The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Descendants of American Slaves
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
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.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From Slate:

A Movement or a Troll?
Why claims that Kamala Harris “is not an American black” are suddenly everywhere.
By RACHELLE HAMPTON

“Kamala Harris is *not* an American Black. She is half Indian and half Jamaican,” read one of a dozen similar tweets questioning Harris’ identity sent in the moments after she, while confronting Joe Biden’s record of opposing desegregation, recalled being bused to school as a little girl. Another read, “KAMALA HARRIS IS NOT BLACK” and featured a photo of Harris with a “Kamala Dolezal” emblazoned across her face, referencing Rachel Dolezal, a white woman who claims to be “transracially” black.

While Science has proved that Caitlyn Jenner is a stunning and brave woman, Science disproves that anybody, such as the absurd and disgusting Rachel Dolezal, could possibly ever change their race, which is an innate genetic reality.

Also Science has proved that race does not exist biologically. Read a book!

Yet another read, “Kamala Harris is implying she is descended from American Black Slaves. She’s not. She comes from Jamaican Slave Owners. That’s fine. She’s not an American Black. Period.” That last one, written by black right-wing provocateur Ali Alexander, was retweeted by none other than Donald Trump Jr., along with a question: “Is this true? Wow.” …

At first glance, the tweets questioning Harris’ black bona fides look apiece with the racist birther conspiracies levied against Barack Obama when he ran for president—the tweets are an effort to paint her as an imposter (and indeed, there’s evidence the “Kamala Dolezal” memes originated in the same toxic spheres as the birther movement). But a quick look at the bios and tweets of the people who have most vocally and consistently questioned Harris’ blackness, and her ability to speak to the experience of black Americans, most frequently feature not the #MAGA hashtag, but another one: #ADOS, or American descendants of slaves.

According to one theory, accounts that use #ADOS are a sinister collection of Russian bots and trolls sowing misinformation and apathy toward Democratic candidates in the runup to the 2020 election. Or they’re a façade for nativist white supremacists who are trying to drive a wedge between American black descendants of slaves and black immigrants. …

The real story of #ADOS is, unsurprisingly, more complicated than any of these parties want to acknowledge. The ADOS hashtag was created by attorney Antonio Moore and political commentator Yvette Carnell. Neither of them is a bot, or a Russian. In interviews with the Intercept in the aftermath of the Democratic debate that brought the hashtag to the fore, Moore and Carnell both dismiss criticism like Reid’s as an effort to “undermine authentic Black advocacy in order to prop up the Democratic establishment.” They describe the goals of #ADOS as “agenda politics” rather than identity politics, calling on Democratic candidates to support a “New Deal for Black America,” a set of specific policies designed to address the institutional and systemic plunder that has defined America’s relationship with blackness since its founding. The ADOS policy page details the specific measures the group supports, including reparations for the descendants of people held in chattel slavery, government subsidies for health care and education, and affirmative action for slave descendants.

The ADOS movement, such as it is, is one of many forums in a larger conversation that questions black homogeneity in America. That conversation will only grow louder as the issue of reparations—and who deserves them—continues to gain momentum following a congressional hearing on the subject last month.

But a closer look suggests ADOS is hiding a blackness purity test in rhetoric about who deserves those reparations. As Michael Scherer and Amy B Wang put it in the Washington Post on Monday, “The underlying message is that black Americans from immigrant families, even places like Jamaica, with a history of slavery under Spanish and British rule, do not have the same claim to the identity or the struggle for civil rights.” And there’s troubling evidence that anti-immigrant bias is at the heart of that message.

There’s troubling evidence of anti-immigrant bias at the heart of the message.
On the ADOS policy page, the group stipulates that the census should introduce a new designation for “ADOS and another for Black immigrants. Black immigrants should be barred from accessing affirmative action and other set asides intended for ADOS, as should Asians, Latinos, white women, and other ‘minority’ groups.” According to the same Washington Post report, Carnell, the co-founder, was previously on the board of Progressives for Immigration Reform, which, despite its name, has deep ties to the anti-immigrant right. Moore, for his part, wrote a 2016 HuffPost op-ed arguing that Trump’s hard-line stance on immigration is warranted because undocumented immigrants are to blame for black unemployment. He also likes to suggest that critics of the movement like Reid aren’t qualified to comment on it because they are children of immigrants.

… Rhetoric like that has gained the attention—and support—of several right-wing activists, including Ann Coulter, who tweeted, “I like #ADOS,” and suggested a name change to DOAS, for Descendants of American Slaves.

Beyond ADOS’s more fundamental issues, experts have also raised the alarm at how easily it could be hijacked for other purposes. Malcolm Nance, a counterterrorism and intelligence consultant for the U.S. government, warned on Twitter that “For 5 months a small group of black cyber security experts have been watching a bunch of black Trumpers using #ADOS & warning it was the leading edge of a racist Russian cyber attack on @KamalaHarris. Many bots. Some trolls.”

There are several interesting questions here, such as: Whose priorities get prioritized in the media: American blacks’ or the Democratic Party’s?

The Democrats clearly feel that they are most likely winning elections by having blacks be defined using a racial one-drop test that skips over inconvenient details of Who Sold Whom Into Slavery.

If you just got off the plain from Ghana, you are black and that’s all you are.

If you just got off the plane from Barbados, where your family has been recognized as middle class and mixed race for a century, you are black here and that’s all you are.

If 3 of your 4 grandparents are white, but one of four identifies as black, you are black.

And so forth.

There are multiple reasons for this. One is the talent gap. While African-American culture produces outstanding athletes and entertainers, it’s less good at producing people who seem plausible as President. Thus the first black president, Barack Obama, had no blood connection to anyone ever enslaved in the United States. Nor does Kamala Harris.

Increasingly, black talent (outside of sports and entertainment) in the U.S. is found in post 1865/1965 immigrants, or people with a very recent white ancestor, or some such combination that would lessen their claim to reparations.

When Harvard professors Henry Louis Gates and Lani Guinier pointed out in 2004 that Harvard’s affirmative action system especially privileged people with some claim to be black but less claim to be descendants of American slaves, they soon had to shut up because of the rise that summer of Obama, a hilariously perfect example of their thesis.

Of course, reparations talk is dredging up these questions once again. The Democrats and the media want to have their cake and eat it too. Get blacks excited about reparations while not answering any of the insidious questions they raise.

 
Hide 113 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Clyde says:

    Why claims that Kamala Harris “is not an American black” are suddenly everywhere.

    Kamala is not a natural born citizen either. Thus cannot be President. Neither of her parents were naturalized US citizens when she was born. They were both legal immigrants, both green card holders. With Obama, at least his mother was a US citizen.

  2. Daniel H says:

    OT: Cucks at it again. They never sleep. Extending the hand across the aisle to work with the Dems on another nation wrecking immigration bill.

    Why should anybody at iSteve give one damn about the fortunes of the Republican party. In the doldrums of summer they are feverishly working on another massive increase in immigration. The cynically named Fairness for High Skilled Immigration Act will fast track 300,000 Indian computer programmers along with 300,000 of their immediate family members and expands the HIB program. Yes, the bill is sponsored by Kamala Harris, but why has McConnell even allowed it to get this far?

    Will a Cuck challenge Harris on this bill specifically? No, the Cuck is too damned worried about being labeled a racist and he futilely believes that he will capture the Indian vote.

    And behold the arrogance of this: a national immigration law is created to specifically benefit one ethnic group, and on a massive and permanent scale.

    With these immigration battles we have to win every time, they only have to win once. And all the while we are being stabbed in the back by the Cucks. I say, let the Cucks lose, get them out of the way and we can construct a true national party.

    >>A bill working its way through both houses of Congress, the Fairness for High Skilled Immigrants Act, would scrap the caps for employment visas and raise them to 15 percent for family visas. (The House is voting today.) But as the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) notes, there are problems with this, too.

    After a transition period, Indian immigrants would get the vast majority of the employment green cards for roughly a decade to clear out their backlog. And after that, wait times for everyone would stabilize at seven to eight years. <<

    https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/pros-and-cons-of-the-fairness-for-high-skilled-immigrants-act/

    • Replies: @istevefan
    , @kender
    , @bomag
  3. That conversation will only grow louder …

    Not if I don’t watch TV or read tweets, it won’t! Go ahead with that conversation, bitches, I’m only open to the Peak Stupidity Reparations Plan.

    Great commentary, Steve. I am at odds with you on ANY kind of AA, but I’ll admit that the calls for AA for Black Descendants of Slaves sure splits up those D’s and their Lyin Press department right up in their fringes.

    BTW, I put the word “Black” in there, because lots, and maybe most, of us Americans are descendants of some types of slaves when you go way back to Old Testament times or further.

  4. There’s troubling evidence of anti-immigrant bias at the heart of the message.

    There’s troubling evidence of anti-native bias in articles from Slate.

    “Troubling” is so openly biased and so unbelievably trite and shop-worn, you’d think Slate’s writers would be embarassed. Apparently not!

    Seriously what the heck could possibly be wrong with any group of people trying to hang onto the goodies they’ve got and be wary of them being snatched up by someone else–much less foreigners coming in! Sure it’s “biased”, it’s biased toward “us” versus “them” … which is, of course, both normal human behavior and precisely what the Democratic Party’s entire platform and program–identity politics–is based on.

    This is “troubling” only because Rachelle very much doesn’t like American blacks having this version of “us” and “them”.

  5. Clyde says:

    Thus the first black president, Barack Obama, had no blood connection to anyone ever enslaved in the United States. Nor does Kamala Harris.

    But at least Obama had the hustle and the decency to marry a real American black. So both his daughters have genuine slave ancestry. While Kamala goes and has a late and meaningless marriage to her beard, a white American Jew. If dearest conniving Kams had married black, she would not be getting this nasty feedback from real (slave ancestry) American blacks.

  6. trelane says:

    How black is lovely Kamala? On a scale of 1-10, how black is she? Is she this black:

  7. @Clyde

    Birthright citizenship.

    • Replies: @Curmudgeon
  8. Well, if we must have a black president, I’d prefer a fake black or a half black over a real black any day. If the ADOS gets their way, serious shit (re: more bad shit for whitey) could happen. I’d rather have a status quo, GloboHomo Mulatto or Quadroon than what they probably think is “Real Black”.

    • Disagree: Cloudbuster
  9. Dexter says:

    So, my neighbor is from Nigeria and his wife is half Norwegian, a quarter English and quarter Danish.
    Carbon copy of Heidi Klum and Seal.
    What would be the race of their 4 children?
    One of their daughter looks very Black but has got some blonde hair.
    Most of the half Middle Eastern-half white and half North Indian and half white children look beautiful. In most of these relationships, it’s a white woman who is spreading her leg for a non white guy. I live in Seattle and lot of Dot Indians target white women here for Green Cards.
    Lol.

  10. Anonymous[119] • Disclaimer says:

    Well, when you want to get the pulse of Black America, the Michael Scherer/Amy B. Wang team is where you start… And for matters intelligencey, “Malcolm Nance” is the dean of modern Kremlinologists. Good to see the Harris campaign rolling out the heavy artillery

    • Replies: @M_Young
  11. @Clyde

    Kamala Harris is a great canidate for us.

    Our situation is dire. In other Western nations there are some plausible nationalist candidates citizens can vote for to try and save their nations. We have a clown show–a great campaigner–on nationalist issues who does little, brags he wants more people coming in then ever and outsources policy making to his low-wattage, immigrantion loving Jewish son-in-law.

    I want Trump to win, to stave off those bastards for another cycle, but most of all to give encouragement to the real nationalists in the Republican party–signal that nationalism is the ticket.

    But if Trump is not going to win, i want it to be as ugly as possible. Let people get a good look at what’s coming at them–what we’ve brought on through our laziness and sloth in letting “elites” contemptuous of Americans govern us.

    Kamala Harris is perfect. She’s annoying, unpleasant, hectoring tedious. (Maybe not Hillary unpleasant but close.) She’s an insult to American blacks. Her election would be an insult to white women. And she’d give all white people a new perspective on what we’ve let happen and what’s in store for us.

    Win, win!

    If President Harris doesn’t wake up white Americans … nothing will. Go ahead, stick a fork in America–we’re done.

    • Agree: ben tillman
  12. Paul says:

    “She [Kamala Harris] is half Indian and half Jamaican,” read one of a dozen similar tweets questioning Harris’ identity sent in the moments after she, while confronting Joe Biden’s record of opposing desegregation, recalled being bused to school as a little girl.”

    Rachelle Hampton is liar. Joe Biden did not oppose desegregation. He did oppose forced, racial, school busing.

  13. anon[293] • Disclaimer says:

    Reparation H. For relief from the burning, itching and discomfort of living with honkys. Not for use in non-white countries.

    • LOL: Harry Baldwin
  14. If you just got off the plain from Ghana …

    OK, just being picky – 2nd use is correct.

  15. bgates says:

    At first glance, the tweets questioning Harris’ black bona fides look apiece with the racist birther conspiracies levied against Barack Obama when he ran for president

    There was never anything “racist” about suspecting a man was born on the same continent as his father.

    there’s evidence the “Kamala Dolezal” memes originated in the same toxic spheres as the birther movement – Democrat oppo research during the primary?

    a closer look suggests ADOS is hiding a blackness purity test in rhetoric about who deserves those reparations

    What hiding? They’re pretty explicit.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
  16. Gunner says:

    Malcolm Nance is the designated House Negro for the Democratic Party. This crazy Trump Hater is a frequent guest on Bill Maher where he gay baited Milo. Of course, any non-black person doing that to a liberal homosexual would have got booed, but right wing gays are okay to insult.

  17. JohnnyD says:

    Apparently, Ta-Nehisi Coates is coming out with his first novel “The Water Dancer.” And he’s even going on tour to promote it!
    https://www.theroot.com/ta-nehisi-coates-announces-the-water-dancer-book-tour-1836214607

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard
  18. Dave Pinsen says: • Website

    Kamala probably gets some mileage from blacks who assume her first name is a made-up black name.

    • Replies: @PiltdownMan
  19. @Clyde

    Kamala is not a natural born citizen either. Thus cannot be President. Neither of her parents were naturalized US citizens when she was born. They were both legal immigrants, both green card holders.

    Kamala Harris was born in 1964, a year before Hart-Celler. AFAIK, both her parents came here on a student visa, circa 1959, and may well have been on some fellowship or training period visa when she was born. Her father received his Ph.D. from Berkeley in 1966, her mother in 1964.

    However, she was born within the geographical borders of the United States of America.

    • Replies: @newrouter
  20. anonymous[283] • Disclaimer says:

    Mochahontas!

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
  21. @Dave Pinsen

    Yep.

    The pro wrestler who went by the vaguely Congolese sounding name, Kamala, is who people used to think of when they heard the name, before Harris became nationally known.

    • Replies: @Autochthon
    , @Ganderson
  22. Malcolm Nance, a counterterrorism and intelligence consultant for the U.S. government, warned on Twitter that “For 5 months a small group of black cyber security experts have been watching a bunch of black Trumpers using #ADOS & warning it was the leading edge of a racist Russian cyber attack on @KamalaHarris. Many bots. Some trolls.”

    I wasn’t aware “black cyber security experts” existed outside of Hollywood. Live and learn.

  23. peterike says:

    “a small group of black cyber security experts”

    Lol! Some Urkles watching Twitter feeds.

    • LOL: Harry Baldwin
  24. @bgates

    There was never anything “racist” about suspecting a man was born on the same continent as his father.

    Yeah, but it was silly.

    Everything else about the guy’s background was suspect–his father, his parents’ marriage, his foreign upbringing, his test scores, his academic record, his blackness, his marriage, his religious beliefs, his anti-white church, his sleazy Chicago friends, his radical politics, his narcissism.

    But the one thing that no one had any significant doubt about was that he came out of Stanley Ann Dunham’s vagina and hence is a natural born US citizen jus sanguinis regardless of where it happened.

    • Agree: Triumph104
    • Replies: @Tarrasik
  25. @Dexter

    More evidence Whiskey is not wrong…

  26. Kronos says:

    So is Kamala Harris the Pied Piper of the Democratic Party? Bribe the black underclass to leave the inner cities with reparation money?

  27. @JohnnyD

    I think I’ll let Senor Chang speak for me on this one:

    • Replies: @Kronos
  28. Dr. X says:

    If 3 of your 4 grandparents are white, but one of four identifies as black, you are black.

    In other words, the Democratic Party’s “one drop” racial standard is much harsher than the Nazi Nuremberg Laws.

    Under the Nuremberg Laws, you had to have 3 or 4 Jewish grandparents to be considered a Jew. “Mischlings” with 1 or 2 Jewish grandparents were generally left alone and not considered “Jews” if they were not active, worshiping members of a Jewish congregation.

    • Replies: @Triumph104
  29. There’s plenty of indirect evidence that Kamala Harris had very little of a black upbringing, even an upper-crust Black Jamaican mulatto upbringing. Her ‘cultural’ blackness began when she headed off to an HBCU after completing high school in Montreal, Quebec.

    In 1966, When she was two years old, her father completed his Ph.D. and left California, accepting an assistant professorship at the University of Illinois. Another assistant professorship, at Northwestern followed for a year, before he got tenure at U. Wisc-Madison.

    Through all this, Kamala Devi Harris stayed behind in Oakland and Berkeley with her Tamil Brahmin mother. Her parents divorced in 1970, when she was 6. It appears that they did not live together as a family unit in one place after 1964, for even as short a time period as a year.

    Barack Obama gave us plenty of clues in his memoir, Dreams From My Father, about why he chose a mainland black American identity, after an upbringing as a mixed race person in very mixed race Hawaii, where no-one really cares.

    In Kamala Harris’ case, we have no clues why she chose the route to “blackness” that she did, as early as right after high school in French-Canadian Quebec, being raised by a Tamil Brahmin mother, and her maternal grandmother, who visited often and had a big part in her granddaughters’ upbringing.

    By contrast, her sister Maya Lakshmi Harris, despite the very considerable handicap of having become a teenage mother at age 17, went to Berkeley and Stanford Law School, and doesn’t seem to identify as particularly black.

  30. Dr. X says:

    If 3 of your 4 grandparents are white, but one of four identifies as black, you are black.

    It’s not “you are black,” it’s “you be black.”

    Check your white privilege, Steve. You’re imposing totalitarian standards of white hegemony upon oppressed people of color and committing syntactical violence against black bodies.

    You’ve really got to undergo some sensitivity training…

  31. @Clyde

    A person born on US soil is automatically a natural born American, irrespective of the parent’s citizenship status.

    • Replies: @Travis
    , @(((Owen)))
  32. istevefan says:
    @Daniel H

    Why should anybody at iSteve give one damn about the fortunes of the Republican party.

    Because we operate in a two-party political arena, and the GOP is the only party that could conceivably be taken over by people who don’t like the existing bipartisan consensus.

    There has already been much turnover in the GOP in the past couple years. Forty-plus GOP House members like Paul Ryan stiffed us in the last election cycle by quitting, and giving the democrats a chance to flip the House. So we are making some progress. Much work is still needed to be done.

    • Replies: @HammerJack
    , @Autochthon
  33. istevefan says:

    How do Indians feel about Harris? Do they see her as one of their own, or do they look down upon her because of her ancestry?

  34. It appears that they did not live together as a family unit in one place after 1964 …

    I meant 1966 .

  35. Anon[152] • Disclaimer says:

    Right after Coleman Hughes testified before Congress against reparations, black Twitter was a-twit with claims that he isn’t black (he’s half Puerto Rican, half black, with a grandfather who was literally a slave, listed on the Monticello web site … how old was the guy?).

    So this [supposedly black person whose views differ from hardcore black American views] is not really black because [some reason that would disqualify a huge chunk of the black-identifying community] is a thing.

    Coleman Hughes’s Puerto Rican ancestry was outed by himself in an interview with a young black Carribean HBD YouTuber Desi-Rae.

    Desi-Rae on Kamala:

    Desi-Rae on Race on IQ:

    Desi-Rae on Race and on race realism:

  36. Wilkey says:

    Kamala Harris also proves another fact about the racial grievance business: it actually has jack shit to do with what crimes your ancestors may be guilty of and what advantages those crimes may have earned you. Kamala Harris may very well have been born to advantage because her father’s ancestors were slave owners and through her mother via the Indian caste system. But once her parents moved here they were washed clean of those sins and given a fresh grudge against the American people because of what was actually or allegedly done to the ancestors of others.

    Americans are guilty of real sins (slavery) and fake sins (the Chinese Exclusion Act) committed by our distant ancestors. We are guilty of European colonialism and the Holocaust because the people who committed those crimes are white, but immigrants from China and Syria aren’t guilty of shit that happened in their countries even just 10 minutes before they left.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  37. According to the same Washington Post report, Carnell, the co-founder, was previously on the board of Progressives for Immigration Reform, which, despite its name, has deep ties to the anti-immigrant right.

    Progressives have always been, and will always be, opposed to immigration. Immigration and human progress are absolutely incompatible.

  38. newrouter says:
    @PiltdownMan

    >However, she was born within the geographical borders of the United States of America.<

    Are bureaucratic edicts the law of the land? Birthright citizenship is a bureaucratic edict.

  39. “Increasingly, black talent (outside of sports and entertainment) in the U.S. is found in post 1865/1965 immigrants, or people with a very recent white ancestor”

    E.g. Colin Kaepernick, one of US’s key authorities on diversity in the Current Year.

  40. Anonymous[277] • Disclaimer says:

    Wouldn’t it be better to say #DOAS – Descendants of American Slaves? An “American Descendant of Slaves” seems like it could technically apply to every single US citizen (like rape victims, everybody surely has a few slaves somewhere in their family trees).

    • Replies: @Cortes
  41. The Democrats and the media want to have their cake and eat it too.

    We’ve been letting them eat cake for t0o long, and getting our heads cut off for our trouble.

  42. Shmendrix says:

    “A lot” of your Jamaican slave owners were “probably” Jews, including “rumor has it” Kamala’s ancestors.

    Come on, Steve, you’re slipping!

  43. anon[372] • Disclaimer says:
    @trelane

    Thank you Trelane- that is a classic!

  44. Anon[245] • Disclaimer says:

    I’ve said before that Harris is having trouble getting black support. She’s been polling low for months until the debate, and I suspect that’s just a temporary bounce. Black really don’t think she’s one of theirs. Her history as a prosecutor is hurting her, and she’s annoyed blacks by marrying white. She also has a tendency to lie and take both sides of an issue, and everyone can tell she’s an insincere opportunist.

  45. @trelane

    Correct! We would also have accepted “Disneyland Toon Town Video”

  46. @istevefan

    True. You don’t have to like today’s Republican Party one bit (and I don’t) to recognize that it’s the only remaining bulwark against Democrat racist tyranny. And hence it has to be infiltrated and turned around, and fast.

  47. 1. The underlying message is that black Americans from immigrant families, even places like Jamaica, with a history of slavery under Spanish and British rule, do not have the same claim to the identity or the struggle for civil rights.

    2. And there’s troubling evidence that anti-immigrant bias is at the heart of that message.

    This implicit “argument” is horseshit. 1 is true, whether or not 2 is true; 2 has no bearing – none whatsoever, upon 1, because the motivation for a statement of fact has no bearing upon that fact. I will demonstrate with a comparable one:

    1. The underlying message is that American astronauts were the first humans to walk upon the moon.

    2. There is troubling evidence that jingoism and American smugness is at the heart of that message.

    It’s a real shame how much stupider public discourse has become in my own lifetime. Recognising this kind of childish and poor writing used to be the stuff of exercises in critical reading and coherent writing for pupils in elementary school. Now that same childish, stupid writing – which would have earned students a bad mark on an essay when I was in sixth grade! – is the stuff of “professional journalism.”

  48. @trelane

    How dare Becky the anchorwoman mock the Negress by enunciating coherent English immediately after the footage of the interview! Obviously a subtle microaggression intended to mock! As final proof, I call attention to the anchorwoman’s beautiful, blonde hair, and I rest my case – if there is a sheen to her tresses, she must be reh-cess!

  49. @PiltdownMan

    Sergeant Slaughter is a metaphor for Honkey Amerikkka when Kamala becomes president. Astute readers may recall I predicted Kamala’s presidency before she even announced her candidacy. I stand by that prediction, and I welcome it, because I, too, want to see it all burn now.

    She is not the president actual Americans want, but she is the president we need.

  50. Nachum says:

    Wow, that quoted piece is really good at changing the topic. The simple fact is that Harris is not at *all* African-American as we usually use the phrase, and is in fact not any more (and likely a lot less) than 50% black racially. Obama was 50% black racially, but was also 0% African-American and apart from genes had nothing black at all about him. Russian bots have nothing to do with those facts.

    Of course we are told over and over again, in a betrayal of all that is “progressive,” that no one apart from members of a group can talk for a group. Apart from sorta-black people talking for black people. Or men who’ve lived as (often super-masculine) men for fifty or sixty years who put on a wig and take over feminist organizations.

    Lani Guinier is one to talk, being half-Jewish and half-Caribbean herself.

    And, by the way, black Americans are on to this, they just know better than to say it out loud, usually. Whoopi Goldberg once pointed out that the big lead actress roles go to people like Halle Berry (white mother, absent black father, raised white but told to say black) or Beyonce (mostly white mother, black father) and not to people like, well, her.

    (Colin Kaepernick is right up there too.)

    Back in school we had to do a speech on some black American for Black History Month. Being a good contrarian, I picked Colin Powell, who was Joint Chiefs Chairman back then. So I had a picture and all. One of my classmates was a very dark skinned black kid, I think of Haitian descent. At some point in my speech he asked me where Powell’s parents were from. I checked my notes and said, “Jamaica.” “Oh, *Jamaica*,” he snorted, and then muttered something about light skin tones.

  51. @istevefan

    People always write shit like this, but – God rest his soul – Ross Perot got some twenty-one per cent of the vote. That’s not negligible. For that matter, for all that he turned out to be a worthless charlatan, Donald Trump was a Republican candidate only nominally. Independents serve in the legislatures. And where in the Hell do naysayers like you think viable political parties come from, anyway? Hell, as recently as 2010, the Constitution Party’s gubernatorial candidate in Colorado took more than three times the votes of the Democratic Party’s candidate. It happens. Political parties, while evil and banal, are not eternal, you know; they come and go: the Federalists, the Whigs, the Democratic-Republicans…how did anything ever come to replace them? (And these are only examples from the F.U.S.A.’s history….)

    The self-fulfilling prophecy that only the uniparty was, is, and shall be, time without end, Amen, is a big part of the problem with modern democracy.

    • Replies: @istevefan
  52. The new ADOS crisis.

    Thus the first black president, Barack Obama, had no blood connection to anyone ever enslaved in the United States.

    Almost no connection…

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Punch_(slave)#Descendants

    11th-great-grandson would render Barry 0.012% ADOS. And 50.012% black.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  53. eah says:

    OT

    link

    Everyone knows “Becky” is a comment used to mock white women. It’s been this way for decades. A sitting U.S. Congresswoman used it as a slur against a white woman. I can be banned from Twitter for pointing out how she’d cry if someone called her a generic black name as a slur.

  54. Waiting for the first “respectable” publication to call ADOS uppity.

  55. Kronos says:
    @The Wild Geese Howard

    Apparently, he grew up terrified of other blacks (gangs, guns, etc.) How about pranking him with the Thug Christmas Choir?

  56. Pericles says:
    @Dexter

    You should meet up with Mike Krauthammer, Dexter.

  57. @Dr. X

    Helene Mayer had a Lutheran mother and a Jewish father.

    Helene Julie Mayer (20 December 1910 – 10 October 1953) was a German-born fencer who won the gold medal at the 1928 Olympics in Amsterdam, and the silver medal at the 1936 Olympics in Berlin. She competed for Nazi Germany in Berlin, despite having been forced to leave Germany in 1935 and resettle in the United States because she was Jewish.

    Mayer had been called the greatest female fencer of all time, and was named by Sports Illustrated as one of the Top 100 Female Athletes of the 20th Century, but her legacy remains clouded. At the Olympics in Berlin, where she was the only German athlete of Jewish origin to win a medal, she gave the Nazi salute during the medal ceremony, and later said it might have protected her family that was still in Germany, in labor camps. Some consider her a traitor and opportunist, while others consider her a tragic figure who was used not only by Nazi Germany but by the International Olympic Committee and the United States Olympic Committee to prevent a boycott of the Games.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helene_Mayer

  58. @Wilkey

    How many Central American death squad members are refugees in the US?

    • Replies: @danand
    , @Joseph Doaks
    , @Wilkey
  59. According to one theory, accounts that use #ADOS are a sinister collection of Russian bots and trolls sowing misinformation….

    Would those be White Russians or Black Russians?

    Maybe the Repubes should steal the reparations thunder from the Dems and promise them to authentic #ADOS. The first step is to probe the size of the program, which means that the forbidden C-question plus a dozen others must be added to the 2020 census. Then, let the Dems fight that in court.

    Do it, @realDonaldTrump … take a page from Colin @Kaepernick7 and @Nike and just do it!

    • Replies: @anonymous
  60. @Dexter

    Most of the half Middle Eastern-half white and half North Indian and half white children look beautiful. In most of these relationships, it’s a white woman who is spreading her leg for a non white guy. I live in Seattle and lot of Dot Indians target white women here for Green Cards.

    Hm…

    http://www.asian-nation.org/interracial.shtml#sthash.IgkYrRlU.dpbs

    Interracial Dating & Marriage
    ……………………

    Asian Indian M- White F 25.6%

    Asian Indian F- White M 37.8%

    • Replies: @Ed
  61. Travis says:
    @greysquirrell

    unless your parents are diplomats.

  62. danand says:
    @Steve Sailer

    “How many Central American death squad members are refugees in the US?”

    At one time I worked with a former member of the Khmer Rouge. His wife owned both half a jewelry store and a 7-11. She drove the first Lexus I’d seen: very quite, smooth, solid – the likes of which I had not experienced in any prior vehicle.

  63. One of the things that can happen in the US is that organizations are set up and made to run by Group X, which is then forced out by Group Y.

    MADD: Set up by women, all forced out by professional fundraisers.
    NAACP: Set up by Jewish establishment reps, all forced out by US blacks.
    Apple: Set up by Jobs, forced out by corporate board who appointed a Pepsi executive to run Apple. Shows just how inept boards can be and this one time the decision was reversed.

    This is _very annoying_ for the people being forced out, and the idea of another group receiving money and privileges and elective office because of events that supposedly badly hurt you and that _you_ and for which your group worked hard to obtain compensation, well, that’s a bit hard to take. It’s rather like getting compensation for your injuries in a car accident when I was on the other side of the globe when it happened. You have the injury, I have the compensation. Your ancestors were slaves (my ancestors owned them), I have the compensation. What’s wrong with that? What isn’t?

    Defending this is just fluff. It is sort of like the fluff that ensures that the question “why should i send my kid to a public school were he (or she) will be physically assaulted by students and mentally assaulted by teachers?” is never asked in public debates.

    The form of the argument bothers me. As to actual slavery, I remember quite well when having a slave for an ancestor was flat out shameful. What’s so wonderful about losing a war?

    Counterinsurgency

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  64. Ganderson says:
    @PiltdownMan

    Kamala was the UGANDAN giant…

  65. @trelane

    To be fair, no one else is that black.

  66. J says: • Website

    If Americans would think this obsession with genetic origin to its end, they would adopt the French model. In France, any person ordering a DNA test would be prosecuted because the law prohibits any research regarding a person’s identity through genetic testing. America, if continues on this path, will find out that today it is very easy and cheap to identify one’s great-great grandfather, and get totally confused about one’s real identity and blood relatives. They will be tortured by doubts and fears all their lives.

  67. I visited Jamaica once, admittedly it was 40 years ago, and I have never seen a reason to go back. I saw that it’s far from a mixed-race paradise. The Chinese business class in particular was disliked by most black Jamaicans, probably very similar to the attitude of blacks in LA toward the Koreans.

  68. Anonymous[371] • Disclaimer says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    11th-great-grandson would render Barry 0.012% ADOS. And 50.012% black.

    Has anyone made anything of this?

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  69. anonymous[252] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Alarmist

    “Maybe the Repubes should steal the reparations thunder from the Dems and promise them to authentic #ADOS. “

    I sympathize with the sentiment but the reality is that the amount of fraud would be staggering. You’d have to check everyone’s background extensively. Ain’t going to happen. It would further institutionalize racism against whites. Plus, you really think a Democrat president would enforce any rules? Everything would be rubberstamped just like DACA, visas, green cards, citizenship was under Obama.

    What might be better is for current AA policies to be targeted only to low/middle income ADOS and native Americans. Let’s finally get rid of AA for hispanics and women. And add in a further policy where admissions must reflect the socioeconomic levels of the US, obviously the lower and middle classes would be the vast majority. The 1% gets only 1% places in admissions. No legacies. Places like Harvard and Yale and affluent liberals would be shown for the hypocrites they are.

  70. istevefan says:
    @Autochthon

    1) Ross Perot received 19% of the popular vote and ZERO electoral votes.

    2) Trump ONLY won because he was on the GOP ticket. Had he run as an independent, he would have ended up like Perot.

    3) Even as a republican, Trump was opposed on key issue (immigration) by the democrats and his own party. Had Trump won as an independent, he’d have even less cooperation from Congress than he already has. And he would have probably been impeached as both dem and GOP would have voted to do so.

    It might be fun to reminisce about the Whigs and the creation of the Republicans. But the chances of that happening today are far less than the chances the GOP could be taken over.

    Think of this analogy, the GOP continually dreams about increasing its share of the black, hispanic and Jewish vote. But it is clear, at least to people on this blog, that the GOP could more readily and easily increase its share of the White vote than to appeal to a sizeable chunk of the aforementioned.

    Likewise, it would be easier and more practical to take over the GOP than to form an entirely new party.

    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
    • Replies: @Autochthon
    , @ATBOTL
  71. Corvinus says:

    “could possibly ever change their race, which is an innate genetic reality.”

    JFC, Mr. Sailer, we’ve been over this part already.

    Race is linked to biology; ethnicity is linked to culture. Race is a biological and social construct. Ethnicity is a social construct. Ethnicity is the term for the culture of people in a given geographic region, including their language, heritage, religion and customs. To be a member of an ethnic group is to conform to some or all of those practices. In a nutshell, race refers to a group of people who possess similar and distinct physical characteristics, while ethnicity refers to a category of people who regard themselves to be different from other groups based on common ancestral, cultural, national, and social experience.

    Furthermore, natural science consists of mental constructs, created with the objective of explaining sensory experience of our world. Human beings affix labels to make sense of our environment. For example, the California spotted owl is an animal, i.e. biological construct. The scientific name of the creature is a human designation—strix occidentalis. That is, binomial nomenclature refers to a formal system, developed by people, to name species. The California owl was not a “California owl” until someone actually and specifically labeled it.

    Men and women had sought, and continue to seek, to explain sensory experience of our world. Race, biology, ethnicity–all are concepts created by human beings as an organizational tool to offer a consistency about the natural world in which they observe. “Canis” refers to a real thing, but human beings designated that term—canis, which means “dog” in Latin, and also refers to their prominent teeth used for killing their prey. Dogs (like cats) did not magically appear as those animals automatically to human beings. People had to describe the characteristics in a manner that made sense to them by developing criteria to differentiate the species in their natural habitats.

    When it comes to breeds are manufactured through selective breeding (artificial selection). A Boston terrier is an explicitly defined animal: the AKC ultimately decides which dog meets the criteria. I am probably stating the obvious here, but geographic isolation, and natural or sexual selection, have resulted in some alleles in human beings being more frequent in some groups compared to human beings, and ancestry determines the distribution of some genes. As far as I know, the major genetic clusters consisted of Europeans/West Asians (whites), sub-Saharan Africans, East Asians, Pacific Islanders, and Native Americans with a discrepancy rate of only 0.14%. It also seems to me that this debate over race as a biological construct–I happen to believe race is both a biological and social construct–originated in the desire to establish the genetic inferiority of some races compared to others.

    Now, race had been used to describe different ethnic groups, as in the English race, or the German race, as in to provide labels for human differences based on the available evidence. The line of reasoning was rudimentary in nature, as Europeans embedded supposedly true behavioral and psychological traits in their reported observations, which was assumed to be other than changeable. So when Europeans encountered Africans and North/South Americans, naturally they would employ this logic, with these “truisms” becoming entrenched.

  72. Cortes says:
    @Anonymous

    Much better wording, but contract terms of many Appalachian coal mining enterprises (for example) may fall to be constructed now as slavery.

    Slavery in the coal mines of Scotland:

    http://www.scottishmining.co.uk/429.html

    For those who can trace their forebears to Central or Eastern Europe there must be a high probability of serfdom among the family histories. A few years ago I met an elderly woman who grew up in the UP of Michigan; she said that her grandparents had left the Carpathians as soon as possible after their status as hereditary foresters was lifted, around the mid 1860s as I recall, legally permitting them to move.

  73. JackOH says:

    OT, slightly: if enslaved Blacks offered such an extraordinary advantage to their White owners, wouldn’t there have been a much greater quantity of slaves demanded by Whites while slavery was legal? And consequently many more descendants of those Black slaves?

    What I’m getting at, I think, is the possibility that 17th century Dutch and Portuguese traders may have been arm-twisted by African potentates into accepting cargos of slave laborers when the Africans had nothing else at the moment. Think about the financial risk of transporting for the first time enslaved African Blacks, whose language, customs, and behaviors are unknown to you, for sale to White Jamestown colonists.

    Were the White Jamestown colonists that desperate for help or so needy for a feeling of overlordship that they wanted to take on African slaves who’d likely need constant supervision to guard against escape?

    I don’t have any pat answers, but the reality is that most American Whites saw an insufficient economic advantage to slavery for them to acquire slaves themselves. And, of course, plenty of American Whites regarded slavery as a questionable institution on a multitude of moral grounds.

    Any chance that energetic American White folks might attempt to sue American Blacks and their ancestors’ African owners for reparations with respect to corruption of American labor markets? How about adulteration of the body politic after Blacks were granted citizenship?

    Just wanted to toss a few ideas out.

  74. kender says:
    @Daniel H

    Science has proven that race is genetic. SO IS GENDER. The same logic one applies to race, in that one cannot claim to be of a different race than one was born into. Caitlin Jenner is most definitely not anything other than an emasculated male. To call him a “stunning and brave woman” is insulting to all biological females. Has Bruce Jenner ever menstruated? Then he is NOT a woman!

  75. @Steve Sailer

    As a politician famously said, “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

    Background checking for immigrants is so racist and unnecessary, except for any remaining ancient, senile former Nazis, of course.

  76. MarkU says:

    How did the concept of collective ethnic or racial guilt ever get established in the first place?

    Are Jews worldwide expected to feel guilty about what ‘they’ are doing in Palestine? Are blacks supposed to feel guilty about the events in Rwanda or feel self disgust because some people with the same colour skin practised cannibalism? Are all Japanese people supposed to self-flagellate daily because of the Bataan death march or the rape of Nanking? What about Hispanics who are likely the descendants of the Conquistadors or the Aztecs?

    Are you really going to allow a skin colour tax for heavens sake? Are you white Americans fucking stupid or what?

    Some people, a very few people, are sitting on vast fortunes demonstrably founded on slavery. If ‘racial reparations’ are going to exist, those people are the ones who should be paying them, anything else is just plain racist nonsense.

  77. MrLiberty says:

    When you have nothing to offer in your own defense or in support of your own argument, now you don’t just have the option of calling someone a “racist” or an “anti-semite.” Now you can simply call them a “Russian Bot” and the entire discussion can be effectively shut down before you can be thoroughly embarrassed for your ignorance.

  78. teotoon says:
    @Clyde

    Two replies to Clyde’s post define just how ignorant Americans have become: hard copy – not online – law books define natural born as having two –not one, not green cards, not student visas; but two! – Natural born parents.

    • Replies: @Clyde
  79. Steve I think the only real principle is that wherever you’re from and whatever your status in your nation of origin, everyone is allowed to hate America and whitey once they get here. It’s required, really.

    But maybe we’re looking at this from the wrong perspective – foreigners and their spawn are assimilating readily and quickly to the American tradition of racial grievance.

    That said, in light of the questions about the racial makeup and status of Mizz Harris, I think I will view 1957’s Island in the Sun once again for its treatment of the complexities of race in the West Indies.

  80. Anonymous[371] • Disclaimer says:
    @Counterinsurgency

    What’s so wonderful about losing a war?

    What do you mean?

    • Replies: @Counterinsurgency
  81. @istevefan

    Nineteen is no more a negligible percentage than twenty-one.

    Your second and third points are speculation.

    How did the Republicans and the Democrats come to be? Was it divine intervention?

    • Replies: @istevefan
  82. Aardvark says:
    @Clyde

    Not that I agree with this, but you also should realize that because she is a Democrat, it is irrelevant as to her citizenship status; we went through that with Obama. No one could figure out who exactly would enforce this and make her drop out of the race in case she was not legitimately a U.S. citizen.

    In the Congressional district where I live, a Democrat carpetbagger showed up and ran against the Republican incumbent and defeated her. The Democrat did not have proper residency in the district, of for that matter in the State. It went so far as the County invalidated the homestead exemption they claimed for the past three years on a property they owned in the County. Yet, this did not disqualify her from winning the election and flipped our district to the Blue side.

    • Replies: @Clyde
    , @(((Owen)))
  83. @Anonymous

    Has anyone made anything of this?

    Neither side has an interest in doing so. It just highlights how little “ADOS” Obama is. And it might remind white Southerners (much of Obama’s maternal ancestry) not to look too closely into the woodpile.

  84. It’s well know that American blacks hate immigrant blacks……..I have evidence in real life regarding this reality.

  85. @Clyde

    Barry’s young mother Dunham did not qualify under contemporary law to transmit US citizenship, so Obama was not a Natural Born Citizen as required under US Constitution.

  86. ATBOTL says:
    @istevefan

    The GOP cannot be taken over. It’s not an inherently democratic institution. The leadership can kick anyone out they want. They have a history of kicking out all nationalists, including recently, alt-right entryists.

    Getting over the delusion that we can use the GOP to advance a nationalist agenda is the biggest problem we have now. Nationalists in ALL European countries have their own parties. We do not see any examples of center right parties becoming nationalist parties.

    The sad thing is that if so many people didn’t think like you and we started a nationalist party 20 years ago, it could already be in power by now.

    • Replies: @istevefan
  87. Reading this piece is like reading an instruction manual on how to form a circular firing squad.

  88. @Ancient Briton

    Citizenship doesn’t matter any more. It ended when Our Betters went into a swoon over Obongo. Here was someone who could assuage their collective guilt. He could have been born on a life raft in the Congo River–still wouldn’t matter. Even if Kamalalalabobala was born in New Delhi or Kingston, no one cares. She has the requisite melanin. Case closed.

  89. Clyde says:
    @teotoon

    Thank you! As usual people are confusing and conflating someone who is a natural born citizen of the US with someone who is a citizen by virtue of being born on US soil.
    The Constitution goes out of its way to specify that the President and Vice President must be natural born citizens, not mere citizens. The Founders considered this to be important. They were correct because Obama turned out to be a saboteur of America and was not natural born. Kamala looks even worse, also not natural born citizen.

  90. Clyde says:
    @Ancient Briton

    Barry’s young mother Dunham did not qualify under contemporary law to transmit US citizenship, so Obama was not a Natural Born Citizen as required under US Constitution.

    You are right. This is complicated but has to do with Hawaii being a territory and not a state. Also had to due with her age and length of residence. I forget all the details.

  91. Clyde says:
    @Aardvark

    My guess is you are talking about that eco-guy who won in North or South Carolina.

  92. istevefan says:
    @Autochthon

    Nineteen is no more a negligible percentage than twenty-one.

    Nineteen or twenty one is very respectable. But the ultimate number that counted was ZERO electoral votes. That is the system we have. In other nations with a parliamentary type system, if a party can garner 19 to 21 percent of the nationwide vote, there is a good chance they will be involved in the formation of a new government. In our system it doesn’t. Of course some claim that it probably helped Clinton win since it took away more votes from the GOP. So he did have an influence, but not the one he had intended.

    How did the Republicans and the Democrats come to be? Was it divine intervention?

    Relatively speaking, they got in on the ground floor when the industry was new. Though the GOP did come after the democrats and whigs, they still came about prior to the hyper rise in politics that we see today. It is much more difficult to create a party from scratch nowadays than it was 150 plus years ago. It’s sort of like how in some mature businesses that are capital intensive it is very difficult for competitors to jump in after the big guys have become established.

    • Replies: @Autochthon
  93. istevefan says:
    @ATBOTL

    The sad thing is that if so many people didn’t think like you and we started a nationalist party 20 years ago, it could already be in power by now.

    People like me supported Pat Buchanan during his runs in the 1990s and in 2000. Where was every one else?

    The GOP cannot be taken over. It’s not an inherently democratic institution. The leadership can kick anyone out they want. They have a history of kicking out all nationalists, including recently, alt-right entryists.

    What do you think Trump just did? He was one of 17 guys who was running for the nomination and the whole GOP apparatus was out to get him. They supported anyone, but Trump, hence the NeverTrumpers. They had the blonde gal at Fox News try to take him out at the debates. They tried to take away his delegates. Yet Trump took the nomination and used the party apparatus to get his name on all 50 states’ ballots.

    Also, this past election we witnessed the exit of Paul Ryan and 40 some GOP cucks from the House. The GOP can be taken over. It won’t be easy. They aren’t just going to lay down. But if we keep at it we can do it. Given that the GOP base now has a huge rift between what they support and what the legacy party leaders do, I think taking over the GOP is a better idea than forming a new party.

    • Agree: Kronos, Autochthon
  94. @istevefan

    Your arguments about regulatory capture and first movers are sound and thoughtful. It is indeed a difficult matter, largely for the reasons you explain.

    But it is not an insurmountable matter.

    Certainly, it is an easier thing than the alternative, which is violent revolution.

  95. Wilkey says:
    @Steve Sailer

    Indeed.

    1) They’re blaming white Americans for sins committed by whites in other countries.

    2) They don’t give credit to whites whose ancestors fought on “the right side” of various causes – for the Union Army, for the Allies in WW2, etc..

    3) They give (non-white) immigrants a pass on on even very recent crimes happening in their home countries.

    4) They give those same non-white immigrants a claim on victim status because of crimes (real or alleged) that were committed not against themselves or their ancestors, but just because they were committed against people racially similar to themselves. E.g., Kamala Harris is automatically allowed to hold a grudge against Americans for crimes committed against blacks and Indians in the US long before her mother and father ever arrived here.

    That’s an indication that it is all about blaming white people and has nothing whatsoever to do with simply holding people accountable for the crimes their ancestors may have committed and for the advantages they may have gained from those crimes.

    • Replies: @(((Owen)))
  96. @greysquirrell

    A person born on American soil to legal permanent resident parents is a natural born citizen. Wong Kim Ark guarantees that. But there is no legal authority granting citizenship to the children of transient student visa holders.

  97. @Aardvark

    The Democrat did not have proper residency in the district, of for that matter in the State.

    The residency requirement is that she be a citizen of the state on the day of inauguration. There is no requirement to be a resident in any particular district (the Constitution does not mention districts anywhere and many states did not choose to use them).

  98. @Dexter

    As Steve observed in a long-lost century, about three decades ago, black men have success seducing white women and Asian women have success seducing white men into their mixed-race relationships.

    But the reverse-gender matches are quite rare. Also Asian men and black women appear to have no interest in getting together to fill the gap, so they just end up solitary and lonely instead.

    • Replies: @Kronos
  99. @Wilkey

    1) They’re blaming white Americans for sins committed by whites in other countries.

    It’s a matter of systemic racism; all beneficiaries must take responsibility.

    2) They don’t give credit to whites whose ancestors fought on “the right side” of various causes – for the Union Army, for the Allies in WW2, etc..

    Ridiculous. No one can take personal credit for what their ancestors did; they weren’t even born yet.

  100. Kronos says:
    @(((Owen)))

    Sounds like a great sitcom.

  101. Anonymous[126] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ancient Briton

    Barry’s young mother Dunham did not qualify under contemporary law to transmit US citizenship, …

    This is true only if two additional facts come together:

    1. Barry was born outside United States territory, e.g. in Canada. U.S. territory includes the 50 states and a number of special territories such as DC, Puerto Rico, Guam etc. Any person born within U.S. territory is a U.S. citizen by virtue of that fact alone.

    2. Ann Dunham was validly married to a non-U.S. citizen at the time. The official story is that Ann was married to Barack Obama Sr., but no evidence of the marriage or divorce appears to have been presented. Moreover, even the official story acknowledges that Obama Sr. remained married at the time of the marriage, thus making the marriage to Ann bigamous and for most purposes a legal nullity.

    As an UNMARRIED mother, Ann could under the law in force at the time pass on her U.S. citizenship to her child despite having lived in the U.S. for less than 5 years after the age of 14 (she was 18).

    Barry’s various birth certificates were undoubtedly forged, probably NOT to cover up the question of eligibility (which Hillary would surely have challenged), but to maintain the numinous narrative created by Barry’s Deep State creators and/or Bill Ayers.

    If Obama Sr. was in fact married to Ann Dunham, then Barry himself would also have been a British subject from birth. Kenya did not become independent until 1963, two years after Barry’s alleged birth year of 1961.

    … so Obama was not a Natural Born Citizen as required under US Constitution.

    Whether “natural born” status for purposes of eligibility requires something MORE than simple U.S. citizenship from birth, e.g. birth within U.S. territory rather than birth to U.S. parents abroad, both parents having been U.S. citizens at the time of birth, neither parent having held any OTHER citizenship at the time of the subject’s birth, etc., remains an unresolved issue.

  102. Tarrasik says:
    @AnotherDad

    Naturally Born has nothing to do with coming out of the vagina of an underage American girl. Naturally Born is a higher standard of citizenship that was intentionally written into the Constitution by the Founding Fathers.

    It’s not even clear that Dunham is his mother. There’s good reason to suspect that his real father is Frank Davis, so why should we believe Dunham is his mother?

    Birth certificates have one purpose. They validate the circumstances of a person’s birth. If Obama truly was a US citizen, he would proudly display his long form birth certificate. Instead he hid it, and posted an obvious electronic fake on the White House website.

    The ONLY reason for such behavior is that Obama has something truly serious to hide. Either the certificate says Frank Davis is his father, or there may be NO certificate.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
  103. @Tarrasik

    “There’s good reason to suspect that his real father is Frank Davis, so why should we believe Dunham is his mother?”

    Uh, that’s not really how it works.

    • LOL: William Badwhite
  104. Ed says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Reality is often the opposite of perception. Women are more likely to say “I need to date and marry a Mormon, Catholic, Jewish” they tend to deviate when it’s not happening and their clock is ticking.

  105. @Anonymous

    Those enslaved have been, quite often historically, on the losing side of a war. This was particularly true for African slaves. How, exactly, does losing a war and being enslaved become a morally significant accomplishment that enables your descendants to claim reparations?

    Counterinsurgency

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  106. Anonymous[414] • Disclaimer says:
    @Counterinsurgency

    How, exactly, does losing a war and being enslaved become a morally significant accomplishment that enables your descendants to claim reparations?

    It is plausible that if a people are harmed or wronged then they may have a claim for compensation.

    • Replies: @Counterinsurgency
  107. @Louis Renault

    No such thing. Birthright does not mean “natural born”. Natural born citizen means the parents were under the jurisdiction of the US, in the US, at the time of birth. John McCain was not a “natural born” citizen, and neither was Obama, if Obama Sr. was his real father.

  108. At one time, all famous blacks would talk about how their parents or grandparents were sharecroppers in the Deep South. History class gave the impression that most sharecroppers were black and Southern, either ex-slaves or the descendants of ex-slaves.

    Yet a large number of sharecroppers weren’t black or Southern. I’m 100% white, and two of my grandparents were sharecroppers in Wisconsin. When Obama was elected, I thought, “We have a black president, yet I can claim descent from sharecroppers, and he can’t.”

  109. @Anonymous

    It is plausible that if a people are harmed or wronged then they may have a claim for compensation.

    There is (or used to be) a framework for this. What you refer to is, in this framework, called a “tort” [1]. Note that this only applies within a civil society. Outside of a civil society, the rule was “right of conquest” and “treaty”. To some slight extent “International law”, mainly between citizens or organizations of different countries, applied.
    After WW II the concept of “tort” was extended. Right of conquest was retired, and replaced by “human rights”, which is what you cite: a “people” are harmed or wronged then they have a claim for compensation. (Apparently “rocks” and “animals” do not, although there attempts to further expand the definition of “claimants” to those categories).
    Leaving aside the difficulty of defining “people” (Are recent immigrants from Africa the same as African-Americans? Disagreement on this is apparently widespread), let’s take a look at the result of extending “claimant” to “peoples” and effectively dropping the requirement that the tort be within a single civil society.

    The effect is clear: wars don’t end. The descendants of the losing side say that their defeat was a harm or wrong, and that they are entitled to compensation (which they specify) for this wrong of defeat, or, for that matter, consequent enslavement. The remedy specified is usually partial immunity from punishment under law, monetary awards, and preference under Federal law (e.g. almost all the Black middle class works for government on some level).

    Moreover, the winners of past wars are thought to have treated the loser badly, wronging them or causing harm. Since the losers quite often don’t exist, they cannot be punished (Germany, which is an exception, is punished more severely than even the winners of WW II).

    Law has no force — police do, the prison system does, the general population does. Law is, to a great extension, an expression of politics [2]. The political consequences of the legal doctrine you describe have been destabilization.

    On the international scale, the results appear to have been an expansion of the ungoverned zones or “failed states” globally [3]. The concept has recently been used (to prevent an ongoing “rights deprivation” to convert much of the Middle East and Afghanistan to ungoverned zones and to destroy the “underground river” project intended to have made Libya a grain basket again.

    The doctrine has also been used to define Islam as the only religion that actually supports human rights, and to make criticism of Islam a violation of human rights.

    May I suggest that this legal doctrine be discarded? Not that it makes any difference — left alone the doctrine will destroy the legal system that enforces it, then vanish, in any case.

    Counterinsurgency

    1] “A tort, in common law jurisdictions, is a civil wrong that causes a claimant to suffer loss or harm resulting in legal liability for the person who commits the tortious act.”
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tort

    2] Robert Bork.
    _The Tempting of America_.
    Free Press, 1990 (first edition. Available on Amazon Kindle for the time being).

    3] Martin van Creveld.
    _The Rise and Decline of the State_.
    Cambridge University Press; 1999/08/28 ( 1st ed).
    Various publishers since; widely used as a textbook.

  110. bomag says:
    @Daniel H

    another nation wrecking immigration bill

    Highlights that modern politicians mainly want to do things that will get them liked. Pro-immigrant sentiment is strong (For The Children!) so here’s a chance to hold some hands and smile.

    Looks to be something Trump should veto.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments are moderated by iSteve, at whim.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?