|
|
|
Travelling north Who were these Australians leaving Melbourne and Sydney? Mostly, younger people in their 20s and 30s and their children. Where did they go? Brisbane scored an impressive 236,580 people (no wonder JJR is so relaxed about migration patterns - his city mostly got fellow Australians as migrants over the last 30 years). Perth also did well with a gain of 120,266, with Adelaide and Hobart holding steady. Why did they go? The article blames housing prices, and it is no doubt true that economic factors do influence people. Melbourne lost people during the last recession, but has attracted people back during the current boom. Even so, the basic pattern is that the “global” cities with the largest intake of foreign migrants are exactly the ones which have experienced an outflow of Australians. And the economic argument doesn’t explain everything. I know two young families which have left Melbourne. My best friend from high school, a highly paid engineer, left for Adelaide with his doctor wife. I doubt if housing prices were the key consideration. My cousin left for Perth with her husband and young family. Again, housing wasn’t the key factor as their new home was more expensive than the outer suburban one they left. My guess is that cities like Brisbane and Adelaide and Perth now feel more comfortable for many Australians than the two larger “global” cities. It’s easier to feel enveloped by the more traditional Australian culture and lifestyle in these places. That, at least, was the feeling I got when I visited Adelaide a year or so ago. I liked the atmosphere of the place, even though the housing generally wasn’t as high standard as that in Melbourne. Conclusion? We are often told that Anglo-Australia was a boring and drab place compared to the newer multicultural model. If true, you would think that Australians would be fleeing the old Australia for the big cosmopolitan cities. But the very opposite is happening. In their hundreds of thousands, Australians have left Sydney and Melbourne. The flow of the native born is away from the cosmopolitan multiculture and toward more traditional and more appealing places and lifestyles. Comments:2
Posted by Stuka on Tue, 09 Aug 2005 14:45 | # “In both cities, growth came mainly from overseas migration. But as migrants moved in, Australians moved out.” Race-Replacement at work. 3
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 09 Aug 2005 15:15 | # It’s race-replacement, Geoff, exactly as is clear from the words of the log entry: “It seems that between 1971 and 2001 a massive 463,771 people left Sydney for other parts of Australia, and 237,325 left Melbourne. Yet Melbourne and Sydney continued to grow. As the article puts it: ‘In both cities, growth came mainly from overseas migration. But as migrants moved in, Australians moved out.’ [...T]he basic pattern is that the ‘global’ cities with the largest intake of foreign migrants are exactly the ones which have experienced an outflow of Australians.” (—from the log entry) Of course, John Ray won’t ever admit it, but that’s exactly what it is, race-replacement: taking a particular community, city, region, state, whole country even, and replacing its race with another one. And it’s being done deliberately—as proof of that one need look no further than that what’s going on is obvious. What’s obvious yet is not brought to a halt must be what is desired. “But they speak the same language as the race that originally inhabited the place, and they have the same culture,” John Ray will respond. Well, that they intend to keep the same culture has been proven false by the situation in the U.S. where George Washington is “a dead white male” and we celebrate “Kwaanza” (whatever that monstrosity is supposed to be) and “Cinco de Mayo,” something Mexican or other, with more changed coming every day. As for keeping the same language, English, that’s also clearly on the way out where the newcomers and their white enablers hold sway. So, not only does the race get replaced, but there’s absolutely no guarantee whatsoever that, once that’s accomplished by the usual suspects( * ), the culture and the language won’t follow. Furthermore even if the other races intended to keep the same culture and language things won’t be the same because, being different races and therefore having partly different behaviour and thinking that will manifest in the people in their aggregate numbers due to subtle and not-so-subtle genetic differences in each individual on average, they won’t be able to reproduce the same culture and national behavior as the original—probably won’t even be able to speak the language exactly the same way, with all the same nuances. Also they don’t look physically like us, which has its importance. Finally, part of being a nation is the feeling which the knowlege of being actually descended from the national ancestors gives, and all that springs from that knowledge and feeling—the love, the will, the idealism, the sense of responsibility, the sense of identity, the yearning for the future, and so on. These other folk can’t have that feeling, that knowledge. So, the population brought in to replace the original likely will not, and cannot even where it wants, give life to same nation as the original. White Euro Christian élites have to start speaking out on this or the game’s going to be over before they know it. The game is race-replacement and no, it’s not going to go away by being ignored. It has to be addressed explicitly. Running from it in the hope it will resolve itself on its own obviously hasn’t worked. It has to be confronted squarely. And right now, not or next week, or next month, or next year. Now. ( * Wall Street, clueless women voters, communists who know that unless they brownify the world population they’ll never be able to take it over, organized religious groups mainly Christians trying to out-self-abnegate each other, and, last but definitely not least, organized Jews trying to do away once and for all with white Christians whom they both dislike and fear—and there are other more secondary culprits as well, of course) 4
Posted by Commenter on Tue, 09 Aug 2005 15:18 | # San Antonio, Texas is a good example of a city with white flight. Take a look at the following pdf: Notice how it is much harder to find extremely white areas than extremely Hispanic areas. The white areas usually have high house prices. Also notice how the city is much more skewed to the north than the south, and this has been a result of white flight. If diversity is supposed to be such a good thing for the country, why do whites (and even Hispanics) flee from it? I’m just tired of how many elites lie to people. 5
Posted by Commenter on Tue, 09 Aug 2005 15:34 | # The pdf also shows there is race-replacement from the land area point of view where many areas become virtually uninhabitable for whites. Like I said, I’m just tired of many elites misleading people. 6
Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 09 Aug 2005 16:20 | # From a work in progress titled “Empty the Cities”: The solution to the problems facing us is to “Empty the cities.”—essentially end “civilization” in the sense of society based on centralized population structure. Cities originated with agriculture. Rural males allowed, through their participation in the economies of the cities, the population of cities. Rural males can depopulate cities. Particularly given the fact that young rural females are drawn into the cities to provide sneers of contempt from urban males toward rural males who are ill adapted to compete for females of their own heritage in an urban environment, there is every incentive to shut down the urban areas. The problem historically was the cities provided crucial functions that could not be provided any other way—so rural males could only hope to produce an excess of females and kill off more males in war, dangerous occupations and suicides. That situation has largely changed. Decentralized production and distribution of agricultural goods is far more viable now with “just in time” inventory systems based on efficient, decentralized and very robust communications infrastructure. For example, the trading pits are not a necessity—it can all be electronically distributed and decentralized. Huge central repositories of grain and livestock yards are inefficient inventory policies vulnerable to attack and sabotage. Chicago can go. Similar arguments apply to almost all other urban areas due to their existence as mere levels of abstraction atop the thermodynamics of food. 7
Posted by Steve Edwards on Tue, 09 Aug 2005 16:51 | # Not “replacement”, Fred. No no no, this is “relocation”! And don’t forget the fall-back position - even if you are practically “relocated” out of existence, you and your co-ethnics may get the right to rule as a minority. So you shouldn’t get so worked up because we all know how durable minority rule was in Africa! 8
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 09 Aug 2005 18:09 | # Oh yes, Steve Edwards, how stupid of me for not taking all that into account! Thanks for setting me straight! 9
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 09 Aug 2005 18:23 | # Stuka, somehow I failed to notice your comment right after Geoff’s, above. You’re one hundred—no, make that one thousand percent correct: what’s going on is race-replacement. As of the present moment there’s nothing those who question it can appeal to—no rule, no law, no principle, nothing—to keep it from going to completion everywhere where it has begun. White élites have to address this issue explicitly. There’s no way around that. Yes, it’s thorny—but there are worse things out there than having to address thorny, difficult issues. Race-replacement gone to completion is one of them. 10
Posted by John S Bolton on Tue, 09 Aug 2005 19:47 | # Do you mean replacement as distinct from displacement? That would imply something like the Walker thesis. 11
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 09 Aug 2005 21:40 | # John Bolton (6:47 PM), let’s say you’re a farmer whose pasture has a pond you want gradually to fill in so there’ll be more pasture for the sheep. Let’s say you’re in no particular hurry. Let’s also say you and your family aren’t especially fond of eating fish, so you don’t catch any to eat—you leave them strictly alone and don’t kill any. Little by little you fill the pond in, expanding the pasture with corresponding shrinkage of the pond. You’re shrinking the living space of the fish compared to what it had been previously. You’re also doing it gradually enough that no fish are killed in the process, and they keep reproducing as they’re able in each generation of fish, and surviving as best they can, just as they’ve always done, though now there are added stresses on them in the way of less room to swim around in, dirtier water they must try and cope with, less dissolved oxygen to breathe, less food available per fish, more susceptibility to disease, greater difficulty spawning and raising young, and so on. Inevitably the population of fish in the pond sooner or later decreases though none have been caught or killed, as portions of the pond are taken away from them and put to another use, the support of sheep. One can say that in that particular piece of pastureland some fish have been “displaced” by sheep, and because expansion of the space available to sheep at the expense of that available to fish now results in more sheep but fewer fish, one can also say that some fish have been “replaced” with sheep. If the process continues, which, let’s say, is the farmer’s intention, the end result will be the disappearance of fish entirely, with additional sheep taking their place in that particular piece of acreage. That’s what’s happening to white people in lots of places today. Anyone who doesn’t see that is blind. Forgive me, what’s the Walker Thesis? 13
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 09 Aug 2005 22:18 | # “The survey was commissioned by the Western Standard, a right-leaning bimonthly news and opinion magazine based in Calgary,” (—from the linked news article in Geoff’s comment above) (Notice how they never, ever identify a magazine, newspaper, or TV network news organization as “left-leaning” ...) I agree with Geoff, this is excellent news indeed. Let’s hope they go all the way with this, and let’s hope the various regions of the U.S. do the same, telling the Tranzis and communists in D.C. and Ottawa to go straight to hell (something they should’ve done twenty-five years ago—let’s get the job done this time guys, shall we? Go for it!). 14
Posted by Matra on Wed, 10 Aug 2005 00:41 | # I always found it interesting that Australia, despite its aggressive multiculturalism, has almost always an all-white cricket team. Not just white but Anglo-Saxon/Celtic. Even during the pre-WWII days there were lots of Irish Catholic cricketers in Australia, yet today there seem to be few if any major Yugoslav, Greek, Asian or black cricketers. Is cricket seen as too, uh, Australian? 15
Posted by Matra on Wed, 10 Aug 2005 00:46 | # Speaking of cricket. I remember England captain Nasser Hussein (half-English half-Indian) getting booed by a mostly Asian expat crowd at some charity-type match in England. I take it Indians and Pakistanis in Australia, like those in England, don’t support the home team. 16
Posted by Commenter on Wed, 10 Aug 2005 02:26 | # Regarding replacement versus displacement, I think there is a lot of displacement and some replacement. Having more minorities increases white neighborhood housing prices (both from increased demand of housing in general and whites trying to escape to them). Higher housing prices push down birthrates. Steve Sailer has shown this through his “affordable family formation” theory. So there is some replacement (one could argue the magnitude of this as people can move to other parts of the country). 17
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 10 Aug 2005 04:09 | # In re Commenter’s post just above: Holland’s population used to consist of twenty million Dutchmen, then a million Moroccans brought in by the usual suspects drove out a million Dutchmen. Holland’s population now consists of nineteen million Dutchmen and one million ... you guessed it! ... Moroccans. You can say either that a million Dutchmen got replaced with a million Moroccans or a million Dutchmen got displaced by a million Moroccans who took their place. I’m not sure I see the importance of the distinction. The really important thing is to see that if the process continues, pretty soon one twentieth plus one twentieth plus one twentieth and so on adds up to twenty twentieths, and Holland gets changed into Morocco. I know John Ray couldn’t possibly conceive of anything wrong with that but some of us certainly could. 18
Posted by Steve Edwards on Wed, 10 Aug 2005 04:37 | # I think Australia is roughly 85-90% European these days (obviously we’d be “better off” if that percentage fell to 40% and liable for ICC prosecution if that percentage rose to 95%!) meaning we are probably less multicultural than America. Australia’s cricket team has a fast bowler called Kaspowicz, but that’s about it. Interestingly, Australian football is apparently close to 10% aboriginal, even though the aborigines make up something like 2% of the population (including half-castes). Aborigines tend to be fairly light and fast, and often do well as wingers/rovers/on-ballers. And another thing - I’ve often wondered what the aborigines think of mass immigration. I can’t really see how it would be to their benefit. Then again there is a fair bit of tension between whites and aborigines. 19
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 10 Aug 2005 04:58 | # “I’ve often wondered what the aborigines think of mass immigration.” The bigger, stronger, more aggressive Tonga Islanders are beating the Abos to a pulp in some country towns, I’ve read. The Abos have appealed to the government to do something about it, as they keep winding up in hospital in intensive care. 21
Posted by Desmond Jones on Wed, 10 Aug 2005 06:20 | # The Western separatist news is at best neutral for WNs. The Western Standard, who commissioned the poll, is the brain-child of Ezra, “We’re All Israelis Now”, Levant. It is conservative like the Bush neocons are conservative. Albertans are largely Anglo-Saxons, (NE Puritan Yankees in the frozen North) and have lost there sense of race, imbibing liberally from the philosophical fountain of Puritan/Yankee liberalism/tolerance originated by John Locke. Alberta’s political heritage is an offshoot of US progressivism. The United Farmer’s of Alberta produced Canada’s Famous Five suffragettes; pro-birth control; anti-abortion; supporters of white only (preferrably UK/US)immigration eugenicists. Alberta, vis-a-vis gov’t programs, is probably more liberal than Massachusetts. The smart money, regarding separatism and a white nationalist movement, is on Quebec. Norman/Celtic in origin, (although French speaking) they have a greater sense of their oneness than A/S westerners. Deported by the Old Empire, they fought honourably in defence of the Confederacy http://www.acadiansingray.com/KIAs-MWIAs-POWs-Deserters.htm#KIA MWIA,, DIED, CAPTURED, DESERTED against the New Empire and its tyrant Lincoln. The anti-eugenic Quebec Catholic Church, was sympathetic to Italian fascism and Mussolini’s support in establishing the Vatican as a sovereign state. Quebec was also the stalwart defender of closed borders after 1923 despite the pressure from Canada’s Jews. 22
Posted by AD on Wed, 10 Aug 2005 07:27 | # I think Australia is roughly 85-90% European these days (obviously we’d be “better off” if that percentage fell to 40% and liable for ICC prosecution if that percentage rose to 95%!) meaning we are probably less multicultural than America. They’ve been saying Australia is around 90% European since the early 1990s,even though we’ve had almost 1.8 million immigrants since then,mostly non-European.Our census is skewed so people can choose two ancestries,making it look like there are double the amount of Europeans(who usually have at least two differnt origins,eg-english-irish,unlike most Asians in OZ) than there actually really are. After travelling around the US a few years ago,i honestly think Australia has an equal or lower percentage of whites.They have ‘multicultural’ cities like us,but they also have quite a large white heartland,which we don’t. Sydney + Melbourne make up close to half of our population,and both cities would be lucky to be 55% white. When it comes to the majority anglo-celtic ancestry,i’d guess we’re about 65% tops. 23
Posted by AD on Wed, 10 Aug 2005 07:37 | # When you compare the broad sub-ethnicity,english speaking ‘germano-celtic’,it makes up probably one of the biggest ethnicities in the world.The problem is we’re so spread out.If we all were in one nation,we’d kick arse. 24
Posted by Steve Edwards on Wed, 10 Aug 2005 08:37 | # I suspect that Germano-Celtic ethnicity has about 300 to 400 million people on the planet (if you include Germans and Dutch, then a whole lot more) - almost as many as the Arabs. Anyhow, when we talk about Australians from European ancestry, we must remember there are significant numbers of Greeks, Italians and Slavs. On the whole, Europeans probably make up around 85% at this stage - especially as Asians are reputed to be up to 9%, Aborigines around 2%, and a few other miscellaneous groups thrown in. Around the turn of the 19th/20th Century, this was supposed to be close to 98%. Clearly, there has been substantial “replacement” over the 20th Century. 25
Posted by John S Bolton on Wed, 10 Aug 2005 13:40 | # The Walker thesis is a theory which states that immigration decreases birth rates of the native population, while increasing those in the country from which the immigrants come. It was popular a hundred years ago, and has since been revived by ecologists studying animals, etc. It seems to fit the facts partially, though certainly not in a complete way. 26
Posted by Steve Edwards on Wed, 10 Aug 2005 14:26 | # Makes perfect sense - land prices fall in the country they leave, which encourages those who stay to have more children. 27
Posted by John S Bolton on Wed, 10 Aug 2005 14:35 | # The author of the theory was Francis Walker. It might be under “walker theory”. 28
Posted by ben tillman on Wed, 10 Aug 2005 21:45 | # The link will take you to a short bio of Francis Amasa Walker (a man of great achievements)—
—along with an article published in the June 1896 Atlantic Monthly, under the title “Restriction of Immigration”: http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/faculty/hodgson/Courses/city/Walker/walker.htm Walker was speaking of population replacement even then: Space would not serve for the full statistical demonstration of the proposition that immigration, during the period from 1830 to 1860, instead of constituting a net reinforcement to the population, simply resulted in a replacement of native by foreign elements…. 29
Posted by John S Bolton on Thu, 11 Aug 2005 02:02 | # Thanks for finding that, I could only find a copy of the AM article that required registration. The Walker thesis of population replacement via immigration, sounds like it can’t be completely true; nor is it likely to be altogether false. 30
Posted by John S Bolton on Thu, 11 Aug 2005 02:15 | # “Consequences of Walker’s writings” says that Prescott Farnsworth Hall used this theory to “liken immigration to genocidal infanticide”. An effect like that would seem to require rather unusual circumstances, and the mechanism could hardly be as stated, if the theory is to be of general applicability. 32
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 11 Aug 2005 06:07 | # “The Walker thesis of population replacement via immigration, sounds like it can’t be completely true;” (—John Bolton) To me it’s as plain as day. Post a comment:
Next entry: An Introduction
|
|
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) |
Posted by Geoff Beck on Tue, 09 Aug 2005 14:28 | #
How striking, the same pattern seems to exist here in the US starting in the 1960s with court ordered desegregation. Since then American whites have been a ‘internal refugees’ constantly fleeing black crime and anarchy.
We all know the pace has accelerated with the arrival of the Mexican invasion.
Property Taxes
One way whites have sough to protect themselves is by raising property taxes: if you can’t pay the home property tax you can’t live in the city.
There are problems with this tactic:
1) Not all whites want to pay high property taxes or can pay such taxes. So where do these whites go? How do they protect themselves?
2) The property tax money goes often to a corrupt local gov’t that, in the end, is controlled by the tyrants in Washington. The same group that caused the problem to begin with.