


42

Posted by jonjayray on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 18:27 | #

“And I still drink Eleanor’s wine”

Eleanor of Aquitaine?


43

Posted by jonjayray on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 18:29 | #

“Asian Culture is good for Asia, like Indian culture is good for India, etc. does not mean Western cultur needs to capitulate and resign to it”

Western culture is under no threat

All the world apes it


44

Posted by jonjayray on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 18:34 | #

“In Melbourne we have some very successful Mexican restaurant chains. This is despite the fact we have no Mexicans”

Such places are usually pale imitations in my experience—though I have come across some good Mexican restaurants in Oz run by Americans—for many of whom Mexican food has become part of their native food.

I wondered what was wrong with the food when I visited my favourite Turkish restaurant recently.  When I paid my bill I noticed that there had been a change of ownership and the kitchen staff were all Anglos.

A sad loss.


45

Posted by Lurker on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 18:49 | #

Xmas trees may well be on sale in China and chip shops may follow, but who is selling these things in China? I somehow suspect they will turn out to be Chinese.


46

Posted by Welleran on Sun, 16 Oct 2005 23:20 | #

Guessedworker/Scrooby: On a reflexive, gut feeling level, I agree 100% with you.  My problem is when I start thinking about it, I can’t present myself with a sufficiently convincing argument of _why_ I should agree, and actually end up convincing myself of more or less the opposite view.

What is being American about?  To me, it has always been first and foremost an idea - an idea that, in theory, can be adopted by any person, from any background.  If Chinese, or Palestinians, or Italians, can come here and _be_ Americans, then I think my loyalties should lie with them - with the people, whatever their background, who can make that idea stronger and more vital - not with a tribalist reflex.  If a Chinese is a better American - better in the sense of living up to the ideas of entrepreneurship, of liberty, of being able to stand alone and choose one’s own destiny - than a native-born, then my sympathies are probably going to be with the Chinese fellow - because in this case I identify with the mental community more than the physical one.

The most immediate counterargument to be made here is that the Chinese may not see it the same way, and is just using me to help advance himself before selling out to the homeland.  This is certainly possible.  It also means he isn’t a real American, which - assuming I have sufficient information to know of it - changes the allegiance I mentioned above.  But until it is proven that most or all Chinese (or other Orientals) will NOT generally become “real” Americans - American on the mental level - I don’t think America can rule out ever letting any in just because some might retain other loyalties.  How does EGI actually work, anyway?  Are people hard-wired to react in certain ways to those similar to us, or is there a certain amount of genetic shorthand involved? - shorthand which would leave room for the brain to tweak it to fit conscious goals?  If the latter, then the idea of an American mental ethnicity is not impossible at all.  It is not being implemented particularly well, but it does justify bringing in hard-working Asians - because, once they become mentally American, their genetics will add their own positive traits to the mix, strengthening America as a whole.  It’s not a white America in that case, but I am not convinced that white is always best.  Orientals DO, after all, have a measured IQ advantage of about 5 points over whites (while whites have one of about 15 points over African-Americans, and 30 over sub-Saharan Africans).

As for “economism” - what this actually is, is the sum total of all the individual choices made by a lot of individual people.  A Chinese restaurant and a steak house open in the same neighborhood.  An individual decides he likes the Chinese food better.  His money helps (in a small way) the Chinese owners open a new restaurant somewhere else, while the steak house struggles or closes.  Are you going to tell that customer he can’t buy Chinese food because the race must be preserved?  You don’t have the right to do that.  His money, and his personal incarnation of the race, are his to do with as he pleases.  If you REALLY object to the Chinese-owned Chinese restaurant, open a white-owned Chinese restaurant, and outcompete them.  If you don’t do that, you don’t want to keep them out badly enough.  Similarly for Mexicans doing jobs that “white kids won’t do” - this is because the white kids know they can get other jobs for better pay.  If the white kids wanted to keep the Mexicans out, they’d stoop to work for minimum wage (or whatever the fruit-pickers make) - but they choose not to, because it’s not worth it to them.

I agree that a certain “replacement” effect is happening in that the influx of immigrants drives up housing prices (at least; probably others as well) and thus probably cuts down somewhat on the white birthrate.  But the whites who lived where the Mexicans live now aren’t dead (except for the aged of course), they just consolidated into other communities.

Listen: if you create an all-white nation somewhere, and enforce that, odds are I’ll apply to live there, and not ask to bring any of my Vietnamese friends with me.  But humanity needs ideals as well as pragmatism.  America welcoming immigrants from nearly anywhere is that.  It has always been a monumental experiment of a country.


47

Posted by Kubilai on Mon, 17 Oct 2005 00:36 | #

Welleran, your post indicates you’re “almost there” in your thinking.  Guilt is the root of why you feel the need to intellecualize what is a “good American”.  This guilt is deeply rooted and constantly droned from birth.  No one said there aren’t good people of different races.  That is irrelevant.  What is said is there is no need nor obligation to sacrifice ourselves as a race and people in order to be “good Americans”. 

BTW, America was an Anglo-Saxon idea which has been clearly shown that it CANNOT be adopted by any person from any background.  Blacks, one of the first non-Anglos in the US have yet to adopt to it.  They are still foreigners to this very day by their own decision.


48

Posted by Kubilai on Mon, 17 Oct 2005 01:00 | #

Are you going to tell that customer he can’t buy Chinese food because the race must be preserved?  You don’t have the right to do that.  His money, and his personal incarnation of the race, are his to do with as he pleases. - Welleran

Individualism, another European ideal BTW, is the core of our existence of today.  It has also been exploited by the left to fit their agenda.  “Of course you have the individual choice to date that Negro, no matter what your parents say”.  To me, individualism and tribalism are not mutually exclusive. 

As to what others think regarding individualism, fairness, and the “American way”, look no further than MEChA with a motto of Por La Raza todo. Fuera de La Raza nada (For the Race, everything. For those outside the Race, nothing)

Seems they have quite the interest…

http://www.azteca.net/aztec/mecha/

My suggestion Welleran, is to stop feeling guilty for being white.


49

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 17 Oct 2005 01:29 | #

“What is being American about?  To me, it has always been first and foremost an idea”  (—Welleran)

It’s a race plus an idea.  Not all races act or think alike and the differences in the way they act and think are partly inborn, just as are the differences in the way they look.  Races that aren’t too different can perhaps participate in large numbers without changing the thing’s identity.  Races that are too different can’t.  That applies even assuming the white Euro fraction of the population isn’t racially changed by the influx, but it will be changed over the long term, so the original white race ends up getting replaced in whole or in part, which is genocide.  National character, an objective thing, is lost and the profound, sacred right of the people to live among their racial-national brethren who look, act, and think like them and are descended from the same ancestors is violated.  Hold a clearly-worded binding referendum first before doing that.  The powers that be won’t, because they want race-replacement.  It would never pass if put to a clearly-worded referendum.  If any of this stuff is in dispute among scientists, wait until the scientific dispute is settled in race-replacement’s favor before forcing it on a population lest you make mistakes of epoch-making gravity that can’t be rectified.  If wiping out a race is OK, what is there aside from killing a large number of people that makes genocide horrific?  If you honestly don’t see the importance of race you’re in John Ray’s and Birch Barlow’s camp and you and I are in different universes so no use talking to each other.  On the other hand if you’re too young to have been exposed to other than government-coerced multiculti diversity-worship brainwashing and had hatred of ethno-racial-cultural white homogeneity rammed into your brain by government propaganda artists (thanks to women voters and the other usual suspects and enablers) stick around this site a while and see if that crap can’t be made to “fall off of you like so much dandruff,” as Laura Schlessinger said happened to all her women’s lib crap the instant she took one look at her baby. 

”- an idea that, in theory, can be adopted by any person, from any background.  If Chinese, or Palestinians, or Italians, can come here and _be_ Americans, then I think my loyalties should lie with them [...]”  (—Welleran)

If they come in small numbers my loyalty lies with them too.  If inappropriate kinds and volumes of aliens are brought in by the usual suspects so as to change the race it’s a whole different ball game:  what’s going on then is genocide and my loyalty is to my race and nation and their preservation, sorry.  I’m not a Chinaman.  They have their own race and nation.  This is ours.


50

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 17 Oct 2005 01:30 | #

“with the people, whatever their background, who can make that idea stronger and more vital - not with a tribalist reflex.”  (—Welleran)

What you’re doing here is discounting the value and importance of race, which puts you in Birch Barlow’s camp.  Naught new in that—we’ve seen ‘em come and go at this site, those who do that.  You and I simply can’t communicate, that’s all—just as I can’t communicate with Jason Soon:  different universes.

“If a Chinese is a better American - better in the sense of living up to the ideas of entrepreneurship, of liberty, of being able to stand alone and choose one’s own destiny - than a native-born, then my sympathies are probably going to be with the Chinese fellow - because in this case I identify with the mental community more than the physical one.” 

Nothing complicated or new in what you’re doing here—you’re simply disregarding race as having importance.  Tons do that, and they can’t make heads or tails of this site.  Maybe you should hang out at GnXp or over at the site for white Australian eunuchoids, Catallaxy (Narcolepsy would be a better name).  De gustibus non disputandum est.  Tell me, incidentally, what the next country is to get race-replaced:  China?  India?  Pakistan?  Israel?  Do you think for one second any of those would allow it?

The most immediate counterargument to be made here is that the Chinese may not see it the same way, and is just using me to help advance himself before selling out to the homeland.  This is certainly possible.  It also means he isn’t a real American, which - assuming I have sufficient information to know of it - changes the allegiance I mentioned above.”

Ditto.

“But until it is proven that most or all Chinese (or other Orientals) will NOT generally become ‘real’ Americans - American on the mental level - I don’t think America can rule out ever letting any in just because some might retain other loyalties.”

Ditto.  Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz…....................

“How does EGI actually work, anyway?”

I haven’t read Salter’s book.  I just go by common sense.

As for the whole rest of your inane comment:  Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz…............. You could make a fortune marketing that instead of sleeping pills for insomniacs.

You really oughtta check out GnXp, Welleran—they’re right up your alley (but make sure you don’t mistakenly propose race-replacement for Subcons in India or Pakistan or Chinese in China—you’ll suddenly notice a distinct chill in your welcome there ... hey just a friendly heads-up ....


51

Posted by Mark Richardson on Mon, 17 Oct 2005 08:54 | #

If a Chinese is a better American - better in the sense of living up to the ideas of entrepreneurship, of liberty, of being able to stand alone and choose one’s own destiny - than a native-born, then my sympathies are probably going to be with the Chinese fellow - because in this case I identify with the mental community more than the physical one.

Welleran has just neatly illustrated one of the basic arguments I make in my articles.

An underlying principle of liberalism, and therefore of the (modern) West, is the idea that we are made human by our capacity to choose who we are through our individual will and reason.

Once you accept this idea, it’s difficult to accept traditional nationalism, because the “physical community” does not embody very well the ideal of the self-created individual.

My own question to Welleran would be this: why is it so important to stand alone and choose one’s own destiny?

Why can’t I stand as part of a group in pursuing something important?

And what if I am born for a particular role, like say a woman for motherhood, or a man for fatherhood? Are these roles any less significant for being unchosen?

Is all meaning self-created? Or do we find a pre-existent meaning within the nature of things and commit ourselves to it?

Welleran, if you accept the second proposition, then you ought logically to reject the “individual choice of destiny” ideal.

If I choose my own destiny, and it is a superficial or destructive choice, then I have failed. I have not embodied virtue at all.

If I recognise a good existing independently of me, and submit myself to its defence, then I have succeeded, even if the role I accept is traditional or conventional or connected to nature or biology.

The mere fact that I choose is not sufficient to make my humanity meaningful.


52

Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:15 | #

Well put, Mark.  Indeed, for the vast majority of people meaningful humanity is learned with love of kin, the highest of them love for one’s children.  Some way behind this, but also vital to a full and healthy sense of the human, is love for one’s people and a willingness to defend them.

These things are natural, necessary and great.  They are not limiting or destructive other than to competing interests.

The lightweight, liberal notion of choice extends no further than a Judaically-inspired consumerist philosophy of the self.  Freedom of the spirit is NOT to be found in personality choices.  On the contrary, the psychology schiesters who dreamt this garbage up, building on old John Locke’s plain wrong tabula rasa, likely only did it to take Western Man away from his normal duty to kin.

As for the ultimate freedom they propose, if it exists at all it is the product of a great intensification of consciousness, taking years to accomplish and to which only a very few very strong people are capable of aspiring - and then with access to highly specialised knowledge definitely NOT found in liberal politics.


53

Posted by JB on Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:24 | #

JJRAY:
I have just acquired a new girlfriend so I don’t have as much time for blogging as I did.

“sorry guys but I bought a new car and I found a new indian restaurant so I don’t have the time to debate your racist nonsense”

JJRAY:
Western culture is under no threat. All the world apes it

yet for some reason hundreds of millions of people want to come live in the West. Why can’t they just try to imitate it and stay home ?


54

Posted by Svigor on Mon, 17 Oct 2005 12:28 | #

My own question to Welleran would be this: why is it so important to stand alone and choose one’s own destiny?

Another question is, who wins, atomized individuals or cohesive collectives?

The answer is obvious.

yet for some reason hundreds of millions of people want to come live in the West. Why can’t they just try to imitate it and stay home ?

Therein lies the distinction between flattery and aggression.


55

Posted by Welleran on Tue, 18 Oct 2005 10:16 | #

Guilt is not my issue - it is more one of caution, and not wanting to condemn unjustly.

You guys seem to be saying that the choice is only between believing in genetic predestination, or not.  I am not convinced that those are the only choices - I think a far likelier one is that of genetic predisposition, which inclines one toward certain things but does not require them.

As for America and its ideals being suited to whites.  Yes, I wouldn’t argue with that.  In fact I would say that America and its ideals are without doubt the BEST civilization ever to appear on this planet (which is not to say it is the best possible, there is still a lot of things to improve on).  However to then go and claim that that this same civilization only fits whites, and that individuals of other races are inherently completely unsuited for it - that is a major claim, and one I would have to see some really solid evidence for before I believe it. 

I don’t think blacks in the US are a good example.  There are a decent number of middle-class blacks who act and think in the classic American sense (not a majority of course, but enough to indicate it isn’t impossible).  Many of the problems lower-class blacks have are at least partly due to the breakdown of the black family - and that is not a genetic issue, as prior to the rise of black illegitimacy, black communities didn’t have those problems - they were poor and probably resentful of whites, but the turmoil of violence and drugs was absent.  (Anyway the rise of illegitimacy in whites will serve as a worthy follow-up experiment - it’s at 30% and rising right now.  If the black societal dysfunction isn’t genetic, but partly related to upbringing, we can expect white society in general to start looking more and more like the inner cities over the next few decades.)

I don’t disagree that we’re currently bringing in too many people too fast.  What I am not convinced of is the idea that bringing in foreigners at all is a mistake.

As for collectives vs. individuals - the collectives never win.  Ever.  Not as long as they are actual collectives instead of empowering their own individual members.

This isn’t an argument that is likely to change any minds on either side, but thanks for the feedback anyway.


56

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 18 Oct 2005 10:41 | #

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz…...............


57

Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 18 Oct 2005 10:58 | #

Welleran: How does EGI actually work, anyway?

As good a places to start as any are JW’s posts here and here.


58

Posted by Svigor on Tue, 18 Oct 2005 16:27 | #

Guilt is not my issue - it is more one of caution, and not wanting to condemn unjustly.

You’re operating under two conflicting parameters.

Since caution is essential to survival and “condemning unjustly” is superfluous, I suggest you jettison the latter.

You guys seem to be saying that the choice is only between believing in genetic predestination, or not.  I am not convinced that those are the only choices - I think a far likelier one is that of genetic predisposition, which inclines one toward certain things but does not require them.

Your position is a reasonable one (though your characterization about predestination is not).

Let’s take caution and run with it here. 

If “determinists” (i.e., a word commonly used to describe people who acknowledge nature) are right, then giving our living space to, and mixing with other peoples will have disastrous results.  If they’re wrong, then all humans are interchangeable and there’s no loss incurred by following their advice.

If equalitarians are right, then all humans are interchangeable and there’s no gain incurred by mixing.  If they’re wrong, then mixing with other peoples and giving them our living space will prove disastrous.

Racemixing, once done, cannot be undone.  Racial preservation can always be undone.

In the absence of clear, incontestable data, it’s safer to preserve our race and our living space.  Since the evidence points in the opposite direction (and continues to do so more and more as time progresses), racial preservation seems the only sane choice.


59

Posted by Svigor on Tue, 18 Oct 2005 16:46 | #

However to then go and claim that that this same civilization only fits whites, and that individuals of other races are inherently completely unsuited for it - that is a major claim, and one I would have to see some really solid evidence for before I believe it.

What do you believe to be the default, alternative claim?  Obviously, the proper default is “dunno,” I hope you aren’t going to reply that the proper default is “everyone’s equally fit for it.”

Also, please stop strawmanizing, as with your word above, “completely.”  We’re talking about human society here, where “completes” are practically non-existent.  A 10% difference is enough to give anyone pause, no need for absolutes.


60

Posted by Svigor on Tue, 18 Oct 2005 17:27 | #

I don’t think blacks in the US are a good example.  There are a decent number of middle-class blacks who act and think in the classic American sense (not a majority of course, but enough to indicate it isn’t impossible).

Manned space flight is possible.  Should we all add a trip to the moon on the way to the grocery store?

Keep in mind there are zero blacks capable of producing white babies.  This is the important thing to remember.

Let’s not sit here and pretend that upstanding citizens and career criminals somehow cancel one another out.  If a group produces criminals at a higher, or even equal rate as it does upstanding citizens then it will fail.

Blacks just don’t have the cognitive tools to create societies like whites do.  This isn’t rocket science.  Dithering about how you can find a good black here and there is just stupid.

Many of the problems lower-class blacks have are at least partly due to the breakdown of the black family - and that is not a genetic issue, as prior to the rise of black illegitimacy, black communities didn’t have those problems - they were poor and probably resentful of whites, but the turmoil of violence and drugs was absent.

You’re really new to this eh?

African America is regressing to the worldwide black mean.  Look at marriage patterns and customs in Africa, they suggest that the artificial condition for blacks was that of high legitimacy, not the other way around.  Blacks felt, for a long time, significant pressure from whites to conform to white norms.  As the pressure decreased to nil, so did the black efforts to conform.  I’ll grant you that there’s now a degree of pressure going the other way, to claim victimhood at whitey’s hands, but it’s subtle and nothing like the previous pressure going in the other direction.

If the black societal dysfunction isn’t genetic, but partly related to upbringing

Stop right there - you’re stating things in a very confused or contentious way.  No one here will argue that environment doesn’t matter.

we can expect white society in general to start looking more and more like the inner cities over the next few decades.

Yes, it’s possible for environment to bring nature’s impact to zero; cut a tree down and its genes don’t make much difference.  On the other hand, it’s impossible for environment to cause nature to exceed its limits; give a redwood as much light, soil, and water as you want, it’ll never grow to be a hundred miles tall.

In other words, yeah, stick a white man in a gulag from birth and beat, starve, and torture him, and you’ll get a savage, but on the other hand you can take blacks and pamper, educate, and nurture them but they’ll never exceed their limits.


61

Posted by Mark Richardson on Tue, 18 Oct 2005 17:57 | #

Welleran, you’ve written a closed-minded reply.

Both I and GW argued against the underlying liberal principles which you are following.

You did not even register these arguments. Instead, you continue to assume that these principles are what we should seek to preserve, and then you try to prove that other races can live within them.

I think you are wrong in your specific argument: even the most liberal of Africans and Asians still seem to defend their ethnic interests, unlike white liberals.

But this is a “secondary” argument. We ought to be able to discuss primary arguments - first principles, if you like.

If you put these out of bounds, then political argument can’t advance very far.


62

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 19 Oct 2005 12:19 | #

“But humanity needs ideals as well as pragmatism.  America welcoming immigrants from nearly anywhere is that.  It has always been a monumental experiment of a country.”  (—Welleran, 10/17, 3:20 AM)

That is what Harry Truman called Gen. Douglas MacArthur’s “Old Soldiers Never Die” speech:  one-hundred percent bullshit (Truman’s exact words to a journalist, by the way, right after the speech).  There, Welleran is faithfully reciting the exact lines that have been drilled into his head since kindergarten by the usual suspects.  He’s a walking talking automaton, sort of a brain-dead zombie spouting propaganda lines memorized by rote without the slightest idea what they even mean.  Till he gets deprogrammed as some of these teenage cult members have to be after they’ve been rescued from weird cults, it’s impossible to talk to the guy.  My advice:  don’t waste time on him.


63

Posted by Welleran on Wed, 19 Oct 2005 22:13 | #

Scroob: could you lay off the venom for a second?  Even if I am programmed, spewing hatred and contempt isn’t exactly the way to convince me to break it.  It just makes me think you’re a knee-jerk knucklehead, ranting impotently at a world - or, at the very least, a national government - that doesn’t work the way you want it to.  You sure haven’t told me anything to convince me your point of view is correct; you just rant about what an idiot I am.  Ok, maybe I am, but why don’t you stop reading what I post if stupidity annoys you that much.

Svigor: good points.  I still think you’re too absolutist in your definition of the potential choices.  I’m not saying whites should be interbred out of existence.  I don’t think there’s any “default” choice in the suitability of western civilization for different types of human.

Mark: Ok, I just reread your previous post.  I don’t see what in there is an argument against liberal principles - it reads to me that you are arguing the individualism vs. greater good issue, and while I disagree with your take on it I don’t see how it’s relevant to the question of whether non-white ethnicities can act and think American.  So yes, I have failed to register the argument, because I literally don’t see it ... I start from liberal principles because I think if they can be implemented, even to a partial extent, the resulting society is better in an absolute ethical sense than one that excludes them.

If it can be proven that there is nothing in them that can work within reality, then we have no choice.  But I am not one to easily believe in the impossibility of anything that human minds attempt.

More importantly, I am not going just on high-flown principles here, as much as Scroob would like to believe that.  The Bell Curve is probably the most important work here, and an essential part of the data presented there is that while racial groups do tend to congregate around certain tendencies, you ALWAYS have outliers.  You ALWAYS have whites who are as stupid as blacks, or blacks who are as smart and civilized as whites - they may not be the norm, but they exist.  Those outliers are worth finding, and ideally, they are the ones who would immigrate.  Claiming that the black middle class is destined to collapse into savagery is, in light of this data, incapable of being true.

Claiming that blacks on average cannot surpass a certain mental level - well, you could make the same argument about men and women.  Men _are_ inherently more suited for higher-level mental pursuits than women, men _do_ on average have higher IQs.  But if you try to then claim that women should stay in the kitchen and make babies - well, I have a sister who is a far better geneticist than I am, and right there is where you lose both me and her completely, and anyone like us.  The blacks-can’t-rise-above-their-natures argument is a different form of the same thing, and will be rejected - not for my emotional reasons, but because it doesn’t tell the whole story.


64

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 19 Oct 2005 23:33 | #

“Scroob: could you lay off the venom for a second?  Even if I am programmed, spewing hatred and contempt isn’t exactly the way to convince me to break it.”  (—Welleran)

I have no interest in “convincing” you of anything, Welleran.  You and your kind bore me to death, to put it plainly.  I could put it a lot more plainly.


65

Posted by Kubilai on Thu, 20 Oct 2005 00:03 | #

Welleran,

What is it with liberals and their pathologic obsession to look for that diamond in the rough in an entire coal mine?  Who cares?  Especially when you have a diamond mine with only the occasional lump of coal to protect?

Big deal you know a woman geneticist, a black genius, an Indian altruist, a Chinese humanitarian.  First, do you have any way of selecting out these INDIVIDUALS from a slew of “norms”?  No.  Is it detrimental to our interests to allow this search to continue?  Yes.  So what’s your dilemma?  Why the need to annihilate an entire race to find the few “outliers”?  Does this make logical sense to you?  Your “liberal principles” have been the bane of western society for the last half century at least so shouldn’t you give up the ghost about now on these liberal principles? 

Instead of rejecting Svi’s argument outright with no counter, maybe you should re-read it.  In summary: if we’re wrong, then no harm no foul; if you’re wrong, major irreversible harm.  What are you going say then?  Sorry, I guess I was wrong?

You want the whole story?  Well here it is, whites are the only race to be guilted into accepting distant peoples into their countries and not in insignificant amounts either.  They are the only ones who give these distant peoples political power and special attention to their own detriment.  They are slowly losing their entire countries and possibly even entire continents.  With time, if this process is allowed to continue, their existence is in jeopardy. 

No other race is doing this.  Blacks have never shown to be productive without white largesse and varying degrees of control.  There would be no black middle class, just like there isn’t in ANY black run country, if it weren’t for whites.  You’re in the eye of the hurricane and are trying to convince everyone what great weather there is.  Snap out of it boy.  You sound really, really silly.


66

Posted by Svigor on Thu, 20 Oct 2005 13:16 | #

Svigor: good points.  I still think you’re too absolutist in your definition of the potential choices.  I’m not saying whites should be interbred out of existence.  I don’t think there’s any “default” choice in the suitability of western civilization for different types of human.

I’ve described the poles. In this case, in the absence of clear evidence, one pole represents adaptive behavior and the other represents maladaptive behavior.  Your non-absolutes are just points between those two poles, each point representing more and more maladaptivity as it approaches your position.

*Puts on swami cap, closes eyes, and rubs temples*  I can read your mind…I know what you’re thinking…you’re thinking, “but that doesn’t mean we can’t have a few of the best, really great, non-whites!”

In theory, isolated from certain other facts like Social Identity Theory and EGI, maybe.  In practice, that’s precisely what it means.  People overwhelmingly tend to sympathize with their coethnics and coracialists, and in the absence of countervailing pressures (of the kind found moving whites but not non-whites), non-whites will tend to betray us.

I’ll tell you what Welleran; give us some time to work on that grey matter.  Read the archives here.  Give the other side a chance to make it’s case.  You might be surprised at the result.


67

Posted by Svigor on Thu, 20 Oct 2005 13:21 | #

Big deal you know a woman geneticist, a black genius, an Indian altruist, a Chinese humanitarian.  First, do you have any way of selecting out these INDIVIDUALS from a slew of “norms”?

Of course not, nor does he have any answer for regression to the mean (a Google-worthy phrase, Welleran).

What are you going say then?  Sorry, I guess I was wrong?

Maybe he’ll say what that fellow (was he a Rockefeller or a Kennedy?) said in finding out how perfectly wrong he was in his words characterizing the 1965 immigration act (this will not turn into open-borders mass non-white immigration): nothing.


68

Posted by Welleran on Fri, 21 Oct 2005 17:02 | #

I’ll say that, first, I understand a lot better now how and why white racialism is generally considered a hate movement and why it hasn’t managed to make any progress on what goals it has that are worthy; second, that I’m astounded by how little interest there is in practical steps to cause more people to openly agree with you, and third, it doesn’t matter what the purpose behind communism is, it’s still communism, and it still won’t work.

You know what the great thing about reality is?  It’s self-correcting.  People who do stupid things disappear from the stage.  The only real disagreement here is on what the stupid thing is - but the way in which you guys structure your arguments is very illustrative.

Good luck.


69

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 21 Oct 2005 19:04 | #

Who said a narcissist the likes of you with the brains of a head of cabbage was educable, Welleran?  Bog off to GnXp and stop boring the men and women here to fricking death, will you?  Run along now.  Bye.


70

Posted by Welleran on Sat, 05 Nov 2005 22:31 | #

_I_ said so.  I came here thinking, well, I mostly agree with what they are saying, but there are a few points I have my doubts about, and a few points I want to make that I think they could agree with.  I was curious to see what kind of discussion there would be.  Instead I find hard-line ideology, with no thought whatsoever, no room for exploration of exactly what some of these ideas mean, and people using words they don’t understand (“reversion to the mean”, for instance - Svigor, don’t you realize you need to HAVE a mean?  and that you need to define what it is?)

There’s also the repeated communist leanings, which are just unacceptable.

You’re not going to convince anyone of anything if you viciously attack anyone who has doubts about what you’re saying as being a cabbagehead.  You’re not going to even come close to success if you don’t try to expand your base.

Should I worry about self-defeating behavior?  Well, maybe not.  It does mean that the “Scrooby problem” takes care of itself.


71

Posted by Welleran on Wed, 16 Nov 2005 12:59 | #

Test of new comment system.



Post a comment:


Name: (required)

Email: (required but not displayed)

URL: (optional)

Note: You should copy your comment to the clipboard or paste it somewhere before submitting it, so that it will not be lost if the session times out.

Remember me


Next entry: Saturday Riddle Classic
Previous entry: The English farmer’s traditional flat hat now taboo

image of the day

Existential Issues

DNA Nations

Establishment Problem

Categories

Links

Endorsement 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

Comments

15 and Pregnant commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Sat, 20 Jan 2018 02:17. (View)

Mixed signal for Whitey, not for bloods commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Sat, 20 Jan 2018 01:53. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'A crisis in the custody suite – seventh (and final) part' on Sat, 20 Jan 2018 00:58. (View)

Another question from Chris L. commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Fri, 19 Jan 2018 23:47. (View)

Ahed Tamimi interviewed commented in entry '“Gaza: An Inquest into Its Martyrdom”: Norman Finkelstein on the Many Lies Perpetuated About Gaza' on Fri, 19 Jan 2018 11:12. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Fri, 19 Jan 2018 10:11. (View)

Putinism commented in entry 'Putin's Revenge' on Fri, 19 Jan 2018 08:12. (View)

Jewish occupy, demonstrate for open borders USA commented in entry 'Africans Deported from Israel “Appear” in Rome' on Fri, 19 Jan 2018 02:08. (View)

question commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 23:15. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 17:43. (View)

Crazy Over You commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:22. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 13:24. (View)

I'm a Man commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 12:41. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'Carolyn Emerick talks pagan folk culture and ethnonationalism with Tara's alt-right panel' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 08:15. (View)

uh commented in entry 'Spencer: My conception of the ethnostate is imperialist - true ethno nationalism is a zero sum game.' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 08:07. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'Carolyn Emerick talks pagan folk culture and ethnonationalism with Tara's alt-right panel' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 07:18. (View)

100% European commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 06:39. (View)

The ancient is the modern commented in entry 'Snyder's lessons applied to reality now: universalized liberalism tyrannizing over ethnonationalism' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 02:19. (View)

100% European but you might not guess commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 00:45. (View)

Near 100% European commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Thu, 18 Jan 2018 00:18. (View)

95% Native American (Central) commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Wed, 17 Jan 2018 11:11. (View)

20% sub-Saharan commented in entry 'Euro-DNA Nation' on Wed, 17 Jan 2018 09:53. (View)

We knew these things commented in entry 'Hermeneutic construction of Putin and Trump's character, positions and relation:' on Wed, 17 Jan 2018 04:13. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Wed, 17 Jan 2018 01:18. (View)

DanielS commented in entry 'MR Radio: Greg Johnson talks to GW and Daniel' on Wed, 17 Jan 2018 01:09. (View)

henry m commented in entry 'MR Radio: Greg Johnson talks to GW and Daniel' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 18:29. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 16:51. (View)

This is the Day commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 16:17. (View)

Emerald City commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:46. (View)

mancinblack commented in entry 'America: Making The World Safe for Hypocrisy' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:41. (View)

Anything, Anything commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:26. (View)

The Allman Brothers commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:04. (View)

Nobody to Depend on commented in entry 'America: Making The World Safe for Hypocrisy' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 14:56. (View)

Pearl Jam commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 14:09. (View)

John McLaughlin commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 13:55. (View)

affection-tone