The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 iSteve BlogTeasers
Borderism v. Citizenism
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

The Open Borders ideology continues to push on an open door among Establishment elites. From the Washington Post:

Opinions
Losing the birth lottery

By Markus Bergström October 3

The writer is chief information officer of an NGO in Guatemala that promotes local governance in developing countries.

What’s the difference between a Mexican and a New Mexican? The former lacked the foresight of being born to American parents. New Mexicans, on the other hand, made the much more strategic choice of entering life with a U.S. birth certificate. This earned them the right to live and work anywhere across the fruited plain, a luxury not afforded to their southern namesakes.

For some stuck on the wrong side of the fence, migrating legally to another country is as impossible as undergoing a full-body skin transplant. Like race, citizenship is an attribute we inherit and have no say over. But while we balk at the idea of letting race determine someone’s legal rights, we unthinkingly support a similar principle based on citizenship. …

This guild system of nationalities is not racism. Nor is it nationalism nor nativism. In fact, no word exists to describe it. This is problematic, as our language often defines how we perceive the world. When the word racism entered the English language in the 1930s, it helped draw attention to the racial discrimination that pervaded society. Similarly, we need a term to highlight citizenship-based discrimination. My humble suggestion: borderism. …

Still, while practical matters are important, both borderism and racism are ultimately questions of ethics. Inheriting the wrong genes is no longer punishable by law, but inheriting the wrong citizenship is. Borderism is thus a sibling of racism as it subjects our rights to the lottery of life. While many opportunities in life are unequally distributed, our legal rights must always be universal.

 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. The “birth lottery” argument isn’t a slippery slope, because it is already at the bottom of the hill.

    Indeed, every distinguishable difference between individuals can be written off as the luck of the “birth lottery.”

    Parents are rich? Birth lottery. Born handsome? Birth lottery? Born with a genetic disease? Birth lottery. Born in Liberia? Birth lottery. Intelligent? Birth lottery.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/isteve/borderism-v-citizenism/#comment-729997
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. What’s the difference between a Mexican and a New Mexican? The former lacked the foresight of being born to American parents. New Mexicans, on the other hand, made the much more strategic choice of entering life with a U.S. birth certificate.

    I keep on kicking myself for not choosing to be born a Pritzker….

    Read More
    • Replies: @Uptown Resident
    And think about all the elephants, hogs, and rhesus monkeys mad as hell they weren't born homo sapiens!
  3. If the first 20 or so comments at WaPo are any indication, this ideology stops at the Establishment elites and doesn’t go any further downward. The real problem is not, then, the silly things that elites believe, but the large chunks of people (especially crumpled journalists) who believe that anything an elite says is to be taken as gospel truth.

    Read More
  4. Borderism is thus a sibling of racism as it subjects our rights to the lottery of life. While many opportunities in life are unequally distributed, our legal rights must always be universal.

    MMMM, curious how our modern-day theorists seem to shy away from “familism.” Why should a wealthy family be able to restrict its membership to those who have won the birth lottery?

    And, on a related note, Barone keeps on grappling with the fact that Mestizo Mexicans are strangely unlike Italians when it comes to social mobility:

    http://townhall.com/columnists/michaelbarone/2014/09/23/why-has-immigration-shifted-n1895034

    Read More
    • Replies: @Log
    I know this was supposed to be a reductio ad absurdum, but it's not. "Family" is well-defined. Your argument would be better stated in terms of access to familial property, but then it would fall afoul of the Golden Rule, as does borderism or citezenism.
  5. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    When will they clamor about lazism, intelligentism, and work ethicism? That should be a good show.

    Read More
  6. Good God syon, would you stop with that idiotic MMMMM thing you keep doing? It’s creepy and weird and I can’t believe you actually take the time to type like that.

    Read More
  7. On a different note, what’s with the overabundance of Scandinavians among NGOs?

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterike
    On a different note, what’s with the overabundance of Scandinavians among NGOs?

    Scandinavians are the most aggressively suicidal of white ethnic groups, and NGOs are the shock troops of white self-immolation. So that's why.
  8. Open borders?

    The end game is no borders. We Are The World.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The end game is no borders. We Are The World.

    Yet, he's for local governance.
  9. Syon, stop with that stupid MMMMMM thing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Syon, stop with that stupid MMMMMM thing.
     
    Trademark, dear boy.
  10. What did you expect from a globalist/no borders/no country sort of guy working for a unnamed NGO.

    Still at the end of the day, he doesn’t have the 1st world people’s well being in mind at all with what he proposing but quite the opposite, which is the destruction of said people by demographic migration. For all intents he’s a enemy of Americans and Europeans like many other cultural Marxists of his sort are.

    Read More
  11. The Mexican government is extremely guilty of borderism, because they do not have open borders with Belize and Guatemala.

    Read More
  12. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @countenance
    Open borders?

    The end game is no borders. We Are The World.

    The end game is no borders. We Are The World.

    Yet, he’s for local governance.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous


    @countenance

    The end game is no borders. We Are The World.
     
    Yet, he’s for local governance.
     
    Marcus's cognitive dissonance is indeed puzzling. In Israel the Jews established "local governance" in 2011 with laws that permit localities to ban residence on an individual basis. Local residence committees decide whether you are culturally and socially compatible with the current residents. If not, you may not move into the community. In short, they establish a form of "local border control".

    Perhaps this is one way to resolve Marcus's dissonance: state borders must be open, but community borders within the state can be closed. The Israeli Supreme Court recently ratified these laws. Its decision said that blanket proscriptions (e.g. of all goyim) would be bad, but individual, case-by-case residency bans (for cultural reasons, of course) were fine.
  13. “Open borders?

    The end game is no borders. We Are The World.”

    “We Are The World” used to be a song about AIDS in Africa. Now it is about turning White countries into 3rd world countries.

    Read More
  14. Amazing how a well paid “intelligentsia” can twist logic into an infinite series of knots to reach one silly and anti-historical conclusion while avoiding more obvious results that would annoy various billionaires.

    Read More
  15. “And, on a related note, Barone keeps on grappling with the fact that Mestizo Mexicans are strangely unlike Italians when it comes to social mobility:”

    I hate when Italians are compared to 3rd world Hispanics simply because the majority of Italians are Catholic and Non light haired.

    Read More
  16. >My humble suggestion: borderism. …<

    oh good the proggtarded are one with #isisisislam

    The End of Sykes Picot

    Read More
  17. It’s not an arbitrary right given the newborn, it’s a parent’s right to pass a benefit on to his child. You could even say it promotes equality (albeit *within* the country) inasmuch as even the most indigent Americans “own” the very valuable (worth, I’d say, millions over a lifetime) right to simply live here.

    Read More
  18. Razib Khan posted on this subject yesterday, Against Vulgar Mohism for Our Age.

    Human prejudices and preferences for particular sorts, whether it be the opposite sex (on the whole), or people of similar kind (whether it be racial, religious, ethnic, or class), are likely going to persist in some form because we are a “groupish” species. Not only have we flourished in groups, our cognitive architecture is geared toward multiple levels of sociality and familiarity. We will never flatten the chain of affinities.

    Much of this is banal and obvious to most. But nevertheless it needs to be elaborated, because the commanding heights of our culture are assaulted by the propagandists of logic and reason applied in domains where feelings are preeminent.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jean Cocteausten
    I disagree that group affinity is any more driven by emotion than other political phenomena. Groups are the inevitable outcome of a completely logical and reasonable process of setting priorities. I would certainly join a group to lobby for laws requiring the local government to approve the design of all signs larger than a certain size. That group might well contain people who think the government should be able to censor advertisements or shut down businesses it doesn't like, but as long as they don't go too far with it, I'm happy to make common cause with them. Such horse-trading probably plays a major role in keeping ethnic groups cohesive.
  19. “This guild system of nationalities is not racism. Nor is it nationalism nor nativism. In fact, no word exists to describe it.”

    Of course there is a word for it: security.

    Read More
  20. 1. Find out who Markus works for (a quick search didn’t reveal that but it shouldn’t be impossible).

    2. Conduct a campaign against that NGO designed to reduce their support and donations. Point out to their supporters/donors that braindrain from Guatemala to the U.S. will make what the NGO claims to be doing more difficult. It will also help the corrupt elites of that country, also making the NGO’s supposed mission more difficult. You can do that by setting up a page to point that out, by looking who they talk to on Twitter* and trying to convince those people, etc.

    * Whether pot or not, Twitter employees don’t seem quite right in the head. They’re willing to suspend accounts for little or no reason based on bogus reports, so use a disposable account.

    Read More
  21. @ic1000
    Razib Khan posted on this subject yesterday, Against Vulgar Mohism for Our Age.

    Human prejudices and preferences for particular sorts, whether it be the opposite sex (on the whole), or people of similar kind (whether it be racial, religious, ethnic, or class), are likely going to persist in some form because we are a “groupish” species. Not only have we flourished in groups, our cognitive architecture is geared toward multiple levels of sociality and familiarity. We will never flatten the chain of affinities.

    Much of this is banal and obvious to most. But nevertheless it needs to be elaborated, because the commanding heights of our culture are assaulted by the propagandists of logic and reason applied in domains where feelings are preeminent.
     

    I disagree that group affinity is any more driven by emotion than other political phenomena. Groups are the inevitable outcome of a completely logical and reasonable process of setting priorities. I would certainly join a group to lobby for laws requiring the local government to approve the design of all signs larger than a certain size. That group might well contain people who think the government should be able to censor advertisements or shut down businesses it doesn’t like, but as long as they don’t go too far with it, I’m happy to make common cause with them. Such horse-trading probably plays a major role in keeping ethnic groups cohesive.

    Read More
  22. This belongs in the Onion. Guest editorial by a real smart second grader. It is a joke, right?

    A few years ago, when Daisy Hernandez proposed mass asylum for her fellow Colombians, her “flaco” NYT editor let her down gently so she didn’t make a fool of herself or the newspaper.

    Did the Post fire their editors? This guy should not be allowed to self harm in public. I mean, maybe he was drunk when he wrote this puerile piece of stupidity.

    Read More
  23. bomag [AKA "doombuggy"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    With guys like this out in public and occupying jobs with some political power, what hope do we have?

    We’re on a ship at sea, and people keep chopping holes in the hull to let in the water “because it is only fair, we don’t want to be accused of waterism.”

    Read More
  24. While many opportunities in life are unequally distributed, our legal rights must always be universal.

    Watch how quickly that argument gets dropped when a “mentally retarded” Negro rapist-murderer comes up for the death penalty.

    Read More
  25. There is a religious belief implied in the phrase “Birth Lottery”. It almost assumes a kind belief that souls inhabit the first empty embryo available, and that this is somehow arbitrary, and the Government must do something to rectify it. A modern quasi Buddhist belief?

    Read More
    • Replies: @bomag
    a kind of belief that souls inhabit the first empty embryo available

    Yeah, I've wondered about this line of thinking, the "every sperm is sacred" epistemology, where we harvest every human egg cell extant; grow it to maturity; rinse and repeat until all hydrogen ions in the universe are rendered into flesh...he with the most souls at the end, wins! These people think they are buying a place in heaven, and they are happy to buy that place with other people's money.
  26. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Bergstrom, with an umlaut. Must be one of those Jewish elites undermining our nation.

    Read More
  27. @syonredux

    What’s the difference between a Mexican and a New Mexican? The former lacked the foresight of being born to American parents. New Mexicans, on the other hand, made the much more strategic choice of entering life with a U.S. birth certificate.
     
    I keep on kicking myself for not choosing to be born a Pritzker....

    And think about all the elephants, hogs, and rhesus monkeys mad as hell they weren’t born homo sapiens!

    Read More
  28. @IanH
    Syon, stop with that stupid MMMMMM thing.

    Syon, stop with that stupid MMMMMM thing.

    Trademark, dear boy.

    Read More
  29. Priss Factor [AKA "pizza with hot pepper"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/archive/segment/54208f26fe34447af90007f6

    Shouldn’t blacks be disgraced for ‘creating’ this kind of culture than whites be demeaned for ‘appropriating’ it? (or appropri-aping it)

    Are we to assume this ‘big booty’ is some gold standard of culture, a precious commodity that whites are stealing from blacks?

    Shouldn’t the issue be blacks need to grow up and whites need to stop degrading themselves by wallowing in the filth of black culture?

    Read More
  30. Priss Factor [AKA "pizza with hot pepper"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “Markus Bergström”

    What’s that? Swedish name? Send 20 million Africans to Sweden and totally destroy that country.

    Maybe only then will these idiots stop talking out of their ass.

    Read More
  31. He’s actually got a point. If “racism” is wrong, then so is “borderism.” The answer is to either accept or reject the legitimacy of point.

    Read More
  32. “While many opportunities in life are unequally distributed, our legal rights must always be universal.”

    And, most importantly, the swarthy man’s legal right to the fruits of the white man’s labor must always be universal.

    Read More
  33. While many opportunities in life are unequally distributed, our legal rights must always be universal.

    Does the necessity of distributing “legal rights” to anyone from anywhere who manages to slope across a border apply to all countries, or just to America? There are plenty of lovely coastal areas in South America where I’d love to have a home. If I just show up with my hand out, are my legal rights guaranteed there?

    Read More
  34. Funny how he’s from Sweden but he picks on us.

    To find out more about what this is all about, do a search on the his group “Startup Cities Institute”. You will come up with some interesting results.

    Read More
  35. Mexico is developing very rapidly. The per capita GDP is 16,110. Since it is cheaper (even though that figure is adjusted for purchasing power parity) and the weather tends to be better (especially in Northern US), the border pressure from Mexico is decreasing.

    If two countries are roughly equal in terms of wealth, open borders isn’t much of a problem. In Chicago, there are a lot of undocumented Europeans. No one seems to care much. I would like to see more immigration from Eastern Europe and Russia. That is how they filled up fly over country in the 19th century.

    The US has open borders between states. Mississippi has about 1/2 the per capita income of Delaware, but that sorted itself out over decades and no one gives it a second thought. One of the defining traits of Americans is to move without hesitation for economic advantage. This is obvious in oil booms, like the Dakotas now, and Texas when the price of oil justifies it. Get a UHaul and get out of Dodge and into Fat City. The UK expected a surge of immigration from Romania on Jan 1, when it became a full member of the EU. No one showed up. Per capita income between Eastern Europe and Western Europe is roughly equal to or greater than that between Mexico and the US.

    The real problem is when immigration increases inequality in the US, which is a social goal that we have worked on (with plenty of painful, unintended consequences) for decades. It also reduces the economic minimum wage (which, without illegal immigration, would be higher than those proposed in New York, &c. Golf courses would have to pay closer to $20/hour than the current $10/$12. And there are a hell of a lot of Americans that would be happy to work for $20/hour. Same with harvesting crops. Semi automate it and pay a US living wage. Of course, fruit would rot in the fields if growers refuse to pay wages that would attract Americans. And it should. If it costs $20/hour or $25/hour, then so what? More and more of our produce seems to be imported from Mexico. Better to import the end product than the labor. However, I am somewhere between confident and certain that most crops would be picked. And the most economically marginal farming should disappear. California needs water for urban areas more than they need to grow low quality crops. Importing labor is roughly equivalent to outsourcing manufacturing. Only worse for a lot of reasons.

    The real argument is that open borders between countries that have huge income differentials is always going to undermine the social goal of equality. I don’t know any Conservative that wants to see less equality in the US. Their main gripe is the mechanism to achieve that end.

    Read More
  36. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    How about a new one ‘familyism’. Familyism is the irrational preference that parents have for their own children. By sheer ‘accident of birth’ mothers and fathers bear children whom they favor with all sorts of things such as love, money, affection, care etc over equally valid children born to other sets of parents. Often the other parents are in third world nations so that the equally valid child is effectively ‘discriminated’ against by the favored parents. This discrimination is iniquitous and results in all manner of terrible outcomes for the unflavored child – who, remember, is just an equally valid child who just happened to be born, by sheer accident, to a different set of parents.
    The solution, of course, is to abolish iniquitous and discriminatory institution of family and to impose the concept of ‘socialized’ family in which children are not raised by parents but by a global, centrally funded institution.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lurker

    The UK expected a surge of immigration from Romania on Jan 1, when it became a full member of the EU. No one showed up
     
    Over 30,000+ this year so far. (So equivalent to 150,000 into the US) The real issue is how many of them are roma/gypsies.
    , @dumpstersquirrel
    "The solution, of course, is to abolish iniquitous and discriminatory institution of family and to impose the concept of ‘socialized’ family in which children are not raised by parents but by a global, centrally funded institution."

    Been reading Plato's Republic? If not, then check it out: Plato proposed this millions and millions of years ago.
    , @Art Deco
    Corina Caplan indubitably told her husband he'd be sleeping on the couch if he advanced that idea.
  37. @Anonymous
    How about a new one 'familyism'. Familyism is the irrational preference that parents have for their own children. By sheer 'accident of birth' mothers and fathers bear children whom they favor with all sorts of things such as love, money, affection, care etc over equally valid children born to other sets of parents. Often the other parents are in third world nations so that the equally valid child is effectively 'discriminated' against by the favored parents. This discrimination is iniquitous and results in all manner of terrible outcomes for the unflavored child - who, remember, is just an equally valid child who just happened to be born, by sheer accident, to a different set of parents.
    The solution, of course, is to abolish iniquitous and discriminatory institution of family and to impose the concept of 'socialized' family in which children are not raised by parents but by a global, centrally funded institution.

    The UK expected a surge of immigration from Romania on Jan 1, when it became a full member of the EU. No one showed up

    Over 30,000+ this year so far. (So equivalent to 150,000 into the US) The real issue is how many of them are roma/gypsies.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FWIW
    "But the figures published last month did not reflect an influx of migrants from the two countries. The number of Romanians and Bulgarians working in Britain from January to March of this year dropped to 140,000 from 144,000 in the previous quarter, according to the Office for National Statistics. That compared with 1.7 million migrants from the rest of the European Union working in Britain, it said.

    Part of the antipathy today stems from previous decisions to allow unfettered immigration from Poland and seven other Eastern European countries immediately after they joined the European Union in 2004.

    The number of native Poles in Britain has grown tenfold since, and today they are the second largest immigrant population, just behind Indians and ahead of Pakistanis, who have colonial links to Britain.
    "

    Overall, I would take the Poles before Pakistanis and Indians. And the Romanians also. The Roma ...
    not so much. 30,000 is a decent sized number, but I would have thought the number would be bigger since the per capita income is so much lower in Romania.
  38. bomag [AKA "doombuggy"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Name Withheld
    There is a religious belief implied in the phrase "Birth Lottery". It almost assumes a kind belief that souls inhabit the first empty embryo available, and that this is somehow arbitrary, and the Government must do something to rectify it. A modern quasi Buddhist belief?

    a kind of belief that souls inhabit the first empty embryo available

    Yeah, I’ve wondered about this line of thinking, the “every sperm is sacred” epistemology, where we harvest every human egg cell extant; grow it to maturity; rinse and repeat until all hydrogen ions in the universe are rendered into flesh…he with the most souls at the end, wins! These people think they are buying a place in heaven, and they are happy to buy that place with other people’s money.

    Read More
  39. He’s exactly right. It’s ludicrous for someone to have a better life just because they popped out of a magic vagina .

    Read More
  40. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Anonymous
    The end game is no borders. We Are The World.

    Yet, he's for local governance.

    The end game is no borders. We Are The World.

    Yet, he’s for local governance.

    Marcus’s cognitive dissonance is indeed puzzling. In Israel the Jews established “local governance” in 2011 with laws that permit localities to ban residence on an individual basis. Local residence committees decide whether you are culturally and socially compatible with the current residents. If not, you may not move into the community. In short, they establish a form of “local border control”.

    Perhaps this is one way to resolve Marcus’s dissonance: state borders must be open, but community borders within the state can be closed. The Israeli Supreme Court recently ratified these laws. Its decision said that blanket proscriptions (e.g. of all goyim) would be bad, but individual, case-by-case residency bans (for cultural reasons, of course) were fine.

    Read More
  41. My question for ol’ Markus is the same one I had for an acquaintance who took issue with my description of Peru as a Third World country, preferring “developing”. With Peru gaining its independence in 1824 (Guatemala in 1821), how long are they going to be developing?

    Read More
  42. @Anonymous
    How about a new one 'familyism'. Familyism is the irrational preference that parents have for their own children. By sheer 'accident of birth' mothers and fathers bear children whom they favor with all sorts of things such as love, money, affection, care etc over equally valid children born to other sets of parents. Often the other parents are in third world nations so that the equally valid child is effectively 'discriminated' against by the favored parents. This discrimination is iniquitous and results in all manner of terrible outcomes for the unflavored child - who, remember, is just an equally valid child who just happened to be born, by sheer accident, to a different set of parents.
    The solution, of course, is to abolish iniquitous and discriminatory institution of family and to impose the concept of 'socialized' family in which children are not raised by parents but by a global, centrally funded institution.

    “The solution, of course, is to abolish iniquitous and discriminatory institution of family and to impose the concept of ‘socialized’ family in which children are not raised by parents but by a global, centrally funded institution.”

    Been reading Plato’s Republic? If not, then check it out: Plato proposed this millions and millions of years ago.

    Read More
  43. How about a new one ‘familyism’. Familyism is the irrational preference that parents have for their own children.

    How about personism — discrimination by a person in favor of himself? It’s no more or less rational or moral to discriminate in favor of a person-self than it is to discriminate in favor of a family-self, a nation-self, a race-self, or a species-self.

    Read More
  44. @syonredux

    Borderism is thus a sibling of racism as it subjects our rights to the lottery of life. While many opportunities in life are unequally distributed, our legal rights must always be universal.
     
    MMMM, curious how our modern-day theorists seem to shy away from "familism." Why should a wealthy family be able to restrict its membership to those who have won the birth lottery?


    And, on a related note, Barone keeps on grappling with the fact that Mestizo Mexicans are strangely unlike Italians when it comes to social mobility:

    http://townhall.com/columnists/michaelbarone/2014/09/23/why-has-immigration-shifted-n1895034

    I know this was supposed to be a reductio ad absurdum, but it’s not. “Family” is well-defined. Your argument would be better stated in terms of access to familial property, but then it would fall afoul of the Golden Rule, as does borderism or citezenism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @random observer
    Is "family" any longer any better defined than "polity"? Both have begun being defined by kinship and both have evolved to the point at which kinship is blended by adoption through legal contract.

    Granted, family is more tightly tied to kinship even now than the citizenship of a country like the US, but both ideas partake of both blood and voluntary ties. Adoptive children are presumed to have the inheritance rights of natural children, as a rule.

    Different societies define the scope of citizenship differently, but they also have and do define the scope of family differently.

    And all of that is just something I would offer within the scope of human societies as they have existed historically. At this point, I would say progressivism is rapidly redefining both the family and the polity and is actually way far out in front with the redefinition of family.

    If only on those grounds, I don't see that one can rhetorically dismiss arguments in defence of borderism that take on the family as a basis of comparison.

    As to the Golden Rule, surely none of familism, citizenism or borderism fall afoul of it. It requires that one treat others as one would wish to be treated oneself. I don't know anyone asking to have equal rights to inherit the family property of others and I certainly am not, ergo I am not obligated to share mine equally with all. Ditto my benefits of citizenship in my country.
  45. While many opportunities in life are unequally distributed, our legal rights must always be universal.

    And one of those legal rights, of course, is one’s right to assemble resources and use them oneself. That is exactly what citizens do when they discriminate between citizens and non-citizens.

    Read More
  46. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    A strange modern English saying that I’ve heard more than once is “If my grandmother had wheels, then I’d be a tea trolley” – which I know must sound doubly weird and bizarre to an American, ( a tea trolley is an absolutely ubiquitous feature of English working life, as familiar as a water cooler is to an American). Anyway, the meaning of this strange little phrase is really to curtail conversations that have strayed into a dangerous territory by becoming contingent on to many ‘its’, ‘buts’ ‘if only this happened, then that would never have resulted, and we’d all be better off’, ‘it’s all the fault of that decision, if only I’d done things differently’ is it points to the absurdity of even attempting to think that present day in your face reality could possibly be different, if such and such action in the past happened or did not happen.It’s saying we live in this reality, and you just have to deal with it. None of this ‘accident of birth’ whining and bullshit.

    Read More
  47. I agree with this article. Israel should be home to the world, not just the Jews. There’s nothing magical about Hebrew vaginas.

    Racist Israel’s Apartheid Nazi policies have to come to an end. America must put all of her mighty resources toward correcting this, the #1 injustice in the world today.

    He’s exactly right. It’s ludicrous for someone to have a better life just because they popped out of a magic vagina .

    You read it here first, folks; libs think Mother Nature is “ludicrous.”

    She’s not amused.

    Read More
  48. It’s not really a good idea to be touting open borders on the same day that Europe reports it’s first homegrown case of Ebola.

    Read More
  49. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Too bad all those Palestinians were born on the wrong side of the fence or wall.

    Read More
  50. @Anonymous
    How about a new one 'familyism'. Familyism is the irrational preference that parents have for their own children. By sheer 'accident of birth' mothers and fathers bear children whom they favor with all sorts of things such as love, money, affection, care etc over equally valid children born to other sets of parents. Often the other parents are in third world nations so that the equally valid child is effectively 'discriminated' against by the favored parents. This discrimination is iniquitous and results in all manner of terrible outcomes for the unflavored child - who, remember, is just an equally valid child who just happened to be born, by sheer accident, to a different set of parents.
    The solution, of course, is to abolish iniquitous and discriminatory institution of family and to impose the concept of 'socialized' family in which children are not raised by parents but by a global, centrally funded institution.

    Corina Caplan indubitably told her husband he’d be sleeping on the couch if he advanced that idea.

    Read More
  51. @Bert
    On a different note, what's with the overabundance of Scandinavians among NGOs?

    On a different note, what’s with the overabundance of Scandinavians among NGOs?

    Scandinavians are the most aggressively suicidal of white ethnic groups, and NGOs are the shock troops of white self-immolation. So that’s why.

    Read More
  52. Priss Factor [AKA "pizza with hot pepper"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “What’s the difference between a Mexican and a New Mexican? The former lacked the foresight of being born to American parents.”

    So… are we to assume that Mexicans are so stupid and worthless that they can never turn their own country into a modern economy and therefore must enter into OTHER nations to have a decent life?

    There was a time when North America was even more underdeveloped than Latin America as the Spanish arrived considerably before the Anglos. Yet, Anglos in the North created a great nation. They didn’t beg the Latins to let them into the South.

    But what do so many Latinos do?
    They just sit on their ass. Latin America has so much potential. Most of its gone to waste.
    And their #1 prospect of a good life seems to be entering the US.

    Btw, would US and modern Western economies even exist in the first place if they never had any borders and tons of non-Europeans entered into their areas for 100s of years?

    Btw, if a 100 million Chinese wanna enter Japan for a better life, should they?

    Read More
  53. This is idiotic. I lost the “birth lottery” by not being born into a wealthy family. So when are the open borders/empty minds crowd going to campaign for wealth to be transferred from people who won that “birth lottery” to people like me?

    What’s the difference between a Mexican and a New Mexican?

    What’s the difference between the children of Bill Gates and the children of Joe Sixpack?

    The open borders crowd are communists in a new wrapper.

    Read More
  54. It is ridiculous to say you should/might have been born in a certain country or in a certain ethnicity.
    The only “Birth Lottery” is which of your parents genes are going to meld together during conception.
    The chance of a birth where/when of an individual is what Thomas Carlyle might have called “The Verdict of History”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    George Carlin had a bit about people who say, "He just happens to be black."

    "Well, were his parents black?"

  55. @Name Withheld
    It is ridiculous to say you should/might have been born in a certain country or in a certain ethnicity.
    The only "Birth Lottery" is which of your parents genes are going to meld together during conception.
    The chance of a birth where/when of an individual is what Thomas Carlyle might have called "The Verdict of History".

    George Carlin had a bit about people who say, “He just happens to be black.”

    “Well, were his parents black?”

    Read More
  56. @Lurker

    The UK expected a surge of immigration from Romania on Jan 1, when it became a full member of the EU. No one showed up
     
    Over 30,000+ this year so far. (So equivalent to 150,000 into the US) The real issue is how many of them are roma/gypsies.

    “But the figures published last month did not reflect an influx of migrants from the two countries. The number of Romanians and Bulgarians working in Britain from January to March of this year dropped to 140,000 from 144,000 in the previous quarter, according to the Office for National Statistics. That compared with 1.7 million migrants from the rest of the European Union working in Britain, it said.

    Part of the antipathy today stems from previous decisions to allow unfettered immigration from Poland and seven other Eastern European countries immediately after they joined the European Union in 2004.

    The number of native Poles in Britain has grown tenfold since, and today they are the second largest immigrant population, just behind Indians and ahead of Pakistanis, who have colonial links to Britain.

    Overall, I would take the Poles before Pakistanis and Indians. And the Romanians also. The Roma …
    not so much. 30,000 is a decent sized number, but I would have thought the number would be bigger since the per capita income is so much lower in Romania.

    Read More
  57. @Log
    I know this was supposed to be a reductio ad absurdum, but it's not. "Family" is well-defined. Your argument would be better stated in terms of access to familial property, but then it would fall afoul of the Golden Rule, as does borderism or citezenism.

    Is “family” any longer any better defined than “polity”? Both have begun being defined by kinship and both have evolved to the point at which kinship is blended by adoption through legal contract.

    Granted, family is more tightly tied to kinship even now than the citizenship of a country like the US, but both ideas partake of both blood and voluntary ties. Adoptive children are presumed to have the inheritance rights of natural children, as a rule.

    Different societies define the scope of citizenship differently, but they also have and do define the scope of family differently.

    And all of that is just something I would offer within the scope of human societies as they have existed historically. At this point, I would say progressivism is rapidly redefining both the family and the polity and is actually way far out in front with the redefinition of family.

    If only on those grounds, I don’t see that one can rhetorically dismiss arguments in defence of borderism that take on the family as a basis of comparison.

    As to the Golden Rule, surely none of familism, citizenism or borderism fall afoul of it. It requires that one treat others as one would wish to be treated oneself. I don’t know anyone asking to have equal rights to inherit the family property of others and I certainly am not, ergo I am not obligated to share mine equally with all. Ditto my benefits of citizenship in my country.

    Read More
  58. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “..our legal rights must always be universal.”

    Immigration has never been a “right”. It is only a privilege, and a largely outdated one at that.

    Read More

Comments are closed.

PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
While other top brass played press agents for the administration’s war, William Odom told the truth about Iraq—though few listened.
A thousand years of meritocracy shaped the Middle Kingdom.