The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Pundit Accuses Jews of Tribalism
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From Haaretz:

Tribalism Fuels Orthodox Jews’ Support for Trump

They risk becoming the Jewish version of the ‘Alt-Right,’ a community that champions its own ethnic interests even when the result is outright bigotry.

Peter Beinart Aug 31, 2016 6:32 PM

Obviously, Jews, being naive newcomers to organizing politically, must be taking lessons from those ancient masters of the game, the ‘Alt-Right.’

 
Hide 156 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Bee says:

    BTW, I didn’t read the article (too long), but I find the headline, “The Answer to Hillary’s Charge of “Racism” Is the Charge of Treason—Against America, and Its Founding Stock”

    to be quite funny.

    Politicians of founding-stock American ancestry (Lincoln Chaffee, Jeb Bush, William Weld, Howard Dean, etc.) tend to agree with Hillary Clinton on immigration, not with non-founding stocker Donald Trump (well, Clinton isn’t of founding stock descent, either).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dennis Dale
    Like all that founding stock over at, say, PNAC or the Weekly Standard?
    , @Sam Haysom
    This descendent of Peter Rambo (beat Samuel Bush here by 7 years) supports Trump.
    , @pyrrhus
    My family came over in 1630, and several members fought in the Revolution...It's Trump all the way.
    , @Pat Hannagan
    Good point, and furthermore, isn't Hillary *Rodham* Clinton of founding stock?

    Surname Rodham is English, her mother's surname Howell is Old Welsh "recorded in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles of Devonshire, dated 926".

    Bill Clinton himself is actually of "Olde English and Anglo-Saxon origin" via his biological father William Jefferson "Bill" Blythe Jr. Bill Clinton's mother, Virginia Dell Cassidy Blythe Clinton Dwire Kelley (née Cassidy), would be part Irish (Cassidy) and part English/German via her mother Edith née Grisham. Grisham is "An English surname, that originated with the German name 'griesheim' from the southern region."

    Furthermore, Hillary Rodham Clinton was raised United Methodist and Bill Clinton was raised a Southern Baptist.

    Out of interest, asking the iSteve readership, doesn't the above make both Bill and Hillary of founding stock?

    I understand the Irish aspect of Bill could be problematic but as Vox Day points out, the "7 million-strong Irish migration from 1600 to 1920" has been a "long-term success" and as such shouldn't the Irish be considered of founding stock as well?

    , @Mr. Anon
    "Politicians of founding-stock American ancestry (Lincoln Chaffee, Jeb Bush, William Weld, Howard Dean, etc.) tend to agree with Hillary Clinton on immigration, not with non-founding stocker Donald Trump (well, Clinton isn’t of founding stock descent, either)."

    And? Why should I give a damn what they think?
    , @Wyrd
    Harambe died for your sins.
    , @Anonymous

    “Politicians of founding-stock American ancestry (Lincoln Chaffee, Jeb Bush, William Weld, Howard Dean, etc.) tend to agree with Hillary Clinton on immigration, not with non-founding stocker Donald Trump (well, Clinton isn’t of founding stock descent, either).”

     

    They have to agree. Financial and social ruination otherwise.
    , @guest
    The surviving founding stock doesn't have to realize what's happening or agree with Trump for them to be betrayed in fact.
    , @Dave
    That's why it's treason.

    (In reply to Bee): "BTW, I didn’t read the article (too long), but I find the headline, “The Answer to Hillary’s Charge of “Racism” Is the Charge of Treason—Against America, and Its Founding Stock”

    to be quite funny.

    Politicians of founding-stock American ancestry (Lincoln Chaffee, Jeb Bush, William Weld, Howard Dean, etc.) tend to agree with Hillary Clinton on immigration, not with non-founding stocker Donald Trump (well, Clinton isn’t of founding stock descent, either)."
    , @jake
    Yes, the WASP founding stock is by and large culturally suicidal, as its English original and its Canadian version and its Australian version and its New Zealand version and its South African version, etc.

    So then why do any of us think that demanding more assimilation to WASP culture is the cure?
    , @anon

    Politicians of founding-stock American ancestry (Lincoln Chaffee, Jeb Bush, William Weld, Howard Dean, etc.) tend to agree with Hillary Clinton on immigration
     
    Politicians are filtered by the donors.

    If a politician doesn't agree with the cheap labor lobby then they won't get funding and their opponent will.

    Same reason so many politicians are blackmailable - donors like their puppets nice and obedient.
    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.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /isteve/jews-accused-of-tribalism/#comment-1551623
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Chutzpah is a Yiddish word for a reason.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    I can’t even. I just can’t.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. “If Israel does not survive as a Jewish democratic state, I want to be able to tell my children that I did what little I’m capable of. I’m a writer, so what I can do is to try to sound an alarm. I just want to be able to say that to them.”

    The man speaking is Peter Beinart, the journalist, essayist and author who became American Jewry’s most prominent prophet of doom following the publication of his 2010 article, “The Failure of the Jewish Establishment.” It is a role that will now be cemented in stone with the publication of his new book “The Crisis of Zionism,” in which he calls on American Jews “to defend the dream of a democratic Jewish state before it is too late.”

    …there’s a part of me, as a Jew, who, when I look at the AIPAC conference, says: ‘Wow, we’re good. Who else could do this?’ I feel the same way when I see the list of Nobel Prize winners.

    …“I think one question that American Jews who are on the left have to face is how much they care about this compared to everything else. People say, ‘Yes, and what about global warming?’ That’s part of the reason I don’t come at this from a purely universalistic perspective. You say to people: You have to be involved in this struggle because it’s the struggle of your people, it’s your honor.”

    http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/is-archliberal-peter-beinart-good-for-the-jews-1.420178

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    Very good find, Mr. Carter.

    "You have to be involved in this struggle because it’s the struggle of your people, it’s your honor.”

    This is what Peter Beinart believes: He and his co-ethnics get to have an "our people". We don't.
    , @Rob McX
    Really, the best definition of "alt-right" is "whites who are as racially conscious as non-whites and Jews". Alt-right journalists could cut and paste pieces straight from Beinart, such as that last sentence: "You have to be involved in this struggle because it’s the struggle of your people, it’s your honor.”
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Clyde says:

    Stop the presses. The tribe is accused of tribalism. Mon Dieu! How long with this tribalism last in America with all the out-marriage which iirc is at 50%. How many Jewish guys are marrying Asian woman like Zuck-cuck.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The article is about Orthodox Jews. They don't marry out.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. IHTG says:

    even when the result is outright bigotry

    Key word?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Ha. I thought the same thing.
    , @Dennis Dale
    Nice catch. I wonder if Beinart caught it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @IHTG

    even when the result is outright bigotry
     
    Key word?

    Ha. I thought the same thing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. EriK says:

    Never was a fan of Beinart.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  9. 1/ Er, since I can read I noticed there’s an adjective in the Haaretz headline that doesn’t appear in the ISteve headline.

    2/ The article is behind a paywall. It will be interesting to note how many commenters here can read the whole article.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    I remember reading it (the paywall wasn't working for some reason, though now that I go there it is) and it basically started from the premise the alt-right is bad to begin with and was complaining about the Orthodox acting like them. Remember, Haaretz is a left-wing Israeli paper that thinks Jews shouldn't be tribalist and should make nice with the Palestinians.

    I'm sure *someone* here can confirm this. Steve, did you actually read the article?

    EDIT: If you scroll down past the ad at the start instead of closing it you can see the article on some versions of Chrome.

    , @Anonymous
    There was no paywall for me when I searched for the article on google, and I never paid a dime to Haaretz. There were a few popups asking for money, but I clicked the 'X' to shut those off.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. The strange outcome of inbreeding + high IQ (though lower spatial intelligence).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Romanian
    Pak Protectors = high IQ + tribalism + amorality
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. Dennis Dale says: • Website
    @Bee
    BTW, I didn't read the article (too long), but I find the headline, "The Answer to Hillary’s Charge of “Racism” Is the Charge of Treason—Against America, and Its Founding Stock"

    to be quite funny.

    Politicians of founding-stock American ancestry (Lincoln Chaffee, Jeb Bush, William Weld, Howard Dean, etc.) tend to agree with Hillary Clinton on immigration, not with non-founding stocker Donald Trump (well, Clinton isn't of founding stock descent, either).

    Like all that founding stock over at, say, PNAC or the Weekly Standard?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. Dennis Dale says: • Website
    @IHTG

    even when the result is outright bigotry
     
    Key word?

    Nice catch. I wonder if Beinart caught it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. SFG says:
    @anony-mouse
    1/ Er, since I can read I noticed there's an adjective in the Haaretz headline that doesn't appear in the ISteve headline.

    2/ The article is behind a paywall. It will be interesting to note how many commenters here can read the whole article.

    I remember reading it (the paywall wasn’t working for some reason, though now that I go there it is) and it basically started from the premise the alt-right is bad to begin with and was complaining about the Orthodox acting like them. Remember, Haaretz is a left-wing Israeli paper that thinks Jews shouldn’t be tribalist and should make nice with the Palestinians.

    I’m sure *someone* here can confirm this. Steve, did you actually read the article?

    EDIT: If you scroll down past the ad at the start instead of closing it you can see the article on some versions of Chrome.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. IHTG says:

    The Haaretz paywall can be bypassed by using Google to search for the article, entering it from there, then refreshing your browser using CTRL-F5.

    As a patriotic Israeli I encourage you to teach this trick to everybody you know

    Read More
    • Replies: @anony-mouse
    Thx
    , @Big Bill
    Its been ten years (15? 20?) since they locked down their site AND their archives. Thanks for the tip!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. laura r says: • Website

    #ALTJEW we are here we are not going away. any jew who supports islamic immigration is signing their own death warrent. nothing bigoted about wanting to be safe. nothing bigoted about wanting your neigborhoods free of 3rd world backward cultures. remember who were the first to do whiteflight in NYC & the n east? the jews. now many live in suburban gated areas, their memories have come up short. @laurarubin7

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    Check out Jewamongyou, Lion of the Blogosphere, and Pragmatically Distributed.
    , @IHTG
    What's a nice girl like you doing hanging around a bunch of Twitter trolls? You should go take some photos with Lion of the Blogosphere.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Forbes says:

    I’m confused…or is the word perplexed? I think I’m coming down with the cynic’s version of cognitive dissonance.

    To champion tribal or ethnic heritage is to prefer one’s own kind (family, relations, extended family as contained in religious, language and cultural bonds) over those that are not your kind. Be it gracious or insidious, it’s a preference. Call it intolerance if you must. But my preference for my brother or my mother, rather than a stranger, is a feature, not a bug, of life existence.

    But Beinart thinks this shameful? That sound you’re hearing? Exploding heads…

    Read More
    • Replies: @pyrrhus
    Binary probably knows that he is spouting a leftist narrative that doesn't make any sense, but he's a loyal leftist, who prefers his own kind.....Oh wait...
    , @laura r
    forbes, after 40 years of socual engineering: up is down, down is up, men are women, criminals are heros, workingclass whiteman bigot, working class brownman noble victim, w/self esteem means hater. haaretz is a far left progressive globalist propganda paper as most of MSM is.
    , @laura r
    in the new world order, any self preservation is considered bigoted- EXCEPT if you are black hispanic trans gender gay 3rd wave feminist muslim ect. you get the picture. the rest of us have white privilege & jew priv. a double problem. we can all drop dead if you ask the media/unuversities/hollywood. the average brainwashed person under 50. the white nationalists have a good point. especially hetro white males.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. @Bee
    BTW, I didn't read the article (too long), but I find the headline, "The Answer to Hillary’s Charge of “Racism” Is the Charge of Treason—Against America, and Its Founding Stock"

    to be quite funny.

    Politicians of founding-stock American ancestry (Lincoln Chaffee, Jeb Bush, William Weld, Howard Dean, etc.) tend to agree with Hillary Clinton on immigration, not with non-founding stocker Donald Trump (well, Clinton isn't of founding stock descent, either).

    This descendent of Peter Rambo (beat Samuel Bush here by 7 years) supports Trump.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    My wife and kids are too. Long live New Sweden.
    , @Olorin
    Is yours buried at the Philly Old Swedes' or the Wilmington one? I'm thinking he's at Philly, right?

    My second-generation forefather was a founding warden of the latter and owing to his major role in getting the church established, is buried in the floor under his pew. Used to go visit him as a kid. I grew up surprised that not all kids/families visited their ten-gens-back ancestors on a regular basis.

    The Rootless Cosmopolitans have had a field day, these past 50 years....
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. SFG says:
    @laura r
    #ALTJEW we are here we are not going away. any jew who supports islamic immigration is signing their own death warrent. nothing bigoted about wanting to be safe. nothing bigoted about wanting your neigborhoods free of 3rd world backward cultures. remember who were the first to do whiteflight in NYC & the n east? the jews. now many live in suburban gated areas, their memories have come up short. @laurarubin7

    Check out Jewamongyou, Lion of the Blogosphere, and Pragmatically Distributed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. IHTG says:
    @laura r
    #ALTJEW we are here we are not going away. any jew who supports islamic immigration is signing their own death warrent. nothing bigoted about wanting to be safe. nothing bigoted about wanting your neigborhoods free of 3rd world backward cultures. remember who were the first to do whiteflight in NYC & the n east? the jews. now many live in suburban gated areas, their memories have come up short. @laurarubin7

    What’s a nice girl like you doing hanging around a bunch of Twitter trolls? You should go take some photos with Lion of the Blogosphere.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. @IHTG
    The Haaretz paywall can be bypassed by using Google to search for the article, entering it from there, then refreshing your browser using CTRL-F5.

    As a patriotic Israeli I encourage you to teach this trick to everybody you know

    Thx

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. Bugg says:

    The Orthodox may be a block useful to Trump in some swing states like FL and VA. But they won’t be much help in NY, NJ nor CT. Simply either they have made the calculation that either Trump is going to win or the Dem dance with the religion of peace has finally gone too far.

    And they are a monolithic block who votes for whom ever the rebbe tells them to support. Frankly would rather not have their support, given the nonsense they have pulled in communities across the NY met area.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Rebbes are a feature of hasidic Judaism. Modern Orthodox and haredi (non-hasidic ultra-Orthodox) Jews do not have rebbes, just ordinary rabbis.
    , @kaganovitch
    I took a walk through Boro Park today . The vast majority of the Yiddish signs I saw were pro Trump.
    , @Big Bill
    Don't count Hillary out!

    When Bill pardoned those welfare/school scamming rabbis and machers from Rockland County, the word went out from the bull rabbis and Hillary got 1214 (of 1215!) votes in one of the ultra-Orthodox 'villes.

    She knows how to buy the black hat vote.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Headline shows up the same for me– no misquoting by Steve, unless he’s since edited the body of the post (which he often does). Also I don’t subscribe to Haaretz, AFAIK

    Speaking of FUD tactics… All week long media outlets & Nevertrump concern-trolls were assuring me that Trump was about to “pivot”/cave on amnesty and Then I’d Be Sorry. Turns out he didn’t quite do what they’d said he would. Was DJT feinting, or do media scribblers now think they can hype plot twists into existence? I’m a bit worn out by their tendency to hysterically jump on any minor wrinkle or misstatement as Game-Changing News, Nixon Going to China, World Ends, etc.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  23. pyrrhus says:
    @Bee
    BTW, I didn't read the article (too long), but I find the headline, "The Answer to Hillary’s Charge of “Racism” Is the Charge of Treason—Against America, and Its Founding Stock"

    to be quite funny.

    Politicians of founding-stock American ancestry (Lincoln Chaffee, Jeb Bush, William Weld, Howard Dean, etc.) tend to agree with Hillary Clinton on immigration, not with non-founding stocker Donald Trump (well, Clinton isn't of founding stock descent, either).

    My family came over in 1630, and several members fought in the Revolution…It’s Trump all the way.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bee
    I'm not talking about ''you'', I'm simply talking about the average politician who's of predominantly New England "founder" ancestry.
    , @sayless
    D.A.R. here. My family came over in 1690, and married into the Shawnee. I'm for Trump too. The NeverTrumpers are delusional about who his supporters are, and what their motivations are. It's an advantage, perhaps.
    , @Forbes
    1635 here, but never saw ourselves as founding stock--just part of what we became, America, as Americans.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. pyrrhus says:
    @Forbes
    I'm confused...or is the word perplexed? I think I'm coming down with the cynic's version of cognitive dissonance.

    To champion tribal or ethnic heritage is to prefer one's own kind (family, relations, extended family as contained in religious, language and cultural bonds) over those that are not your kind. Be it gracious or insidious, it's a preference. Call it intolerance if you must. But my preference for my brother or my mother, rather than a stranger, is a feature, not a bug, of life existence.

    But Beinart thinks this shameful? That sound you're hearing? Exploding heads...

    Binary probably knows that he is spouting a leftist narrative that doesn’t make any sense, but he’s a loyal leftist, who prefers his own kind…..Oh wait…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Clyde
    Stop the presses. The tribe is accused of tribalism. Mon Dieu! How long with this tribalism last in America with all the out-marriage which iirc is at 50%. How many Jewish guys are marrying Asian woman like Zuck-cuck.

    The article is about Orthodox Jews. They don’t marry out.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    We’re reaching chutzpah levels that shouldn’t even be possible.

    Read More
    • LOL: Avenge Harambe
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  27. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    “Jews Favor Clinton Over Trump by More Than 2-To-1, Poll Shows”

    http://www.newsweek.com/jews-favor-clinton-over-trump-more-2-1-new-polls-shows-494977

    Jewish voters in the U.S. support Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump by more than two-to-one, according to a survey released Tuesday by research consultancy Gallup.

    The survey, which used daily data collected by Gallup between July 1 and August 28, showed that 52 percent of Jews have favorable views of the Democratic nominee, but only 23 percen had a positive attitude towards the Republican nominee.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  28. Blah says:
    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Yes, he attacks Darwinism in his new book.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Bugg
    The Orthodox may be a block useful to Trump in some swing states like FL and VA. But they won't be much help in NY, NJ nor CT. Simply either they have made the calculation that either Trump is going to win or the Dem dance with the religion of peace has finally gone too far.

    And they are a monolithic block who votes for whom ever the rebbe tells them to support. Frankly would rather not have their support, given the nonsense they have pulled in communities across the NY met area.

    Rebbes are a feature of hasidic Judaism. Modern Orthodox and haredi (non-hasidic ultra-Orthodox) Jews do not have rebbes, just ordinary rabbis.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MGB
    They're all going to hell so who gives a shit?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Sam Haysom
    This descendent of Peter Rambo (beat Samuel Bush here by 7 years) supports Trump.

    My wife and kids are too. Long live New Sweden.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Blah
    Slightly off-topic Steve but have you seen Tom Wolfe has a new book:

    http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/08/31/books/tom-wolfes-kingdom-of-speech-takes-aim-at-darwin-and-chomsky.html

    Yes, he attacks Darwinism in his new book.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. anon says: • Disclaimer

    Every day this past year has seemed more like a dream than the last.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    It's called internet addiction.
    , @Glossy
    Unfortunately, I think Trump will lose. But if he wins, things will get C*R*A*Z*Y real fast. Soros-driven civil disobedience, assasination attempts, impeachment hearings, and I wouldn't even completely exclude a coup followed by a crackdown.

    In general, the amount of craziness in the air seems to be increasing. If future scientists identify some environmental cause of global mental instability and plot its variations through time, this would be one of the peak periods, together with the late 1960s and early 1990s.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. ogunsiron says:

    becoming ( … ) a community that champions its own ethnic interests even when the result is outright bigotry.

    He dares to write this, as if it’s some kind of new thing. Infuriating.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  34. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @anon
    Every day this past year has seemed more like a dream than the last.

    It’s called internet addiction.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Possibly, but I don't think I'm any more internet addicted than I was last year or the year before.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Glossy says: • Website
    @anon
    Every day this past year has seemed more like a dream than the last.

    Unfortunately, I think Trump will lose. But if he wins, things will get C*R*A*Z*Y real fast. Soros-driven civil disobedience, assasination attempts, impeachment hearings, and I wouldn’t even completely exclude a coup followed by a crackdown.

    In general, the amount of craziness in the air seems to be increasing. If future scientists identify some environmental cause of global mental instability and plot its variations through time, this would be one of the peak periods, together with the late 1960s and early 1990s.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Things will get crazy regardless of who wins.

    Remember, Bill Clinton's presidency sparked the rise of the "militia movement", which was obviously overhyped by liberals, but there was the development of that whole subculture, which overlaps with the anti-New World Order, conspiracy theory subculture and the white nationalist subcultures. These subcultures were overhyped by liberals, but there was genuine related craziness during the Clinton administration, like the Oklahoma City bombing. These subcultures have only grown and become more popular with the rise of the internet and the Obama administration. Things have gone more liberal, and Hillary would be even more liberal than her husband's administration, so there might be some craziness if Hillary wins as well.

    The amount of craziness in the air is due to the rise of the internet and the fragmentation of people into different online subcultures and communities. People are increasingly inhabiting different mental worlds.
    , @rod1963
    The Left will go insane with rage. I remember when GW Bush was elected in 2000, they were frothing the mouth and in 2004, they were positively rabid given their Lurch went down in flames.

    But will it translate to physical action? Maybe, maybe not. The Left doesn't have the numbers or the motivation to sustain large movements, witness OWS and BLM.

    Hillary can't even fill a small auditorium.

    Yeah if Bernie didn't sell out, he could lead the resistance, but he won't. The Left has so sanitized itself in order to make Hillary the inevitable candidate, they have no one and I mean no one with a ounce of charisma and populist tendencies to lead the fight.

    So what do they have? They have the megaphone(MSM), Silicon Valley and Wall Street money, and political control of most cities in the U.S. and good chunk of the Federal circuit court of appeals. Their approach will be to try and tie up Trump in court the moment he tries anything.
    , @Alec Leamas
    Import the Third World and you're going to get more Third World style politics.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. Bee says:
    @pyrrhus
    My family came over in 1630, and several members fought in the Revolution...It's Trump all the way.

    I’m not talking about ”you”, I’m simply talking about the average politician who’s of predominantly New England “founder” ancestry.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. I see that Mr. Beinart’s opinion is heavy in moral argument. Is moral argument like alcohol in that genetic lines develop resistance after long exposure? If so, how do the world’s people line up in tolerance to moral argument?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  38. JohnnyD says:

    Obviously, Alan Dershowitz, David Brooks, Abe Foxman, Jennifer Rubin, and John Podhortez have no tribal identity. It’s just a coincidence that they want different immigration policies for Israel and the United States. I usually to cut Beinart some slack (since he admitted that he was wrong about the Iraq War, and understands that Jewish liberals who support the Israeli right are hypocrites) but this piece deserves ridicule.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  39. ROLMAO! Your acerbic comments are hilarious.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  40. @Bee
    BTW, I didn't read the article (too long), but I find the headline, "The Answer to Hillary’s Charge of “Racism” Is the Charge of Treason—Against America, and Its Founding Stock"

    to be quite funny.

    Politicians of founding-stock American ancestry (Lincoln Chaffee, Jeb Bush, William Weld, Howard Dean, etc.) tend to agree with Hillary Clinton on immigration, not with non-founding stocker Donald Trump (well, Clinton isn't of founding stock descent, either).

    Good point, and furthermore, isn’t Hillary *Rodham* Clinton of founding stock?

    Surname Rodham is English, her mother’s surname Howell is Old Welsh “recorded in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles of Devonshire, dated 926″.

    Bill Clinton himself is actually of “Olde English and Anglo-Saxon origin” via his biological father William Jefferson “Bill” Blythe Jr. Bill Clinton’s mother, Virginia Dell Cassidy Blythe Clinton Dwire Kelley (née Cassidy), would be part Irish (Cassidy) and part English/German via her mother Edith née Grisham. Grisham is “An English surname, that originated with the German name ‘griesheim’ from the southern region.”

    Furthermore, Hillary Rodham Clinton was raised United Methodist and Bill Clinton was raised a Southern Baptist.

    Out of interest, asking the iSteve readership, doesn’t the above make both Bill and Hillary of founding stock?

    I understand the Irish aspect of Bill could be problematic but as Vox Day points out, the “7 million-strong Irish migration from 1600 to 1920″ has been a “long-term success” and as such shouldn’t the Irish be considered of founding stock as well?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    "Irish" in the US generally refers to Irish Catholic, which isn't considered "founding stock". There wasn't substantial Irish Catholic immigration until the Potato Famine. Until then, much of the "Irish" immigration was actually Anglo-Irish and Scotch-Irish, who were Protestant and of English and Scottish origin.
    , @Hibernian
    In colonial days there were a few Irish Catholics in Maryland and Pennsylvania.
    , @Bee
    Hillary isn't of founding stock. Her French-Canadian ancestors have been in North America a long time, but her English ancestors were all 1800s immigrants. She is that rape WASP American without Colonial roots.
    http://ethnicelebs.com/hillary-clinton

    Bill is of deep Southern American ancestry, so strictly speaking, yes, that's founding stock, but I was mostly referring to people of predominantly New England Yankee WASP roots like Bush, Chafee, Dean, and Weld, three of whom tried to make a big comeback in this election season, to no particular avail, it seems.

    Hillary, by the way, would be the first US president since Ronald Reagan to have no German ancestry of any kind whatsoever, which is also rare for a WASP middle American. Tim Kaine doesn't either.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. @Bugg
    The Orthodox may be a block useful to Trump in some swing states like FL and VA. But they won't be much help in NY, NJ nor CT. Simply either they have made the calculation that either Trump is going to win or the Dem dance with the religion of peace has finally gone too far.

    And they are a monolithic block who votes for whom ever the rebbe tells them to support. Frankly would rather not have their support, given the nonsense they have pulled in communities across the NY met area.

    I took a walk through Boro Park today . The vast majority of the Yiddish signs I saw were pro Trump.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Anonymous
    It's called internet addiction.

    Possibly, but I don’t think I’m any more internet addicted than I was last year or the year before.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Thank G_d for Orthodox Jews!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  44. juster says:

    Nobody tell Haaretz about us alt-right sympathetic Jews (and no, we’re not self-hating, and yes, we’ve read KMac, and yes, we understand that WN is important in the alt-right and no, we’re not in favor of our own expulsion or extermination). Their heads might explode.

    If as the comment above says Jews favor Clinton over Trump 2:1 that’s a lot better than I thought, given the relentless parade of anti-Trump pearl-clutching articles in Tablet, Forward, Haaretz, etc.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    WN is important in the alt-right and no, we’re not in favor of our own expulsion or extermination

    WN does not imply expulsion or extermination. I simply means a White majority. Surely jews can accept that.
    , @Dave Pinsen
    There is hatred of Jews, but it's pretty marginal in the US. But there seems to be a more widespread insecurity on the part of liberal Jews that puts them in the open borders crowd. Instead of realizing that most old stock Americans aren't haters of anyone (and many are even philosemites)...
    https://youtu.be/y6E9sJ6B-u8?t=3m36s
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Pat Hannagan
    Good point, and furthermore, isn't Hillary *Rodham* Clinton of founding stock?

    Surname Rodham is English, her mother's surname Howell is Old Welsh "recorded in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles of Devonshire, dated 926".

    Bill Clinton himself is actually of "Olde English and Anglo-Saxon origin" via his biological father William Jefferson "Bill" Blythe Jr. Bill Clinton's mother, Virginia Dell Cassidy Blythe Clinton Dwire Kelley (née Cassidy), would be part Irish (Cassidy) and part English/German via her mother Edith née Grisham. Grisham is "An English surname, that originated with the German name 'griesheim' from the southern region."

    Furthermore, Hillary Rodham Clinton was raised United Methodist and Bill Clinton was raised a Southern Baptist.

    Out of interest, asking the iSteve readership, doesn't the above make both Bill and Hillary of founding stock?

    I understand the Irish aspect of Bill could be problematic but as Vox Day points out, the "7 million-strong Irish migration from 1600 to 1920" has been a "long-term success" and as such shouldn't the Irish be considered of founding stock as well?

    “Irish” in the US generally refers to Irish Catholic, which isn’t considered “founding stock”. There wasn’t substantial Irish Catholic immigration until the Potato Famine. Until then, much of the “Irish” immigration was actually Anglo-Irish and Scotch-Irish, who were Protestant and of English and Scottish origin.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Hannagan
    So the attitude is that even though Irish, and Irish Catholics, have been in America since the founding as a European settlement the Irish of Catholic faith can not be considered of founding stock?

    Even so, only Bill Clinton has any Irish in him and it's not certain at all that that heritage is Catholic given he was raised Southern Baptist.

    Vox Day argues "that the Irish example is the historical anomaly" of migrations in that their presence in America since the founding wasn't significantly altering of the American national character ("significantly altering its national character.") and compares the transformative effect of Hispanics like himself* in the USA, Greece after the Dorians, Germania after the Goths and England after the Danes (among other historic transformitive migration waves).

    I find Vox Day's argument persuasive and am still at a loss to understand notions of Irish, and Irish Catholics, as not being founding stock since the historical record shows they clearly were, and remain so.

    *It should be noted that Vox himself is part Irish so even though he may be biased towards the Irish his argument is still robust and historically sourced.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. Langley says:

    OT

    Steve – you must have seen this one.

    “German-man” convicted of arson (not what you think).

    Harry Burkhart was born in Grozny in Chechnya but traveled on German documents, as a German citizen.

    http://www.staradvertiser.com/breaking-news/german-man-convicted-of-setting-rash-of-fires-in-l-a-to-avenge-mothers-deportation/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011%E2%80%9312_Los_Angeles_arson_attacks

    http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jan/07/local/la-me-arson-profile-20120106

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  47. biz says:

    Haaretz operates at a large monetary loss. Very few people in Israel read it. It is heavily subsidized by some European NGO.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "Haaretz operates at a large monetary loss. Very few people in Israel read it. It is heavily subsidized by some European NGO."

    Are you implying that Haaretz is somehow uninfluential? According to circulation figures available on the web (after about 30 seconds of googling), Haaretz's circulation is 72,000, while that of the New York Times is 1.38 million. As a fraction of thier nation's population (8 and 310 million respectively), Haaretz is at about 0.9%, the Times, 0.4%. Haaretz has over twice the relative circulation of the Times.

    Is the New York Times uninfluential?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Hibernian says:
    @Pat Hannagan
    Good point, and furthermore, isn't Hillary *Rodham* Clinton of founding stock?

    Surname Rodham is English, her mother's surname Howell is Old Welsh "recorded in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles of Devonshire, dated 926".

    Bill Clinton himself is actually of "Olde English and Anglo-Saxon origin" via his biological father William Jefferson "Bill" Blythe Jr. Bill Clinton's mother, Virginia Dell Cassidy Blythe Clinton Dwire Kelley (née Cassidy), would be part Irish (Cassidy) and part English/German via her mother Edith née Grisham. Grisham is "An English surname, that originated with the German name 'griesheim' from the southern region."

    Furthermore, Hillary Rodham Clinton was raised United Methodist and Bill Clinton was raised a Southern Baptist.

    Out of interest, asking the iSteve readership, doesn't the above make both Bill and Hillary of founding stock?

    I understand the Irish aspect of Bill could be problematic but as Vox Day points out, the "7 million-strong Irish migration from 1600 to 1920" has been a "long-term success" and as such shouldn't the Irish be considered of founding stock as well?

    In colonial days there were a few Irish Catholics in Maryland and Pennsylvania.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. Big Bill says:
    @IHTG
    The Haaretz paywall can be bypassed by using Google to search for the article, entering it from there, then refreshing your browser using CTRL-F5.

    As a patriotic Israeli I encourage you to teach this trick to everybody you know

    Its been ten years (15? 20?) since they locked down their site AND their archives. Thanks for the tip!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. MGB says:
    @Anonymous
    Rebbes are a feature of hasidic Judaism. Modern Orthodox and haredi (non-hasidic ultra-Orthodox) Jews do not have rebbes, just ordinary rabbis.

    They’re all going to hell so who gives a shit?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Glossy
    Unfortunately, I think Trump will lose. But if he wins, things will get C*R*A*Z*Y real fast. Soros-driven civil disobedience, assasination attempts, impeachment hearings, and I wouldn't even completely exclude a coup followed by a crackdown.

    In general, the amount of craziness in the air seems to be increasing. If future scientists identify some environmental cause of global mental instability and plot its variations through time, this would be one of the peak periods, together with the late 1960s and early 1990s.

    Things will get crazy regardless of who wins.

    Remember, Bill Clinton’s presidency sparked the rise of the “militia movement”, which was obviously overhyped by liberals, but there was the development of that whole subculture, which overlaps with the anti-New World Order, conspiracy theory subculture and the white nationalist subcultures. These subcultures were overhyped by liberals, but there was genuine related craziness during the Clinton administration, like the Oklahoma City bombing. These subcultures have only grown and become more popular with the rise of the internet and the Obama administration. Things have gone more liberal, and Hillary would be even more liberal than her husband’s administration, so there might be some craziness if Hillary wins as well.

    The amount of craziness in the air is due to the rise of the internet and the fragmentation of people into different online subcultures and communities. People are increasingly inhabiting different mental worlds.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. Big Bill says:
    @Bugg
    The Orthodox may be a block useful to Trump in some swing states like FL and VA. But they won't be much help in NY, NJ nor CT. Simply either they have made the calculation that either Trump is going to win or the Dem dance with the religion of peace has finally gone too far.

    And they are a monolithic block who votes for whom ever the rebbe tells them to support. Frankly would rather not have their support, given the nonsense they have pulled in communities across the NY met area.

    Don’t count Hillary out!

    When Bill pardoned those welfare/school scamming rabbis and machers from Rockland County, the word went out from the bull rabbis and Hillary got 1214 (of 1215!) votes in one of the ultra-Orthodox ‘villes.

    She knows how to buy the black hat vote.

    Read More
    • Replies: @kaganovitch
    Nah, that was New Square. New Square is a company town even by Hassidic standards.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. @Anonymous
    "Irish" in the US generally refers to Irish Catholic, which isn't considered "founding stock". There wasn't substantial Irish Catholic immigration until the Potato Famine. Until then, much of the "Irish" immigration was actually Anglo-Irish and Scotch-Irish, who were Protestant and of English and Scottish origin.

    So the attitude is that even though Irish, and Irish Catholics, have been in America since the founding as a European settlement the Irish of Catholic faith can not be considered of founding stock?

    Even so, only Bill Clinton has any Irish in him and it’s not certain at all that that heritage is Catholic given he was raised Southern Baptist.

    Vox Day argues “that the Irish example is the historical anomaly” of migrations in that their presence in America since the founding wasn’t significantly altering of the American national character (“significantly altering its national character.”) and compares the transformative effect of Hispanics like himself* in the USA, Greece after the Dorians, Germania after the Goths and England after the Danes (among other historic transformitive migration waves).

    I find Vox Day’s argument persuasive and am still at a loss to understand notions of Irish, and Irish Catholics, as not being founding stock since the historical record shows they clearly were, and remain so.

    *It should be noted that Vox himself is part Irish so even though he may be biased towards the Irish his argument is still robust and historically sourced.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    The reason was the Irish were Catholic. These denominational differences were a much bigger deal a few centuries ago--Episcopalians and Puritans were worried about 'popery', and Catholics often voted differently from Protestants. The Know-Nothings are remembered as a nativist movement, but they originally went after *Catholics*.

    There's also the longstanding bad blood between the English and Irish. The Irish, for their part, often looked up to the USA as the one colony that actually got away.

    , @Anonymous
    Traditionally, "founding stock" did not refer to Irish Catholics. It referred to people descended from the population that was demographically and culturally dominant during the time of the founding i.e. WASPs. Hence the name. There were other groups around at that time, mostly other Protestants like the Dutch, but also the French and others, and even Indians and blacks. Founding stock Americans might have some ancestry from these other groups, but it'd generally be subsumed by the greater WASP ancestry.

    At any rate, it's not very salient today because WASPs have generally been subsumed by the wider white population.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    “In colonial days there were a few Irish Catholics in Maryland and Pennsylvania.”

    There were also Anglo-Irish and Scots-Irish in the early US who were Catholics, not Protestants. Heck, Irish Huguenots… Complex things often happened by way of Ireland, it seems they still do.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  55. Malcolm Y says:

    I just read an article about a radio interview on Hugh Hewitt’s radio show and Jonah Goldberg – can’t find the link.

    The bottom line of what Goldberg had to say was that the alt-right was like an onion with layers. In the center was the core alt-righters who are racists, nuts etc. Then there are some outer layers of somewhat saner, nicer people that had been led astray.

    But after Donald Trump is humiliatingly defeated, these saner alt-righters can be herded like good little sheep back to the true conservative fold, and all will be well, and they will follow orders (I guess from Goldberg et al) as they should.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist

    The bottom line of what Goldberg had to say was that the alt-right was like an onion with layers. In the center was the core alt-righters who are racists, nuts etc. Then there are some outer layers of somewhat saner, nicer people that had been led astray.

    But after Donald Trump is humiliatingly defeated, these saner alt-righters can be herded like good little sheep back to the true conservative fold, and all will be well, and they will follow orders (I guess from Goldberg et al) as they should.
     

    I listen to HH, and heard the interview, and this is about right. Hugh's been doing quite a bit of Righteous Republican hygiene-maintenance in the past couple of days, bringing on guests (e.g. Rich Lowry yesterday) who denounce the alt-right racists and explain how they're not quite the same as the 'nationalists' and 'populists' who support Trump, but who can indeed still be reclaimed as good Republicans.

    HH is good on many issues, but he's a typical baby boomer who's terrified of being called racist, and he's got potential career advancement in TV at stake, so he's trying to support Trump's candidacy while simultaneously washing his hands of him; it's not always so pretty to listen to . . . .

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. Dennis Dale says: • Website

    The Eternal Alt Right is no myth.
    It’s all there in the Protocols of the Elders of Asgard.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    "The Eternal Alt Right is no myth. It’s all there in the Protocols of the Elders of Asgard."

    Yes, I heard about it in that movie Goy Spencer.
    , @White Guy In Japan
    I read about it in the Dead Sea Scrolls of Pepe.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. SFG says:
    @Pat Hannagan
    So the attitude is that even though Irish, and Irish Catholics, have been in America since the founding as a European settlement the Irish of Catholic faith can not be considered of founding stock?

    Even so, only Bill Clinton has any Irish in him and it's not certain at all that that heritage is Catholic given he was raised Southern Baptist.

    Vox Day argues "that the Irish example is the historical anomaly" of migrations in that their presence in America since the founding wasn't significantly altering of the American national character ("significantly altering its national character.") and compares the transformative effect of Hispanics like himself* in the USA, Greece after the Dorians, Germania after the Goths and England after the Danes (among other historic transformitive migration waves).

    I find Vox Day's argument persuasive and am still at a loss to understand notions of Irish, and Irish Catholics, as not being founding stock since the historical record shows they clearly were, and remain so.

    *It should be noted that Vox himself is part Irish so even though he may be biased towards the Irish his argument is still robust and historically sourced.

    The reason was the Irish were Catholic. These denominational differences were a much bigger deal a few centuries ago–Episcopalians and Puritans were worried about ‘popery’, and Catholics often voted differently from Protestants. The Know-Nothings are remembered as a nativist movement, but they originally went after *Catholics*.

    There’s also the longstanding bad blood between the English and Irish. The Irish, for their part, often looked up to the USA as the one colony that actually got away.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @juster
    Nobody tell Haaretz about us alt-right sympathetic Jews (and no, we're not self-hating, and yes, we've read KMac, and yes, we understand that WN is important in the alt-right and no, we're not in favor of our own expulsion or extermination). Their heads might explode.

    If as the comment above says Jews favor Clinton over Trump 2:1 that's a lot better than I thought, given the relentless parade of anti-Trump pearl-clutching articles in Tablet, Forward, Haaretz, etc.

    WN is important in the alt-right and no, we’re not in favor of our own expulsion or extermination

    WN does not imply expulsion or extermination. I simply means a White majority. Surely jews can accept that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    That depends which WN's you read. Some WN's are not in favor of Jewish extermination or expulsion, but there are clearly others who are. For what it's worth, I think that most American Jews could ultimately come to terms with the WN's who want a White majority but don't insist on expelling them. Our grandparents and great-grandparents lived in America under similar policies. The ones who can't would leave, but they're not the kind who would be happy in Israel.
    , @laura r
    agree, but so many insults on the forums. have you seen occidental observer?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Pat Hannagan
    So the attitude is that even though Irish, and Irish Catholics, have been in America since the founding as a European settlement the Irish of Catholic faith can not be considered of founding stock?

    Even so, only Bill Clinton has any Irish in him and it's not certain at all that that heritage is Catholic given he was raised Southern Baptist.

    Vox Day argues "that the Irish example is the historical anomaly" of migrations in that their presence in America since the founding wasn't significantly altering of the American national character ("significantly altering its national character.") and compares the transformative effect of Hispanics like himself* in the USA, Greece after the Dorians, Germania after the Goths and England after the Danes (among other historic transformitive migration waves).

    I find Vox Day's argument persuasive and am still at a loss to understand notions of Irish, and Irish Catholics, as not being founding stock since the historical record shows they clearly were, and remain so.

    *It should be noted that Vox himself is part Irish so even though he may be biased towards the Irish his argument is still robust and historically sourced.

    Traditionally, “founding stock” did not refer to Irish Catholics. It referred to people descended from the population that was demographically and culturally dominant during the time of the founding i.e. WASPs. Hence the name. There were other groups around at that time, mostly other Protestants like the Dutch, but also the French and others, and even Indians and blacks. Founding stock Americans might have some ancestry from these other groups, but it’d generally be subsumed by the greater WASP ancestry.

    At any rate, it’s not very salient today because WASPs have generally been subsumed by the wider white population.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    I was going to agree with you at first, since the Dutch and Swedes on the New Jersey coast and up the Hudson river had many other protestants, including Huguenots and German refugees. But then I remembered that Maryland had extensive Catholic colonization, from before the Cromwellian era, and German colonization in Pennsylvania (usually also protestant sectarians) was also well advanced before the Revolution. So the OP probably has a point about Irish Catholics, but how many, I have no idea.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. Mark Caplan says: • Website

    Haaretz, Aug 26:

    The only group Trump is doing well is among Orthodox Jewish voters (6 percent of the Florida Jewish electorate). According to the [GBA Strategies] poll, Trump leads Clinton 66-22 percent among Orthodox Jews. Among all non-Orthodox voters, Clinton leads Trump 77-22.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  61. Mr. Anon says:
    @C. Van Carter

    “If Israel does not survive as a Jewish democratic state, I want to be able to tell my children that I did what little I’m capable of. I’m a writer, so what I can do is to try to sound an alarm. I just want to be able to say that to them.”

    The man speaking is Peter Beinart, the journalist, essayist and author who became American Jewry’s most prominent prophet of doom following the publication of his 2010 article, “The Failure of the Jewish Establishment.” It is a role that will now be cemented in stone with the publication of his new book “The Crisis of Zionism,” in which he calls on American Jews “to defend the dream of a democratic Jewish state before it is too late.”

    ...there’s a part of me, as a Jew, who, when I look at the AIPAC conference, says: ‘Wow, we’re good. Who else could do this?’ I feel the same way when I see the list of Nobel Prize winners.

    ...“I think one question that American Jews who are on the left have to face is how much they care about this compared to everything else. People say, ‘Yes, and what about global warming?’ That’s part of the reason I don’t come at this from a purely universalistic perspective. You say to people: You have to be involved in this struggle because it’s the struggle of your people, it’s your honor."
     
    http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/is-archliberal-peter-beinart-good-for-the-jews-1.420178

    Very good find, Mr. Carter.

    “You have to be involved in this struggle because it’s the struggle of your people, it’s your honor.”

    This is what Peter Beinart believes: He and his co-ethnics get to have an “our people”. We don’t.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. Mr. Anon says:
    @Dennis Dale
    The Eternal Alt Right is no myth.
    It's all there in the Protocols of the Elders of Asgard.

    “The Eternal Alt Right is no myth. It’s all there in the Protocols of the Elders of Asgard.”

    Yes, I heard about it in that movie Goy Spencer.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. Mr. Anon says:
    @biz
    Haaretz operates at a large monetary loss. Very few people in Israel read it. It is heavily subsidized by some European NGO.

    “Haaretz operates at a large monetary loss. Very few people in Israel read it. It is heavily subsidized by some European NGO.”

    Are you implying that Haaretz is somehow uninfluential? According to circulation figures available on the web (after about 30 seconds of googling), Haaretz’s circulation is 72,000, while that of the New York Times is 1.38 million. As a fraction of thier nation’s population (8 and 310 million respectively), Haaretz is at about 0.9%, the Times, 0.4%. Haaretz has over twice the relative circulation of the Times.

    Is the New York Times uninfluential?

    Read More
    • Replies: @donut
    "Is the New York Times uninfluential?" If only it were.
    , @SFG
    Yeah, but you'd have to adduce evidence Haaretz reaches all the movers and shakers in Tel Aviv. My understanding (I don't live there) is that it does, but they're less powerful than they used to be with the rising Russian and Haredi populations. But I'm sure one of the Israelis around here can comment.
    , @IHTG
    That argument doesn't work because no media is influential in Israel in the way the New York Times is. It's too small-scale a society to support the concept of a "prestige media". People just don't relate to journalists and pundits in that way here.

    Where the media does have an impact is in meat-and-potatoes news coverage. That's why Netanyahu's true political arch-enemy is the Mozes family, not the Schocken family.

    , @Karl
    > Haaretz’s circulation is 72,000

    that would be the Hebrew edition, which although leftist, ==does== need to consider that its buyers get called up for a month/year reserve duty in the infantry until age 45-ish

    I have never seen a printed copy of the English edition of Haaretz. It (like _Times of Israel_) exists on the internet, as a continuation of a long,long heritage of Eretz-Israel-resident Jews, scamming money from diaspora Jews.

    It's our diaspora, we will scam their money as we see fit. I myself watched the IRA openly do it to the Irish diaspora in the Bronx.

    If you want to see what the American Modern Orthodox are reading about Israel, check out Yeshiva World News. Lots of kvelling from old ladies in New Jersey gushing about how their nerdy skinny/nearsighted grandson joined the IDF, had his ass kicked into shape by the Moroccan drill seargants, learned how to trade smartass-ery with bikini chicks on TelAviv beaches, and graduated from a sniper-marksmanship course. Then married a nice Orthodox girl from the girls high school in Kiryat Arba, and started pumping out grandchildren.
    , @Greasy William

    Are you implying that Haaretz is somehow uninfluential?
     
    Haaretz has 0 influence. 0 as in literally none. Even Leftists think that Haaretz is trash.

    The NYT equivalent in Israel is Yediot Ahronot. Washington Post is Maariv.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. Mr. Anon says:
    @Bee
    BTW, I didn't read the article (too long), but I find the headline, "The Answer to Hillary’s Charge of “Racism” Is the Charge of Treason—Against America, and Its Founding Stock"

    to be quite funny.

    Politicians of founding-stock American ancestry (Lincoln Chaffee, Jeb Bush, William Weld, Howard Dean, etc.) tend to agree with Hillary Clinton on immigration, not with non-founding stocker Donald Trump (well, Clinton isn't of founding stock descent, either).

    “Politicians of founding-stock American ancestry (Lincoln Chaffee, Jeb Bush, William Weld, Howard Dean, etc.) tend to agree with Hillary Clinton on immigration, not with non-founding stocker Donald Trump (well, Clinton isn’t of founding stock descent, either).”

    And? Why should I give a damn what they think?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bee
    "Why should I give a damn what they think?"

    Beats me. But people always invoke the founding stockers around these parts.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Anonymous
    WN is important in the alt-right and no, we’re not in favor of our own expulsion or extermination

    WN does not imply expulsion or extermination. I simply means a White majority. Surely jews can accept that.

    That depends which WN’s you read. Some WN’s are not in favor of Jewish extermination or expulsion, but there are clearly others who are. For what it’s worth, I think that most American Jews could ultimately come to terms with the WN’s who want a White majority but don’t insist on expelling them. Our grandparents and great-grandparents lived in America under similar policies. The ones who can’t would leave, but they’re not the kind who would be happy in Israel.

    Read More
    • Replies: @juster
    I actually have a lot of WN friends these days. If they accept me, I accept them is how I look at it. And I understand their critique of disproportionate Jewish power and influence.
    , @laura r
    white nationalists cover the waterfront. some are extreme. others are reasonable. jared taylor is very supportive of jews.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. SPMoore8 says:
    @Anonymous
    Traditionally, "founding stock" did not refer to Irish Catholics. It referred to people descended from the population that was demographically and culturally dominant during the time of the founding i.e. WASPs. Hence the name. There were other groups around at that time, mostly other Protestants like the Dutch, but also the French and others, and even Indians and blacks. Founding stock Americans might have some ancestry from these other groups, but it'd generally be subsumed by the greater WASP ancestry.

    At any rate, it's not very salient today because WASPs have generally been subsumed by the wider white population.

    I was going to agree with you at first, since the Dutch and Swedes on the New Jersey coast and up the Hudson river had many other protestants, including Huguenots and German refugees. But then I remembered that Maryland had extensive Catholic colonization, from before the Cromwellian era, and German colonization in Pennsylvania (usually also protestant sectarians) was also well advanced before the Revolution. So the OP probably has a point about Irish Catholics, but how many, I have no idea.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Maryland was founded as a colony for English Catholics, but there were also many Protestants there, and there was conflict between the Catholics and Protestants.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryland#Persecution_of_Catholics

    Maryland was founded for the purpose of providing religious toleration of England's Roman Catholic minority.[52] In 1642 a number of Puritans left Virginia for Maryland and founded Providence (now called Annapolis).[53] A dispute with traders from Virginia over Kent Island led to armed conflict. In 1644 William Claiborne, a Puritan, seized Kent Island while his associate, the pro-Parliament Puritan Richard Ingle, took over St. Mary's.[54] Both used religion as a tool to gain popular support. The two years from 1644–1646 that Claiborne and his Puritan associates held sway were known as "The Plundering Time". They captured Jesuit priests, imprisoned them, then sent them back to England.

    In 1646 Leonard Calvert returned with troops, recaptured St. Mary's City, and restored order. The House of Delegates passed the "Act concerning Religion" in 1649 granting religious liberty to all Trinitarian Christians.[51]

    In 1650 the Puritans revolted against the proprietary government. "Protestants swept the Catholics out of the legislature ...and religious strife returned".[51] The Puritans set up a new government prohibiting both Catholicism and Anglicanism. The Puritan revolutionary government persecuted Maryland Catholics during its reign, known as the plundering time. Mobs burned down all the original Catholic churches of southern Maryland. The Puritan rule lasted until 1658 when the Calvert family regained control and re-enacted the Toleration Act.

    After England's "Glorious Revolution" of 1688, Maryland outlawed Catholicism. This lasted until after the American Revolutionary War. Wealthy Catholic planters built chapels on their land to practice their religion in relative secrecy.
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @juster
    Nobody tell Haaretz about us alt-right sympathetic Jews (and no, we're not self-hating, and yes, we've read KMac, and yes, we understand that WN is important in the alt-right and no, we're not in favor of our own expulsion or extermination). Their heads might explode.

    If as the comment above says Jews favor Clinton over Trump 2:1 that's a lot better than I thought, given the relentless parade of anti-Trump pearl-clutching articles in Tablet, Forward, Haaretz, etc.

    There is hatred of Jews, but it’s pretty marginal in the US. But there seems to be a more widespread insecurity on the part of liberal Jews that puts them in the open borders crowd. Instead of realizing that most old stock Americans aren’t haters of anyone (and many are even philosemites)…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. @Big Bill
    Don't count Hillary out!

    When Bill pardoned those welfare/school scamming rabbis and machers from Rockland County, the word went out from the bull rabbis and Hillary got 1214 (of 1215!) votes in one of the ultra-Orthodox 'villes.

    She knows how to buy the black hat vote.

    Nah, that was New Square. New Square is a company town even by Hassidic standards.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. Bee says:
    @Pat Hannagan
    Good point, and furthermore, isn't Hillary *Rodham* Clinton of founding stock?

    Surname Rodham is English, her mother's surname Howell is Old Welsh "recorded in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles of Devonshire, dated 926".

    Bill Clinton himself is actually of "Olde English and Anglo-Saxon origin" via his biological father William Jefferson "Bill" Blythe Jr. Bill Clinton's mother, Virginia Dell Cassidy Blythe Clinton Dwire Kelley (née Cassidy), would be part Irish (Cassidy) and part English/German via her mother Edith née Grisham. Grisham is "An English surname, that originated with the German name 'griesheim' from the southern region."

    Furthermore, Hillary Rodham Clinton was raised United Methodist and Bill Clinton was raised a Southern Baptist.

    Out of interest, asking the iSteve readership, doesn't the above make both Bill and Hillary of founding stock?

    I understand the Irish aspect of Bill could be problematic but as Vox Day points out, the "7 million-strong Irish migration from 1600 to 1920" has been a "long-term success" and as such shouldn't the Irish be considered of founding stock as well?

    Hillary isn’t of founding stock. Her French-Canadian ancestors have been in North America a long time, but her English ancestors were all 1800s immigrants. She is that rape WASP American without Colonial roots.

    http://ethnicelebs.com/hillary-clinton

    Bill is of deep Southern American ancestry, so strictly speaking, yes, that’s founding stock, but I was mostly referring to people of predominantly New England Yankee WASP roots like Bush, Chafee, Dean, and Weld, three of whom tried to make a big comeback in this election season, to no particular avail, it seems.

    Hillary, by the way, would be the first US president since Ronald Reagan to have no German ancestry of any kind whatsoever, which is also rare for a WASP middle American. Tim Kaine doesn’t either.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    "Hillary, by the way, would be the first US president since Ronald Reagan to have no German ancestry of any kind whatsoever"

    Why was Reagan nicknamed "Dutch?"

    , @Bee
    *RARE WASP American
    , @Clifford Brown
    Barack Obama is technically "Founding Stock", right? I've read how Obama is related to Dick Cheney, George Bush and Queen Elizabeth. As a Native American, Elizabeth Warren is the ultimate "Founding Stock".

    If elected, Donald Trump would be by far our least "Founding Stock" President. Trump is not only Nouveau Riche, he is a Nouveau American. No wonder they can't stand him.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. @Bee
    Hillary isn't of founding stock. Her French-Canadian ancestors have been in North America a long time, but her English ancestors were all 1800s immigrants. She is that rape WASP American without Colonial roots.
    http://ethnicelebs.com/hillary-clinton

    Bill is of deep Southern American ancestry, so strictly speaking, yes, that's founding stock, but I was mostly referring to people of predominantly New England Yankee WASP roots like Bush, Chafee, Dean, and Weld, three of whom tried to make a big comeback in this election season, to no particular avail, it seems.

    Hillary, by the way, would be the first US president since Ronald Reagan to have no German ancestry of any kind whatsoever, which is also rare for a WASP middle American. Tim Kaine doesn't either.

    “Hillary, by the way, would be the first US president since Ronald Reagan to have no German ancestry of any kind whatsoever”

    Why was Reagan nicknamed “Dutch?”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bee
    Because of his Dutchboy haircut! That's the story I've always heard.

    Which reminds me of the only US president who had English as their second language, Mr. Van Buren.
    , @Olorin
    IIRC the Reagan Library puts out that it was because his father observed, shortly after his birth, that he "looked like a fat little Dutch man."

    Today I guess that would be fat-shaming.
    , @Bill Jones
    Because he insisted his date paid her share?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. It is a valuable piece of rhetoric to say that Trump’s strongest support is among Orthodox Jews. I plan on using this.

    I am sure it must help that Trump’s grandchildren are being raised Orthodox. The Orthodox are not too keen on gay marriage or electing women into positions of leadership. At least Hillary dresses modestly.

    Since the Orthodox have to walk to synagogue on the Sabbath, they tend to live in urban neighborhoods and not partake in White flight which means that they are often surrounded by Black or Latino neighborhoods, often with less than ideal inter-community relations. I have been suprised at how Anti-Semitic some Blacks are in in New York City. Unlike native Black Americans, the heavily Caribbean immigrant population in Brooklyn does not associate Jews with the civil rights movement (not that Hasids were ever marching from Selma to Montgomery). For various reasons, the Orthodox tend to be somewhat immune to the standard media Narrative.

    By the way, it looks like New York State Assemblyman Dov Hikind will not be invited to Corey Booker’s Purim party next year.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  72. Krauze,Herzog, Beinart….. once upon a time one particularly heinous Georgian would have call all of them a rootless cosmopolitans.

    Praise Cthulhu & Allah that nowadays a such display of undiluted hatred is hardly possible even to imagine.

    After all, it is a year of 2024.
    Hillary’s brain in the jar & Enrique Marquez Jr. just got re-selected and we all happily reside in the North American Union.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Clifford Brown

    once upon a time one particularly heinous Georgian
     
    Jimmy Carter?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. Wyrd says:
    @Bee
    BTW, I didn't read the article (too long), but I find the headline, "The Answer to Hillary’s Charge of “Racism” Is the Charge of Treason—Against America, and Its Founding Stock"

    to be quite funny.

    Politicians of founding-stock American ancestry (Lincoln Chaffee, Jeb Bush, William Weld, Howard Dean, etc.) tend to agree with Hillary Clinton on immigration, not with non-founding stocker Donald Trump (well, Clinton isn't of founding stock descent, either).

    Harambe died for your sins.

    Read More
    • LOL: Romanian
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. juster says:
    @Anonymous
    That depends which WN's you read. Some WN's are not in favor of Jewish extermination or expulsion, but there are clearly others who are. For what it's worth, I think that most American Jews could ultimately come to terms with the WN's who want a White majority but don't insist on expelling them. Our grandparents and great-grandparents lived in America under similar policies. The ones who can't would leave, but they're not the kind who would be happy in Israel.

    I actually have a lot of WN friends these days. If they accept me, I accept them is how I look at it. And I understand their critique of disproportionate Jewish power and influence.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    They're either not really your friends, or not really WN as the term is usually understood. It's possible you hung out with a bunch of Breitbart-level American nationalists who are willing to accept minorities who play by the rules, but read the Daily Stormer or TheRightStuff's response to Joshua Seidel. They don't want any Jews, period (and are quite forceful about it).

    I suspect the background is the neocon takeover--they're afraid if they let any in their movement will eventually be run by Jews. I think the Buckley purge had more to do with WFB wanting to look respectable to the general public (WW2 was still fresh in everyone's mind and he probably could see which way the civil rights movement was going)...but I can see where these guys are coming from.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. Bee says:
    @Bee
    Hillary isn't of founding stock. Her French-Canadian ancestors have been in North America a long time, but her English ancestors were all 1800s immigrants. She is that rape WASP American without Colonial roots.
    http://ethnicelebs.com/hillary-clinton

    Bill is of deep Southern American ancestry, so strictly speaking, yes, that's founding stock, but I was mostly referring to people of predominantly New England Yankee WASP roots like Bush, Chafee, Dean, and Weld, three of whom tried to make a big comeback in this election season, to no particular avail, it seems.

    Hillary, by the way, would be the first US president since Ronald Reagan to have no German ancestry of any kind whatsoever, which is also rare for a WASP middle American. Tim Kaine doesn't either.

    *RARE WASP American

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tex
    Subliminal error. I do the same when talking about Bill C. Lolz
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. Bee says:
    @Steve Sailer
    "Hillary, by the way, would be the first US president since Ronald Reagan to have no German ancestry of any kind whatsoever"

    Why was Reagan nicknamed "Dutch?"

    Because of his Dutchboy haircut! That’s the story I’ve always heard.

    Which reminds me of the only US president who had English as their second language, Mr. Van Buren.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. @Bee
    Hillary isn't of founding stock. Her French-Canadian ancestors have been in North America a long time, but her English ancestors were all 1800s immigrants. She is that rape WASP American without Colonial roots.
    http://ethnicelebs.com/hillary-clinton

    Bill is of deep Southern American ancestry, so strictly speaking, yes, that's founding stock, but I was mostly referring to people of predominantly New England Yankee WASP roots like Bush, Chafee, Dean, and Weld, three of whom tried to make a big comeback in this election season, to no particular avail, it seems.

    Hillary, by the way, would be the first US president since Ronald Reagan to have no German ancestry of any kind whatsoever, which is also rare for a WASP middle American. Tim Kaine doesn't either.

    Barack Obama is technically “Founding Stock”, right? I’ve read how Obama is related to Dick Cheney, George Bush and Queen Elizabeth. As a Native American, Elizabeth Warren is the ultimate “Founding Stock”.

    If elected, Donald Trump would be by far our least “Founding Stock” President. Trump is not only Nouveau Riche, he is a Nouveau American. No wonder they can’t stand him.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bee
    Ronald Reagan and JFK were also 0% founding stock. And there are a couple of other weird ones like Woodrow Wilson (whose mother and paternal grandparents were immigrants - just like Trump's).

    I really was referring mostly to the New England WASPs like the Bushes, Chaffees, and the Welds, from whom Obama is not particularly heavily descended.

    Obama is from the broader group of old Colonial Americans, though, yes, as are most other presidents.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. @bored identity
    Krauze,Herzog, Beinart..... once upon a time one particularly heinous Georgian would have call all of them a rootless cosmopolitans.

    Praise Cthulhu & Allah that nowadays a such display of undiluted hatred is hardly possible even to imagine.

    After all, it is a year of 2024.
    Hillary's brain in the jar & Enrique Marquez Jr. just got re-selected and we all happily reside in the North American Union.

    once upon a time one particularly heinous Georgian

    Jimmy Carter?

    Read More
    • Replies: @bored identity
    Witty....
    Btw, your Trump /Heisenberg analogy is right on the money, although I believe that,after the Arizona speech, Schrodinger's Paradox is at work in its mysterious ways:


    Is el gato deported ?
    or
    Is el gato a citizen?

    El gato is both deported and a citizen !
     
    The only exception, when the rule of superposition will not be applied, are the full-time street cats like El Chapo.
    Trump says they 'll go back faster than Speedy Gonzales.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @SPMoore8
    I was going to agree with you at first, since the Dutch and Swedes on the New Jersey coast and up the Hudson river had many other protestants, including Huguenots and German refugees. But then I remembered that Maryland had extensive Catholic colonization, from before the Cromwellian era, and German colonization in Pennsylvania (usually also protestant sectarians) was also well advanced before the Revolution. So the OP probably has a point about Irish Catholics, but how many, I have no idea.

    Maryland was founded as a colony for English Catholics, but there were also many Protestants there, and there was conflict between the Catholics and Protestants.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryland#Persecution_of_Catholics

    Maryland was founded for the purpose of providing religious toleration of England’s Roman Catholic minority.[52] In 1642 a number of Puritans left Virginia for Maryland and founded Providence (now called Annapolis).[53] A dispute with traders from Virginia over Kent Island led to armed conflict. In 1644 William Claiborne, a Puritan, seized Kent Island while his associate, the pro-Parliament Puritan Richard Ingle, took over St. Mary’s.[54] Both used religion as a tool to gain popular support. The two years from 1644–1646 that Claiborne and his Puritan associates held sway were known as “The Plundering Time”. They captured Jesuit priests, imprisoned them, then sent them back to England.

    In 1646 Leonard Calvert returned with troops, recaptured St. Mary’s City, and restored order. The House of Delegates passed the “Act concerning Religion” in 1649 granting religious liberty to all Trinitarian Christians.[51]

    In 1650 the Puritans revolted against the proprietary government. “Protestants swept the Catholics out of the legislature …and religious strife returned”.[51] The Puritans set up a new government prohibiting both Catholicism and Anglicanism. The Puritan revolutionary government persecuted Maryland Catholics during its reign, known as the plundering time. Mobs burned down all the original Catholic churches of southern Maryland. The Puritan rule lasted until 1658 when the Calvert family regained control and re-enacted the Toleration Act.

    After England’s “Glorious Revolution” of 1688, Maryland outlawed Catholicism. This lasted until after the American Revolutionary War. Wealthy Catholic planters built chapels on their land to practice their religion in relative secrecy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Hannagan
    Thanks to all who have contributed to my query re. what is the founding stock of the USA and why the Irish aren't included.

    Here is my answer in precis, starting with the timeline of colonisation of what is today known as the USA:

    Pre-Columbus 1492 in pre-history we have American Native Indian tribes as well as the Irish subsequent to The Voyage of St. Brendan culminating in the known Celtic tribe of Duhare in South Carolina.

    Post 1492 we have Spanish, French, British, Dutch, Swedish and Portuguese colonisation.

    The Spanish had colonised New Spain by 1562 which incorporated western areas of the USA such as California, New Mexico, Arizona. By 1565 they had established "the oldest continuously occupied European-established settlement within the borders of the contiguous United States." at St. Augustine, Florida.

    Post 1600:

    The French had colonised along the St. Laurence River establishing New France.

    Pre 1624 Dutch settled in New Amsterdam, now New York, which was then "a provincial extension of the Dutch Republic". The Swedes settled Delaware from 1638 to 1655 which was then a Swedish colony.

    As stated above the area of Maryland was settled pre 1632 by English Catholics.

    Then British established colonies in Jamestown, Virginia, in 1607 and Plymouth, New England, in 1620.

    Subsequent long story short: Swedes conquered by Dutch, Dutch conquered by British and in 1750 there are 13 British colonies on the east coast of now USA.

    In the same period New France is expanded along the Mississippi the total area now known as Louisiana. New Spain has expanded north and west, at the same time British colonies are established in the north known as Rupert's Land.

    7 years war (1754 to 1763): France vs Britain. Britain wins and becomes world power. Louisiana in New France taken by Spain. Rest of east coast taken by Britain.


    1775-1783: American war over ownership of taxation and usury, now known as American Revolutionary War/War of Independence; 13 British colonies vs Britain.

    "On July 2, 1776, the Continental Congress formally voted for independence, and issued its Declaration on July 4."

    American revolutionaries are supplied by France and Spain, American revolutionaries win right to establish their own taxation and usury without interference from Britain. Trade resumes.

    "the Treaty of Paris ended the war and recognized the sovereignty of the United States over the territory bounded roughly by what is now Canada to the north, Florida to the south, and the Mississippi River to the west. France gained its revenge and little else except a heavy national debt, while Spain acquired Great Britain's Florida colonies."

    Conclusion: even though the Irish, Spanish, French and Portuguese pre-date British colonies on mainland USA, and even though subsequent colonies of Swedes and Dutch are established simultaneously with that of the British, these are not considered founding stock as the founding is based on the Treaty of Paris ratification of British stock as winners of the war over taxation.

    The ethno-religious nature of that stock is then determinant of what constitutes "founding stock". Notable is a strong philosemitism, rabidly anti-Catholic, both of which factors determine the future expansion of this once British colony. Extirpation of all competing ethno-religious colonies is achieved in the American Civil War with a centralised control on usury and taxation established thus ushering in the age of the Jew in the 20th century.

    I would be very grateful for any corrections to the above, or additions. In any case, once again thanks for your thought provoking comments.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. rod1963 says:
    @Glossy
    Unfortunately, I think Trump will lose. But if he wins, things will get C*R*A*Z*Y real fast. Soros-driven civil disobedience, assasination attempts, impeachment hearings, and I wouldn't even completely exclude a coup followed by a crackdown.

    In general, the amount of craziness in the air seems to be increasing. If future scientists identify some environmental cause of global mental instability and plot its variations through time, this would be one of the peak periods, together with the late 1960s and early 1990s.

    The Left will go insane with rage. I remember when GW Bush was elected in 2000, they were frothing the mouth and in 2004, they were positively rabid given their Lurch went down in flames.

    But will it translate to physical action? Maybe, maybe not. The Left doesn’t have the numbers or the motivation to sustain large movements, witness OWS and BLM.

    Hillary can’t even fill a small auditorium.

    Yeah if Bernie didn’t sell out, he could lead the resistance, but he won’t. The Left has so sanitized itself in order to make Hillary the inevitable candidate, they have no one and I mean no one with a ounce of charisma and populist tendencies to lead the fight.

    So what do they have? They have the megaphone(MSM), Silicon Valley and Wall Street money, and political control of most cities in the U.S. and good chunk of the Federal circuit court of appeals. Their approach will be to try and tie up Trump in court the moment he tries anything.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Gross Terry
    Biden. They should have run Biden; not that they could have stopped Hillary even if they wanted to.


    Imagine the debates between Trump and Biden! At long last, America's crazy uncles attend to the issues of the day!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. Mexican Alt-Rockers Are Naughticing How One Mexican Pundit Has Been Running The Show For Thirty Years

    QUE NO TE HAGA BOBO JACOBO
    ( “Don’t Let Jacobo Make a Fool Out of You”)

    Ya todos sabemos por que nos hacemos
    a todos nos lleva
    a unos mas a otros menos
    a todos nos tienen muriendonos de hambre
    ya todos sabemos quien es el culpable
    a ricos, a pobres, a chicos, a grandes, a todos
    nos vino a poner en la madre.
    De lunes a viernes transmites al aire
    te pasas hablando como una comadre.
    Recibes propinas de Carlos Salinas
    transmites en vivo
    nos dices pamplinas
    que nadie se entere
    que todo es mentira
    por eso el programa se queda en familia.

    Le tiras pedradas a algunos partidos
    enjuicias personas al aire o en vivo
    olvidas noticias sobre la guerilla a
    todos los fraudes les cambias las cifras.
    Por todo el planeta tienes a tu gente
    por que es tu trabajo que nadie se entere
    de pronto aparecen noticias urgentes
    pues del protocolo eres un alcahuete.
    Por que te conviene tener ignorante
    a la gente que viene eres mal informante
    hay un periodista que altera noticias
    en un noticiero que esta en Televisa.

    Que no te haga bobo Jacobo
    que no te haga bruto ese PUTO.
    Que no te haga bobo Jacobo

    Le tiras a un lado
    despues al del otro
    les haces la barba eres un agachon.
    Le vendes noticias
    al mejor postor
    sabemos muy bien que eres un impostor.
    Desde las mañanas
    que tengo lagañas
    tienes a tu gente diciendo patrañas
    maldito Jacobo chismoso traidor
    le guardas secretos a nuestra nacion.

    Un corte y regresas en lo que le areglas
    te llegan despues los alteras
    A todos nos miente
    Nos miente Jacobo
    Que no se haga tonto
    Que no se haga bobo.

    Que no te haga bobo Jacobo
    Que no te haga bobo Jacobo

    Que no te haga bobo Jacobo
    Que no te haga bobo Jacobo

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  82. @Malcolm Y
    I just read an article about a radio interview on Hugh Hewitt's radio show and Jonah Goldberg - can't find the link.

    The bottom line of what Goldberg had to say was that the alt-right was like an onion with layers. In the center was the core alt-righters who are racists, nuts etc. Then there are some outer layers of somewhat saner, nicer people that had been led astray.

    But after Donald Trump is humiliatingly defeated, these saner alt-righters can be herded like good little sheep back to the true conservative fold, and all will be well, and they will follow orders (I guess from Goldberg et al) as they should.

    The bottom line of what Goldberg had to say was that the alt-right was like an onion with layers. In the center was the core alt-righters who are racists, nuts etc. Then there are some outer layers of somewhat saner, nicer people that had been led astray.

    But after Donald Trump is humiliatingly defeated, these saner alt-righters can be herded like good little sheep back to the true conservative fold, and all will be well, and they will follow orders (I guess from Goldberg et al) as they should.

    I listen to HH, and heard the interview, and this is about right. Hugh’s been doing quite a bit of Righteous Republican hygiene-maintenance in the past couple of days, bringing on guests (e.g. Rich Lowry yesterday) who denounce the alt-right racists and explain how they’re not quite the same as the ‘nationalists’ and ‘populists’ who support Trump, but who can indeed still be reclaimed as good Republicans.

    HH is good on many issues, but he’s a typical baby boomer who’s terrified of being called racist, and he’s got potential career advancement in TV at stake, so he’s trying to support Trump’s candidacy while simultaneously washing his hands of him; it’s not always so pretty to listen to . . . .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. Rob McX says:
    @C. Van Carter

    “If Israel does not survive as a Jewish democratic state, I want to be able to tell my children that I did what little I’m capable of. I’m a writer, so what I can do is to try to sound an alarm. I just want to be able to say that to them.”

    The man speaking is Peter Beinart, the journalist, essayist and author who became American Jewry’s most prominent prophet of doom following the publication of his 2010 article, “The Failure of the Jewish Establishment.” It is a role that will now be cemented in stone with the publication of his new book “The Crisis of Zionism,” in which he calls on American Jews “to defend the dream of a democratic Jewish state before it is too late.”

    ...there’s a part of me, as a Jew, who, when I look at the AIPAC conference, says: ‘Wow, we’re good. Who else could do this?’ I feel the same way when I see the list of Nobel Prize winners.

    ...“I think one question that American Jews who are on the left have to face is how much they care about this compared to everything else. People say, ‘Yes, and what about global warming?’ That’s part of the reason I don’t come at this from a purely universalistic perspective. You say to people: You have to be involved in this struggle because it’s the struggle of your people, it’s your honor."
     
    http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/is-archliberal-peter-beinart-good-for-the-jews-1.420178

    Really, the best definition of “alt-right” is “whites who are as racially conscious as non-whites and Jews”. Alt-right journalists could cut and paste pieces straight from Beinart, such as that last sentence: “You have to be involved in this struggle because it’s the struggle of your people, it’s your honor.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Hannagan
    the best definition of “alt-right” is “whites who are as racially conscious as non-whites and Jews”.

    That is an excellent definition, Rob McX. I will use that one. Well done!
    , @Connecticut Famer
    Really, the best definition of “alt-right” is “whites who are as racially conscious as non-whites and Jews”.

    Bingo!!! Ahh, but woe betide anybody who would support such a heresy.
    , @Pat Casey
    Is the alt-right a political movement or a social movement? Or both? I guess a social movement would encompass a political movement. Anyways. "The struggle of your people"---that sounds like a more animated phenomenon than I take Jarod Taylor to be guiding. Racial Consciousness or Racialism?

    I guess Citizenism is dead. Sorry Steve. You know I was rooting for you.

    I will say the strangeness, and it is pretty strange, when you think about what Richard Spencer is passionate about, is that Trump is a perfect Citizenist, and Spencer is still interested in advocating Friedrich Nietzsche. Does anyone remember the pagan youtube videos he said inspired him back at alternative right dot come? That guy was overweight wearing a homemade halloween costume and a complete lunatic. He kinda jumped the gun and told Hillary he wasn't going to let her...make him do what she would like for him to do, because he's a Machiavellian.

    Ok, next blog post, what would Machiavelli write? Maybe sly old Mach would only Tweet, just because... I know! He would only tweet nonsense! To make Hilary think I don't what I'm doing! Shit I already told her I'm a Machiavellian though. Maybe I should prophesy again, or maybe just remind them of my prophecy. Damnit I need to let the new guys know when and where the Pagan Rites are going to be held by me and my boy Jack Donovan. My Jack my D-man. Gosh is Jack's so strong and hard, when he just yells at people, who give him the stink eye, about the intermittent grunting in public, they think he's a retard like slingblade, then my D-man shows him that yelling is like roaring, when you just keep screaming I Can Grunt All I Want Damnit!

    Has anyone ever seen a philosophy paper out of Richard Spencer, that doesn't hum along to Nietzsche I mean? Prety sure he's never written anything like a Sharon Statement either. Maybe thats his real secret. Nice and shiny opinions I guess. Say, where'd they come from? Is it true he had HBD ME tattooed on the small of his back? Or its not on the small of his back exactly is what they say?

    , @Anonymous
    The alt-right is really just the development of a broad based white nationalism. Whites are significantly mixed now, and are no longer as demographically dominant. It mirrors the development of black nationalism in the US, which has a longer history because blacks from different tribes were generally mixed together from the outset when they were brought over to the US, and because blacks have been a demographic minority.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. Gabriel M says:

    What you are all missing is that whilst it seems obvious to you that liberal Jews are really pursuing their own ethnic interests by promoting liberalism, to Peter Beinhart it seems obvious that by promoting liberalism they are going against their own ethnic interests. The truth is somewhat in the middle: most Jews support liberalism, the dominant ethical ideal of our time, making larger or smaller exceptions when it contradicts their own interests LIKE EVERYONE ELSE. I remember when I was at university and the last all-male choirs were being “desegregated”; many people were upset, but they all had good explanations for why there should be an exception to liberalism in this case, because music is important to them and thus matters unlike things that are important to other people, which don’t.

    Anyway, once again, Steve Sailer welcomes us to his parallel universe where Haaretz is an important newspaper. For comparison, here’s Caroline Gluck, who people in Israel actually read, on George Soros.

    http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Our-World-Soross-campaign-of-global-chaos-464770

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  85. @Clifford Brown

    once upon a time one particularly heinous Georgian
     
    Jimmy Carter?

    Witty….
    Btw, your Trump /Heisenberg analogy is right on the money, although I believe that,after the Arizona speech, Schrodinger’s Paradox is at work in its mysterious ways:

    Is el gato deported ?
    or
    Is el gato a citizen?

    El gato is both deported and a citizen !

    The only exception, when the rule of superposition will not be applied, are the full-time street cats like El Chapo.
    Trump says they ‘ll go back faster than Speedy Gonzales.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. @Dennis Dale
    The Eternal Alt Right is no myth.
    It's all there in the Protocols of the Elders of Asgard.

    I read about it in the Dead Sea Scrolls of Pepe.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bored identity
    Q:
    Did you graduate from Greenwich University?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. Olorin says:
    @Sam Haysom
    This descendent of Peter Rambo (beat Samuel Bush here by 7 years) supports Trump.

    Is yours buried at the Philly Old Swedes’ or the Wilmington one? I’m thinking he’s at Philly, right?

    My second-generation forefather was a founding warden of the latter and owing to his major role in getting the church established, is buried in the floor under his pew. Used to go visit him as a kid. I grew up surprised that not all kids/families visited their ten-gens-back ancestors on a regular basis.

    The Rootless Cosmopolitans have had a field day, these past 50 years….

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    This is my wife's 11thggrandfather

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Gunnarsson_Rambo
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. Olorin says:
    @Steve Sailer
    "Hillary, by the way, would be the first US president since Ronald Reagan to have no German ancestry of any kind whatsoever"

    Why was Reagan nicknamed "Dutch?"

    IIRC the Reagan Library puts out that it was because his father observed, shortly after his birth, that he “looked like a fat little Dutch man.”

    Today I guess that would be fat-shaming.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. sayless says:
    @pyrrhus
    My family came over in 1630, and several members fought in the Revolution...It's Trump all the way.

    D.A.R. here. My family came over in 1690, and married into the Shawnee. I’m for Trump too. The NeverTrumpers are delusional about who his supporters are, and what their motivations are. It’s an advantage, perhaps.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. @Rob McX
    Really, the best definition of "alt-right" is "whites who are as racially conscious as non-whites and Jews". Alt-right journalists could cut and paste pieces straight from Beinart, such as that last sentence: "You have to be involved in this struggle because it’s the struggle of your people, it’s your honor.”

    the best definition of “alt-right” is “whites who are as racially conscious as non-whites and Jews”.

    That is an excellent definition, Rob McX. I will use that one. Well done!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. donut says:
    @Mr. Anon
    "Haaretz operates at a large monetary loss. Very few people in Israel read it. It is heavily subsidized by some European NGO."

    Are you implying that Haaretz is somehow uninfluential? According to circulation figures available on the web (after about 30 seconds of googling), Haaretz's circulation is 72,000, while that of the New York Times is 1.38 million. As a fraction of thier nation's population (8 and 310 million respectively), Haaretz is at about 0.9%, the Times, 0.4%. Haaretz has over twice the relative circulation of the Times.

    Is the New York Times uninfluential?

    “Is the New York Times uninfluential?” If only it were.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. SFG says:
    @Mr. Anon
    "Haaretz operates at a large monetary loss. Very few people in Israel read it. It is heavily subsidized by some European NGO."

    Are you implying that Haaretz is somehow uninfluential? According to circulation figures available on the web (after about 30 seconds of googling), Haaretz's circulation is 72,000, while that of the New York Times is 1.38 million. As a fraction of thier nation's population (8 and 310 million respectively), Haaretz is at about 0.9%, the Times, 0.4%. Haaretz has over twice the relative circulation of the Times.

    Is the New York Times uninfluential?

    Yeah, but you’d have to adduce evidence Haaretz reaches all the movers and shakers in Tel Aviv. My understanding (I don’t live there) is that it does, but they’re less powerful than they used to be with the rising Russian and Haredi populations. But I’m sure one of the Israelis around here can comment.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. Bee says:
    @Clifford Brown
    Barack Obama is technically "Founding Stock", right? I've read how Obama is related to Dick Cheney, George Bush and Queen Elizabeth. As a Native American, Elizabeth Warren is the ultimate "Founding Stock".

    If elected, Donald Trump would be by far our least "Founding Stock" President. Trump is not only Nouveau Riche, he is a Nouveau American. No wonder they can't stand him.

    Ronald Reagan and JFK were also 0% founding stock. And there are a couple of other weird ones like Woodrow Wilson (whose mother and paternal grandparents were immigrants – just like Trump’s).

    I really was referring mostly to the New England WASPs like the Bushes, Chaffees, and the Welds, from whom Obama is not particularly heavily descended.

    Obama is from the broader group of old Colonial Americans, though, yes, as are most other presidents.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Connecticut Famer
    All presidents (including Obongo) can claim some Anglo-Saxon blood, even if minimal. Only two exceptions: Van Buren (Dutch, obviously) and the Hibernian Kennedy.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. SFG says:
    @juster
    I actually have a lot of WN friends these days. If they accept me, I accept them is how I look at it. And I understand their critique of disproportionate Jewish power and influence.

    They’re either not really your friends, or not really WN as the term is usually understood. It’s possible you hung out with a bunch of Breitbart-level American nationalists who are willing to accept minorities who play by the rules, but read the Daily Stormer or TheRightStuff’s response to Joshua Seidel. They don’t want any Jews, period (and are quite forceful about it).

    I suspect the background is the neocon takeover–they’re afraid if they let any in their movement will eventually be run by Jews. I think the Buckley purge had more to do with WFB wanting to look respectable to the general public (WW2 was still fresh in everyone’s mind and he probably could see which way the civil rights movement was going)…but I can see where these guys are coming from.

    Read More
    • Replies: @juster
    Sorry to get back to you so late. Some are Breitbarters, some are European identitarians. I think "not wanting Jews to take over their movement" is utterly reasonable. But the way politics works is that you need friends. If someone agrees with me on core issues, I care less about their race or ethnicity than the fact they agree with me. I think that's the bottom line for the people I know.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. IHTG says:
    @Mr. Anon
    "Haaretz operates at a large monetary loss. Very few people in Israel read it. It is heavily subsidized by some European NGO."

    Are you implying that Haaretz is somehow uninfluential? According to circulation figures available on the web (after about 30 seconds of googling), Haaretz's circulation is 72,000, while that of the New York Times is 1.38 million. As a fraction of thier nation's population (8 and 310 million respectively), Haaretz is at about 0.9%, the Times, 0.4%. Haaretz has over twice the relative circulation of the Times.

    Is the New York Times uninfluential?

    That argument doesn’t work because no media is influential in Israel in the way the New York Times is. It’s too small-scale a society to support the concept of a “prestige media”. People just don’t relate to journalists and pundits in that way here.

    Where the media does have an impact is in meat-and-potatoes news coverage. That’s why Netanyahu’s true political arch-enemy is the Mozes family, not the Schocken family.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. Karl says:
    @Mr. Anon
    "Haaretz operates at a large monetary loss. Very few people in Israel read it. It is heavily subsidized by some European NGO."

    Are you implying that Haaretz is somehow uninfluential? According to circulation figures available on the web (after about 30 seconds of googling), Haaretz's circulation is 72,000, while that of the New York Times is 1.38 million. As a fraction of thier nation's population (8 and 310 million respectively), Haaretz is at about 0.9%, the Times, 0.4%. Haaretz has over twice the relative circulation of the Times.

    Is the New York Times uninfluential?

    > Haaretz’s circulation is 72,000

    that would be the Hebrew edition, which although leftist, ==does== need to consider that its buyers get called up for a month/year reserve duty in the infantry until age 45-ish

    I have never seen a printed copy of the English edition of Haaretz. It (like _Times of Israel_) exists on the internet, as a continuation of a long,long heritage of Eretz-Israel-resident Jews, scamming money from diaspora Jews.

    It’s our diaspora, we will scam their money as we see fit. I myself watched the IRA openly do it to the Irish diaspora in the Bronx.

    If you want to see what the American Modern Orthodox are reading about Israel, check out Yeshiva World News. Lots of kvelling from old ladies in New Jersey gushing about how their nerdy skinny/nearsighted grandson joined the IDF, had his ass kicked into shape by the Moroccan drill seargants, learned how to trade smartass-ery with bikini chicks on TelAviv beaches, and graduated from a sniper-marksmanship course. Then married a nice Orthodox girl from the girls high school in Kiryat Arba, and started pumping out grandchildren.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Olorin
    Is yours buried at the Philly Old Swedes' or the Wilmington one? I'm thinking he's at Philly, right?

    My second-generation forefather was a founding warden of the latter and owing to his major role in getting the church established, is buried in the floor under his pew. Used to go visit him as a kid. I grew up surprised that not all kids/families visited their ten-gens-back ancestors on a regular basis.

    The Rootless Cosmopolitans have had a field day, these past 50 years....

    This is my wife’s 11thggrandfather

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Gunnarsson_Rambo

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. @Glossy
    Unfortunately, I think Trump will lose. But if he wins, things will get C*R*A*Z*Y real fast. Soros-driven civil disobedience, assasination attempts, impeachment hearings, and I wouldn't even completely exclude a coup followed by a crackdown.

    In general, the amount of craziness in the air seems to be increasing. If future scientists identify some environmental cause of global mental instability and plot its variations through time, this would be one of the peak periods, together with the late 1960s and early 1990s.

    Import the Third World and you’re going to get more Third World style politics.

    Read More
    • Agree: Forbes
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. @Mr. Anon
    "Haaretz operates at a large monetary loss. Very few people in Israel read it. It is heavily subsidized by some European NGO."

    Are you implying that Haaretz is somehow uninfluential? According to circulation figures available on the web (after about 30 seconds of googling), Haaretz's circulation is 72,000, while that of the New York Times is 1.38 million. As a fraction of thier nation's population (8 and 310 million respectively), Haaretz is at about 0.9%, the Times, 0.4%. Haaretz has over twice the relative circulation of the Times.

    Is the New York Times uninfluential?

    Are you implying that Haaretz is somehow uninfluential?

    Haaretz has 0 influence. 0 as in literally none. Even Leftists think that Haaretz is trash.

    The NYT equivalent in Israel is Yediot Ahronot. Washington Post is Maariv.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    Okay. It is not influential. I'm not Israeli - I have little knowledge of Israeli popular culture or current affairs. Is it unrepresentative of some significant strain in Israeli thought? Peter Beinart is not an insignificant voice - he saw fit to write an article in it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. Romanian says:
    @Cryptogenic
    The strange outcome of inbreeding + high IQ (though lower spatial intelligence).

    Pak Protectors = high IQ + tribalism + amorality

    Read More
    • Replies: @Brutusale
    The average Zionist is EXACTLY like a Pak Protector. The survival of their breeders is paramount.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. laura r says: • Website
    @Forbes
    I'm confused...or is the word perplexed? I think I'm coming down with the cynic's version of cognitive dissonance.

    To champion tribal or ethnic heritage is to prefer one's own kind (family, relations, extended family as contained in religious, language and cultural bonds) over those that are not your kind. Be it gracious or insidious, it's a preference. Call it intolerance if you must. But my preference for my brother or my mother, rather than a stranger, is a feature, not a bug, of life existence.

    But Beinart thinks this shameful? That sound you're hearing? Exploding heads...

    forbes, after 40 years of socual engineering: up is down, down is up, men are women, criminals are heros, workingclass whiteman bigot, working class brownman noble victim, w/self esteem means hater. haaretz is a far left progressive globalist propganda paper as most of MSM is.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Forbes
    While vice is virtue, and virtue is vice...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. laura r says: • Website
    @Anonymous
    That depends which WN's you read. Some WN's are not in favor of Jewish extermination or expulsion, but there are clearly others who are. For what it's worth, I think that most American Jews could ultimately come to terms with the WN's who want a White majority but don't insist on expelling them. Our grandparents and great-grandparents lived in America under similar policies. The ones who can't would leave, but they're not the kind who would be happy in Israel.

    white nationalists cover the waterfront. some are extreme. others are reasonable. jared taylor is very supportive of jews.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    white nationalists cover the waterfront. some are extreme. others are reasonable. jared taylor is very supportive of jews.
     
    No one seriously advocates exterminating or expelling jews.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. @rod1963
    The Left will go insane with rage. I remember when GW Bush was elected in 2000, they were frothing the mouth and in 2004, they were positively rabid given their Lurch went down in flames.

    But will it translate to physical action? Maybe, maybe not. The Left doesn't have the numbers or the motivation to sustain large movements, witness OWS and BLM.

    Hillary can't even fill a small auditorium.

    Yeah if Bernie didn't sell out, he could lead the resistance, but he won't. The Left has so sanitized itself in order to make Hillary the inevitable candidate, they have no one and I mean no one with a ounce of charisma and populist tendencies to lead the fight.

    So what do they have? They have the megaphone(MSM), Silicon Valley and Wall Street money, and political control of most cities in the U.S. and good chunk of the Federal circuit court of appeals. Their approach will be to try and tie up Trump in court the moment he tries anything.

    Biden. They should have run Biden; not that they could have stopped Hillary even if they wanted to.

    Imagine the debates between Trump and Biden! At long last, America’s crazy uncles attend to the issues of the day!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. @Rob McX
    Really, the best definition of "alt-right" is "whites who are as racially conscious as non-whites and Jews". Alt-right journalists could cut and paste pieces straight from Beinart, such as that last sentence: "You have to be involved in this struggle because it’s the struggle of your people, it’s your honor.”

    Really, the best definition of “alt-right” is “whites who are as racially conscious as non-whites and Jews”.

    Bingo!!! Ahh, but woe betide anybody who would support such a heresy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Bee
    BTW, I didn't read the article (too long), but I find the headline, "The Answer to Hillary’s Charge of “Racism” Is the Charge of Treason—Against America, and Its Founding Stock"

    to be quite funny.

    Politicians of founding-stock American ancestry (Lincoln Chaffee, Jeb Bush, William Weld, Howard Dean, etc.) tend to agree with Hillary Clinton on immigration, not with non-founding stocker Donald Trump (well, Clinton isn't of founding stock descent, either).

    “Politicians of founding-stock American ancestry (Lincoln Chaffee, Jeb Bush, William Weld, Howard Dean, etc.) tend to agree with Hillary Clinton on immigration, not with non-founding stocker Donald Trump (well, Clinton isn’t of founding stock descent, either).”

    They have to agree. Financial and social ruination otherwise.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @laura r
    white nationalists cover the waterfront. some are extreme. others are reasonable. jared taylor is very supportive of jews.

    white nationalists cover the waterfront. some are extreme. others are reasonable. jared taylor is very supportive of jews.

    No one seriously advocates exterminating or expelling jews.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. Tex says:
    @Bee
    *RARE WASP American

    Subliminal error. I do the same when talking about Bill C. Lolz

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. Beinart lecturing Orthodox Jews:

    We can’t have tribalism in here!

    This is the Temple!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dennis Dale
    "Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!"
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. guest says:
    @Bee
    BTW, I didn't read the article (too long), but I find the headline, "The Answer to Hillary’s Charge of “Racism” Is the Charge of Treason—Against America, and Its Founding Stock"

    to be quite funny.

    Politicians of founding-stock American ancestry (Lincoln Chaffee, Jeb Bush, William Weld, Howard Dean, etc.) tend to agree with Hillary Clinton on immigration, not with non-founding stocker Donald Trump (well, Clinton isn't of founding stock descent, either).

    The surviving founding stock doesn’t have to realize what’s happening or agree with Trump for them to be betrayed in fact.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. The primary reason to vote for Trump is that he’s the candidate who may be able to maintain an Anglo-European majority long enough to give whites some time and space to increase their birthrates. The alternative (Hillary) means Brazil, and much sooner rather than later.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  111. Forbes says:
    @pyrrhus
    My family came over in 1630, and several members fought in the Revolution...It's Trump all the way.

    1635 here, but never saw ourselves as founding stock–just part of what we became, America, as Americans.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. Forbes says:
    @laura r
    forbes, after 40 years of socual engineering: up is down, down is up, men are women, criminals are heros, workingclass whiteman bigot, working class brownman noble victim, w/self esteem means hater. haaretz is a far left progressive globalist propganda paper as most of MSM is.

    While vice is virtue, and virtue is vice…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. Dr. X says:

    Jews? Tribal?! You don’t say!

    Well, I never...

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  114. @Bee
    Ronald Reagan and JFK were also 0% founding stock. And there are a couple of other weird ones like Woodrow Wilson (whose mother and paternal grandparents were immigrants - just like Trump's).

    I really was referring mostly to the New England WASPs like the Bushes, Chaffees, and the Welds, from whom Obama is not particularly heavily descended.

    Obama is from the broader group of old Colonial Americans, though, yes, as are most other presidents.

    All presidents (including Obongo) can claim some Anglo-Saxon blood, even if minimal. Only two exceptions: Van Buren (Dutch, obviously) and the Hibernian Kennedy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Nixon was the last president with wholly founding stock ancestry. George W. Bush was essentially founding stock except for a great grandparent who immigrated from Germany in the 1840s:

    https://hailtoyou.wordpress.com/2010/11/19/the-hated-richard-nixons-ancestry/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. Bee says:
    @Mr. Anon
    "Politicians of founding-stock American ancestry (Lincoln Chaffee, Jeb Bush, William Weld, Howard Dean, etc.) tend to agree with Hillary Clinton on immigration, not with non-founding stocker Donald Trump (well, Clinton isn’t of founding stock descent, either)."

    And? Why should I give a damn what they think?

    “Why should I give a damn what they think?”

    Beats me. But people always invoke the founding stockers around these parts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    Yes, the founding stock. Not a handful of traitors.
    , @Brutusale
    Even the purebred litters have their culls.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. @White Guy In Japan
    I read about it in the Dead Sea Scrolls of Pepe.

    Q:
    Did you graduate from Greenwich University?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. Svigor says:

    white nationalists cover the waterfront. some are extreme. others are reasonable.

    I like to think I’m both. But not extremely reasonable. Maybe reasonably extreme?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Karl
    > I like to think I’m both. But not extremely reasonable. Maybe reasonably extreme?

    Please visit the Russian Orthodox churches in Afula. Practice your ballroom dancing skills so you feel at home.

    I don't know if their clergy loves us or hates us, but I do know that they visit Russia twice a year..... but always come back.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. Dave says:
    @Bee
    BTW, I didn't read the article (too long), but I find the headline, "The Answer to Hillary’s Charge of “Racism” Is the Charge of Treason—Against America, and Its Founding Stock"

    to be quite funny.

    Politicians of founding-stock American ancestry (Lincoln Chaffee, Jeb Bush, William Weld, Howard Dean, etc.) tend to agree with Hillary Clinton on immigration, not with non-founding stocker Donald Trump (well, Clinton isn't of founding stock descent, either).

    That’s why it’s treason.

    (In reply to Bee): “BTW, I didn’t read the article (too long), but I find the headline, “The Answer to Hillary’s Charge of “Racism” Is the Charge of Treason—Against America, and Its Founding Stock”

    to be quite funny.

    Politicians of founding-stock American ancestry (Lincoln Chaffee, Jeb Bush, William Weld, Howard Dean, etc.) tend to agree with Hillary Clinton on immigration, not with non-founding stocker Donald Trump (well, Clinton isn’t of founding stock descent, either).”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. Svigor says:

    In colonial days there were a few Irish Catholics in Maryland and Pennsylvania.

    Is that why MD is so fucked up? Only half-serious question. I have never seen such a nest of pure, concentrated wiggerism as I did in MD. If anything, The Wire episodes understated it. I figured it was being sandwiched between Baltimore and D.C.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  120. Svigor says:

    If memory serves, Jews voting 2-to-1 for Cankles over Trump would be at the high end of Jewish support for a Republican presidential candidate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res

    If memory serves, Jews voting 2-to-1 for Cankles over Trump would be at the high end of Jewish support for a Republican presidential candidate.
     
    Right. See http://www.pewforum.org/2012/11/07/how-the-faithful-voted-2012-preliminary-exit-poll-analysis/
    Kind of funny to see statements like that used as an attempt to support how uniquely terrible Trump is.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. Pat Casey says:
    @Rob McX
    Really, the best definition of "alt-right" is "whites who are as racially conscious as non-whites and Jews". Alt-right journalists could cut and paste pieces straight from Beinart, such as that last sentence: "You have to be involved in this struggle because it’s the struggle of your people, it’s your honor.”

    Is the alt-right a political movement or a social movement? Or both? I guess a social movement would encompass a political movement. Anyways. “The struggle of your people”—that sounds like a more animated phenomenon than I take Jarod Taylor to be guiding. Racial Consciousness or Racialism?

    I guess Citizenism is dead. Sorry Steve. You know I was rooting for you.

    I will say the strangeness, and it is pretty strange, when you think about what Richard Spencer is passionate about, is that Trump is a perfect Citizenist, and Spencer is still interested in advocating Friedrich Nietzsche. Does anyone remember the pagan youtube videos he said inspired him back at alternative right dot come? That guy was overweight wearing a homemade halloween costume and a complete lunatic. He kinda jumped the gun and told Hillary he wasn’t going to let her…make him do what she would like for him to do, because he’s a Machiavellian.

    Ok, next blog post, what would Machiavelli write? Maybe sly old Mach would only Tweet, just because… I know! He would only tweet nonsense! To make Hilary think I don’t what I’m doing! Shit I already told her I’m a Machiavellian though. Maybe I should prophesy again, or maybe just remind them of my prophecy. Damnit I need to let the new guys know when and where the Pagan Rites are going to be held by me and my boy Jack Donovan. My Jack my D-man. Gosh is Jack’s so strong and hard, when he just yells at people, who give him the stink eye, about the intermittent grunting in public, they think he’s a retard like slingblade, then my D-man shows him that yelling is like roaring, when you just keep screaming I Can Grunt All I Want Damnit!

    Has anyone ever seen a philosophy paper out of Richard Spencer, that doesn’t hum along to Nietzsche I mean? Prety sure he’s never written anything like a Sharon Statement either. Maybe thats his real secret. Nice and shiny opinions I guess. Say, where’d they come from? Is it true he had HBD ME tattooed on the small of his back? Or its not on the small of his back exactly is what they say?

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    Please rephrase this post in the form of sense.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Rob McX
    Really, the best definition of "alt-right" is "whites who are as racially conscious as non-whites and Jews". Alt-right journalists could cut and paste pieces straight from Beinart, such as that last sentence: "You have to be involved in this struggle because it’s the struggle of your people, it’s your honor.”

    The alt-right is really just the development of a broad based white nationalism. Whites are significantly mixed now, and are no longer as demographically dominant. It mirrors the development of black nationalism in the US, which has a longer history because blacks from different tribes were generally mixed together from the outset when they were brought over to the US, and because blacks have been a demographic minority.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. In a country as small as Israel, no one lives very far from a border. So it’s no surprise that most Israelis vote like the white people of Maricopa County Arozona.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jake
    True, and the vast majority of Jews elsewhere vote like Cultural Marxist revolutionaries, with the caveat that the operative CM/PC system allow them to become filthy rich.

    If that does not end, and quickly, here is the end game: there will be no more white Gentile Christians with resources left to defend Jews when the 2 billion brown Moslems decide that Hitler's final solution was too soft and are willing to take 500 million casualties to effect it, worldwide, and not just in lands controlled by 1 nation in Europe.

    Jewish Liberalism, Jewish contempt for white Gentile Christian cultures, is leading to eventual horrors for Jews at the hands of non-white Moslems.

    I see Jews like Soros as being at least as culturally and ethnically suicidal as any WASP.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. jake says:
    @Bee
    BTW, I didn't read the article (too long), but I find the headline, "The Answer to Hillary’s Charge of “Racism” Is the Charge of Treason—Against America, and Its Founding Stock"

    to be quite funny.

    Politicians of founding-stock American ancestry (Lincoln Chaffee, Jeb Bush, William Weld, Howard Dean, etc.) tend to agree with Hillary Clinton on immigration, not with non-founding stocker Donald Trump (well, Clinton isn't of founding stock descent, either).

    Yes, the WASP founding stock is by and large culturally suicidal, as its English original and its Canadian version and its Australian version and its New Zealand version and its South African version, etc.

    So then why do any of us think that demanding more assimilation to WASP culture is the cure?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. jake says:
    @International Jew
    In a country as small as Israel, no one lives very far from a border. So it's no surprise that most Israelis vote like the white people of Maricopa County Arozona.

    True, and the vast majority of Jews elsewhere vote like Cultural Marxist revolutionaries, with the caveat that the operative CM/PC system allow them to become filthy rich.

    If that does not end, and quickly, here is the end game: there will be no more white Gentile Christians with resources left to defend Jews when the 2 billion brown Moslems decide that Hitler’s final solution was too soft and are willing to take 500 million casualties to effect it, worldwide, and not just in lands controlled by 1 nation in Europe.

    Jewish Liberalism, Jewish contempt for white Gentile Christian cultures, is leading to eventual horrors for Jews at the hands of non-white Moslems.

    I see Jews like Soros as being at least as culturally and ethnically suicidal as any WASP.

    Read More
    • Replies: @International Jew

    Jews like Soros
     
    Heh, you can have him!

    As for the rest of us, yeah we tend left of center but according to
    http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/02/23/u-s-religious-groups-and-their-political-leanings/
    we're less Dem than Buddhists, Hindus and, needless to say, Dindus.

    We're left of Episcopalians (can't get whiter than that!) but from these numbers, a random Jew is only 31%
    ((64/49-1)x100%) more likely to vote Dem than a random Episcopalian.

    So while I fully agree with you that the decline of the West is a very bad thing for us (and I never tire of telling my bro's that), blaming it on us you're very much barking up the wrong tree.

    , @laura r
    excellent. jews have to stop identifying w/the "other"- its tired its ignorant. yes a few billion brown people will kill us all. "they" are not us, & how dare anyone use the holocaust to justify open borders. jews are often their own enemies.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. Dennis Dale says: • Website
    @candid_observer
    Beinart lecturing Orthodox Jews:

    We can't have tribalism in here!

    This is the Temple!

    “Gentlemen, you can’t fight in here! This is the War Room!”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. @jake
    True, and the vast majority of Jews elsewhere vote like Cultural Marxist revolutionaries, with the caveat that the operative CM/PC system allow them to become filthy rich.

    If that does not end, and quickly, here is the end game: there will be no more white Gentile Christians with resources left to defend Jews when the 2 billion brown Moslems decide that Hitler's final solution was too soft and are willing to take 500 million casualties to effect it, worldwide, and not just in lands controlled by 1 nation in Europe.

    Jewish Liberalism, Jewish contempt for white Gentile Christian cultures, is leading to eventual horrors for Jews at the hands of non-white Moslems.

    I see Jews like Soros as being at least as culturally and ethnically suicidal as any WASP.

    Jews like Soros

    Heh, you can have him!

    As for the rest of us, yeah we tend left of center but according to

    http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/02/23/u-s-religious-groups-and-their-political-leanings/

    we’re less Dem than Buddhists, Hindus and, needless to say, Dindus.

    We’re left of Episcopalians (can’t get whiter than that!) but from these numbers, a random Jew is only 31%
    ((64/49-1)x100%) more likely to vote Dem than a random Episcopalian.

    So while I fully agree with you that the decline of the West is a very bad thing for us (and I never tire of telling my bro’s that), blaming it on us you’re very much barking up the wrong tree.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    A lot of Buddhists tend to be very liberal Jews who get into New Age-y type stuff.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @anony-mouse
    1/ Er, since I can read I noticed there's an adjective in the Haaretz headline that doesn't appear in the ISteve headline.

    2/ The article is behind a paywall. It will be interesting to note how many commenters here can read the whole article.

    There was no paywall for me when I searched for the article on google, and I never paid a dime to Haaretz. There were a few popups asking for money, but I clicked the ‘X’ to shut those off.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @International Jew

    Jews like Soros
     
    Heh, you can have him!

    As for the rest of us, yeah we tend left of center but according to
    http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/02/23/u-s-religious-groups-and-their-political-leanings/
    we're less Dem than Buddhists, Hindus and, needless to say, Dindus.

    We're left of Episcopalians (can't get whiter than that!) but from these numbers, a random Jew is only 31%
    ((64/49-1)x100%) more likely to vote Dem than a random Episcopalian.

    So while I fully agree with you that the decline of the West is a very bad thing for us (and I never tire of telling my bro's that), blaming it on us you're very much barking up the wrong tree.

    A lot of Buddhists tend to be very liberal Jews who get into New Age-y type stuff.

    Read More
    • Replies: @International Jew
    Maybe in the 60s that counted for something but we're now in our second or third decade of mass immigration from China.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. res says:
    @Svigor
    If memory serves, Jews voting 2-to-1 for Cankles over Trump would be at the high end of Jewish support for a Republican presidential candidate.

    If memory serves, Jews voting 2-to-1 for Cankles over Trump would be at the high end of Jewish support for a Republican presidential candidate.

    Right. See http://www.pewforum.org/2012/11/07/how-the-faithful-voted-2012-preliminary-exit-poll-analysis/
    Kind of funny to see statements like that used as an attempt to support how uniquely terrible Trump is.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Trump is basically running on a Buchananite platform, but it's hard to imagine Pat Buchanan getting the same amount of support from Jews as Trump. Presumably it's Trump's personal and familial ties to Jews that are driving Jewish support for a Buchananite platform higher than it would otherwise be.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Connecticut Famer
    All presidents (including Obongo) can claim some Anglo-Saxon blood, even if minimal. Only two exceptions: Van Buren (Dutch, obviously) and the Hibernian Kennedy.

    Nixon was the last president with wholly founding stock ancestry. George W. Bush was essentially founding stock except for a great grandparent who immigrated from Germany in the 1840s:

    https://hailtoyou.wordpress.com/2010/11/19/the-hated-richard-nixons-ancestry/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @res

    If memory serves, Jews voting 2-to-1 for Cankles over Trump would be at the high end of Jewish support for a Republican presidential candidate.
     
    Right. See http://www.pewforum.org/2012/11/07/how-the-faithful-voted-2012-preliminary-exit-poll-analysis/
    Kind of funny to see statements like that used as an attempt to support how uniquely terrible Trump is.

    Trump is basically running on a Buchananite platform, but it’s hard to imagine Pat Buchanan getting the same amount of support from Jews as Trump. Presumably it’s Trump’s personal and familial ties to Jews that are driving Jewish support for a Buchananite platform higher than it would otherwise be.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. @Steve Sailer
    "Hillary, by the way, would be the first US president since Ronald Reagan to have no German ancestry of any kind whatsoever"

    Why was Reagan nicknamed "Dutch?"

    Because he insisted his date paid her share?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. laura r says: • Website
    @Forbes
    I'm confused...or is the word perplexed? I think I'm coming down with the cynic's version of cognitive dissonance.

    To champion tribal or ethnic heritage is to prefer one's own kind (family, relations, extended family as contained in religious, language and cultural bonds) over those that are not your kind. Be it gracious or insidious, it's a preference. Call it intolerance if you must. But my preference for my brother or my mother, rather than a stranger, is a feature, not a bug, of life existence.

    But Beinart thinks this shameful? That sound you're hearing? Exploding heads...

    in the new world order, any self preservation is considered bigoted- EXCEPT if you are black hispanic trans gender gay 3rd wave feminist muslim ect. you get the picture. the rest of us have white privilege & jew priv. a double problem. we can all drop dead if you ask the media/unuversities/hollywood. the average brainwashed person under 50. the white nationalists have a good point. especially hetro white males.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. laura r says: • Website
    @jake
    True, and the vast majority of Jews elsewhere vote like Cultural Marxist revolutionaries, with the caveat that the operative CM/PC system allow them to become filthy rich.

    If that does not end, and quickly, here is the end game: there will be no more white Gentile Christians with resources left to defend Jews when the 2 billion brown Moslems decide that Hitler's final solution was too soft and are willing to take 500 million casualties to effect it, worldwide, and not just in lands controlled by 1 nation in Europe.

    Jewish Liberalism, Jewish contempt for white Gentile Christian cultures, is leading to eventual horrors for Jews at the hands of non-white Moslems.

    I see Jews like Soros as being at least as culturally and ethnically suicidal as any WASP.

    excellent. jews have to stop identifying w/the “other”- its tired its ignorant. yes a few billion brown people will kill us all. “they” are not us, & how dare anyone use the holocaust to justify open borders. jews are often their own enemies.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. laura r says: • Website
    @Anonymous
    WN is important in the alt-right and no, we’re not in favor of our own expulsion or extermination

    WN does not imply expulsion or extermination. I simply means a White majority. Surely jews can accept that.

    agree, but so many insults on the forums. have you seen occidental observer?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. If it ever were to come down to a battle of the Races, the Northern European white diaspora would prevail. Why? Because our mothers give birth to the most difficult women on Earth, and we must live with them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  138. @Anonymous
    Maryland was founded as a colony for English Catholics, but there were also many Protestants there, and there was conflict between the Catholics and Protestants.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryland#Persecution_of_Catholics

    Maryland was founded for the purpose of providing religious toleration of England's Roman Catholic minority.[52] In 1642 a number of Puritans left Virginia for Maryland and founded Providence (now called Annapolis).[53] A dispute with traders from Virginia over Kent Island led to armed conflict. In 1644 William Claiborne, a Puritan, seized Kent Island while his associate, the pro-Parliament Puritan Richard Ingle, took over St. Mary's.[54] Both used religion as a tool to gain popular support. The two years from 1644–1646 that Claiborne and his Puritan associates held sway were known as "The Plundering Time". They captured Jesuit priests, imprisoned them, then sent them back to England.

    In 1646 Leonard Calvert returned with troops, recaptured St. Mary's City, and restored order. The House of Delegates passed the "Act concerning Religion" in 1649 granting religious liberty to all Trinitarian Christians.[51]

    In 1650 the Puritans revolted against the proprietary government. "Protestants swept the Catholics out of the legislature ...and religious strife returned".[51] The Puritans set up a new government prohibiting both Catholicism and Anglicanism. The Puritan revolutionary government persecuted Maryland Catholics during its reign, known as the plundering time. Mobs burned down all the original Catholic churches of southern Maryland. The Puritan rule lasted until 1658 when the Calvert family regained control and re-enacted the Toleration Act.

    After England's "Glorious Revolution" of 1688, Maryland outlawed Catholicism. This lasted until after the American Revolutionary War. Wealthy Catholic planters built chapels on their land to practice their religion in relative secrecy.
     

    Thanks to all who have contributed to my query re. what is the founding stock of the USA and why the Irish aren’t included.

    Here is my answer in precis, starting with the timeline of colonisation of what is today known as the USA:

    Pre-Columbus 1492 in pre-history we have American Native Indian tribes as well as the Irish subsequent to The Voyage of St. Brendan culminating in the known Celtic tribe of Duhare in South Carolina.

    Post 1492 we have Spanish, French, British, Dutch, Swedish and Portuguese colonisation.

    The Spanish had colonised New Spain by 1562 which incorporated western areas of the USA such as California, New Mexico, Arizona. By 1565 they had established “the oldest continuously occupied European-established settlement within the borders of the contiguous United States.” at St. Augustine, Florida.

    Post 1600:

    The French had colonised along the St. Laurence River establishing New France.

    Pre 1624 Dutch settled in New Amsterdam, now New York, which was then “a provincial extension of the Dutch Republic”. The Swedes settled Delaware from 1638 to 1655 which was then a Swedish colony.

    As stated above the area of Maryland was settled pre 1632 by English Catholics.

    Then British established colonies in Jamestown, Virginia, in 1607 and Plymouth, New England, in 1620.

    Subsequent long story short: Swedes conquered by Dutch, Dutch conquered by British and in 1750 there are 13 British colonies on the east coast of now USA.

    In the same period New France is expanded along the Mississippi the total area now known as Louisiana. New Spain has expanded north and west, at the same time British colonies are established in the north known as Rupert’s Land.

    7 years war (1754 to 1763): France vs Britain. Britain wins and becomes world power. Louisiana in New France taken by Spain. Rest of east coast taken by Britain.

    1775-1783: American war over ownership of taxation and usury, now known as American Revolutionary War/War of Independence; 13 British colonies vs Britain.

    “On July 2, 1776, the Continental Congress formally voted for independence, and issued its Declaration on July 4.”

    American revolutionaries are supplied by France and Spain, American revolutionaries win right to establish their own taxation and usury without interference from Britain. Trade resumes.

    “the Treaty of Paris ended the war and recognized the sovereignty of the United States over the territory bounded roughly by what is now Canada to the north, Florida to the south, and the Mississippi River to the west. France gained its revenge and little else except a heavy national debt, while Spain acquired Great Britain’s Florida colonies.”

    Conclusion: even though the Irish, Spanish, French and Portuguese pre-date British colonies on mainland USA, and even though subsequent colonies of Swedes and Dutch are established simultaneously with that of the British, these are not considered founding stock as the founding is based on the Treaty of Paris ratification of British stock as winners of the war over taxation.

    The ethno-religious nature of that stock is then determinant of what constitutes “founding stock”. Notable is a strong philosemitism, rabidly anti-Catholic, both of which factors determine the future expansion of this once British colony. Extirpation of all competing ethno-religious colonies is achieved in the American Civil War with a centralised control on usury and taxation established thus ushering in the age of the Jew in the 20th century.

    I would be very grateful for any corrections to the above, or additions. In any case, once again thanks for your thought provoking comments.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Hannagan
    In short: the founding stock is predicated on the stock of the victors of the American Revolutionary War.

    That war was won by the stock who founded Plymouth and Jamestown and the subsequent 13 colonies.

    Thus the connection between the Mayflower and founding stock to the exclusion of all other stock, no matter their predating them nor contributions up till the present day.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. @Pat Hannagan
    Thanks to all who have contributed to my query re. what is the founding stock of the USA and why the Irish aren't included.

    Here is my answer in precis, starting with the timeline of colonisation of what is today known as the USA:

    Pre-Columbus 1492 in pre-history we have American Native Indian tribes as well as the Irish subsequent to The Voyage of St. Brendan culminating in the known Celtic tribe of Duhare in South Carolina.

    Post 1492 we have Spanish, French, British, Dutch, Swedish and Portuguese colonisation.

    The Spanish had colonised New Spain by 1562 which incorporated western areas of the USA such as California, New Mexico, Arizona. By 1565 they had established "the oldest continuously occupied European-established settlement within the borders of the contiguous United States." at St. Augustine, Florida.

    Post 1600:

    The French had colonised along the St. Laurence River establishing New France.

    Pre 1624 Dutch settled in New Amsterdam, now New York, which was then "a provincial extension of the Dutch Republic". The Swedes settled Delaware from 1638 to 1655 which was then a Swedish colony.

    As stated above the area of Maryland was settled pre 1632 by English Catholics.

    Then British established colonies in Jamestown, Virginia, in 1607 and Plymouth, New England, in 1620.

    Subsequent long story short: Swedes conquered by Dutch, Dutch conquered by British and in 1750 there are 13 British colonies on the east coast of now USA.

    In the same period New France is expanded along the Mississippi the total area now known as Louisiana. New Spain has expanded north and west, at the same time British colonies are established in the north known as Rupert's Land.

    7 years war (1754 to 1763): France vs Britain. Britain wins and becomes world power. Louisiana in New France taken by Spain. Rest of east coast taken by Britain.


    1775-1783: American war over ownership of taxation and usury, now known as American Revolutionary War/War of Independence; 13 British colonies vs Britain.

    "On July 2, 1776, the Continental Congress formally voted for independence, and issued its Declaration on July 4."

    American revolutionaries are supplied by France and Spain, American revolutionaries win right to establish their own taxation and usury without interference from Britain. Trade resumes.

    "the Treaty of Paris ended the war and recognized the sovereignty of the United States over the territory bounded roughly by what is now Canada to the north, Florida to the south, and the Mississippi River to the west. France gained its revenge and little else except a heavy national debt, while Spain acquired Great Britain's Florida colonies."

    Conclusion: even though the Irish, Spanish, French and Portuguese pre-date British colonies on mainland USA, and even though subsequent colonies of Swedes and Dutch are established simultaneously with that of the British, these are not considered founding stock as the founding is based on the Treaty of Paris ratification of British stock as winners of the war over taxation.

    The ethno-religious nature of that stock is then determinant of what constitutes "founding stock". Notable is a strong philosemitism, rabidly anti-Catholic, both of which factors determine the future expansion of this once British colony. Extirpation of all competing ethno-religious colonies is achieved in the American Civil War with a centralised control on usury and taxation established thus ushering in the age of the Jew in the 20th century.

    I would be very grateful for any corrections to the above, or additions. In any case, once again thanks for your thought provoking comments.

    In short: the founding stock is predicated on the stock of the victors of the American Revolutionary War.

    That war was won by the stock who founded Plymouth and Jamestown and the subsequent 13 colonies.

    Thus the connection between the Mayflower and founding stock to the exclusion of all other stock, no matter their predating them nor contributions up till the present day.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The French would be the founding stock of Quebec. There's a similar term in Quebec:

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

    The French term pure laine literally meaning pure wool (and often translated as true blue or dyed-in-the-wool) refers to those whose ancestry is exclusively French-Canadian. Another similar term is de souche. (of the base of the tree, or root,[1] old stock as in 'Old Stock Canadians').[2]

    While most French-Canadians are able to trace their ancestry back to the original settlers of New France, a number are descended from mixed marriages between the French, Scottish and Irish settlers.[3] When these shared the same Roman Catholic faith, their unions were approved by the once-powerful Roman Catholic Church in Quebec. Another factor was the settlement of many English people in the region, many of whom were ultimately assimilated into the francophone culture.
     
    The Dutch and Swedish settlements were not significant relative to the British. They were ceded to the British, and they were not succeeded by the United States. They did not have a major demographic impact. Most Americans with Swedish ancestry derive that ancestry from Swedish immigration in the 19th century. I believe there were some Irish Catholic indentured servants in colonial America, but they were not demographically significant nor did they have a cultural or political impact on the founding of the US. They would have been subsumed by the wider British population.

    At any rate, you seem to be taking this personally, which is strange since you're not even Irish-American. Furthermore, I've never heard of Irish-Americans feeling slighted or bad about not being founding stock, or even thinking that they were founding stock.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. @Anonymous
    A lot of Buddhists tend to be very liberal Jews who get into New Age-y type stuff.

    Maybe in the 60s that counted for something but we’re now in our second or third decade of mass immigration from China.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    I don't think many Chinese and other Asian immigrants actually identify as Buddhist though. Most of them seem to be affiliated with no religion or some Christian denomination. You see lots of Chinese and Korean churches from the increase in immigration, but no Buddhist temples.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @International Jew
    Maybe in the 60s that counted for something but we're now in our second or third decade of mass immigration from China.

    I don’t think many Chinese and other Asian immigrants actually identify as Buddhist though. Most of them seem to be affiliated with no religion or some Christian denomination. You see lots of Chinese and Korean churches from the increase in immigration, but no Buddhist temples.

    Read More
    • Replies: @International Jew
    So what % of American Buddhists do you figure are Jews?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Pat Hannagan
    In short: the founding stock is predicated on the stock of the victors of the American Revolutionary War.

    That war was won by the stock who founded Plymouth and Jamestown and the subsequent 13 colonies.

    Thus the connection between the Mayflower and founding stock to the exclusion of all other stock, no matter their predating them nor contributions up till the present day.

    The French would be the founding stock of Quebec. There’s a similar term in Quebec:

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

    The French term pure laine literally meaning pure wool (and often translated as true blue or dyed-in-the-wool) refers to those whose ancestry is exclusively French-Canadian. Another similar term is de souche. (of the base of the tree, or root,[1] old stock as in ‘Old Stock Canadians’).[2]

    While most French-Canadians are able to trace their ancestry back to the original settlers of New France, a number are descended from mixed marriages between the French, Scottish and Irish settlers.[3] When these shared the same Roman Catholic faith, their unions were approved by the once-powerful Roman Catholic Church in Quebec. Another factor was the settlement of many English people in the region, many of whom were ultimately assimilated into the francophone culture.

    The Dutch and Swedish settlements were not significant relative to the British. They were ceded to the British, and they were not succeeded by the United States. They did not have a major demographic impact. Most Americans with Swedish ancestry derive that ancestry from Swedish immigration in the 19th century. I believe there were some Irish Catholic indentured servants in colonial America, but they were not demographically significant nor did they have a cultural or political impact on the founding of the US. They would have been subsumed by the wider British population.

    At any rate, you seem to be taking this personally, which is strange since you’re not even Irish-American. Furthermore, I’ve never heard of Irish-Americans feeling slighted or bad about not being founding stock, or even thinking that they were founding stock.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Hannagan
    Thanks for that. No, I'm not taking it personally at all, I'm not even Irish for that matter. Not Australian either, though was born and raised here and my ancestors go back to 1802. Not sure what I am anymore, really.

    I find the subject of anthropology fascinating and American history profoundly provocative on that score alone especially given the USA as world hegemon and declared enemy of me and mine.

    Was just chatting to a Yank mate of mine about this subject and he directed me to Albion's Seed as well as the blog Social Matter where " the terms "Red Empire" and "Blue Empire" to distinguish between parts of the government controlled by Scots-Irish/Virginians vs. those controlled by Puritans, respectively." "For example, the State Department is Blue Empire, the CIA is Red Empire."


    He said:

    The thirteen colonies were settled by four groups:

    Puritans in New England (they're the Judeocentric leftist usurers)

    Midlanders in the Mid-Atlantic (apolitical and align with whichever group is most powerful at the time)

    Royal nobility moved to Virginia (conservative, martial, the "First Families" culture)

    Scots-Irish moved to the other Southern states (very conservative, isolationist)

    The Civil War was a conflict of the Puritans and Midlanders against the Virginians and Scots-Irish


    They also extended this culture to the states that were settled after the Revolution; Scots-Irish moved to Texas and the Southwest, Puritans and Midlanders settled the upper Midwest etc.


    If you read the Declaration of Independence you can actually see the conflict presented in its text, because it simultaneously complains that the King was both exercising TOO much control over the colonies and not ENOUGH control (or more accurately, the King wasn't allowing Puritans to exercise local control).

    What do you make of that? This is a better explanation of my original musings.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. Mr. Anon says:
    @Greasy William

    Are you implying that Haaretz is somehow uninfluential?
     
    Haaretz has 0 influence. 0 as in literally none. Even Leftists think that Haaretz is trash.

    The NYT equivalent in Israel is Yediot Ahronot. Washington Post is Maariv.

    Okay. It is not influential. I’m not Israeli – I have little knowledge of Israeli popular culture or current affairs. Is it unrepresentative of some significant strain in Israeli thought? Peter Beinart is not an insignificant voice – he saw fit to write an article in it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. Mr. Anon says:
    @Bee
    "Why should I give a damn what they think?"

    Beats me. But people always invoke the founding stockers around these parts.

    Yes, the founding stock. Not a handful of traitors.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. @Anonymous
    The French would be the founding stock of Quebec. There's a similar term in Quebec:

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

    The French term pure laine literally meaning pure wool (and often translated as true blue or dyed-in-the-wool) refers to those whose ancestry is exclusively French-Canadian. Another similar term is de souche. (of the base of the tree, or root,[1] old stock as in 'Old Stock Canadians').[2]

    While most French-Canadians are able to trace their ancestry back to the original settlers of New France, a number are descended from mixed marriages between the French, Scottish and Irish settlers.[3] When these shared the same Roman Catholic faith, their unions were approved by the once-powerful Roman Catholic Church in Quebec. Another factor was the settlement of many English people in the region, many of whom were ultimately assimilated into the francophone culture.
     
    The Dutch and Swedish settlements were not significant relative to the British. They were ceded to the British, and they were not succeeded by the United States. They did not have a major demographic impact. Most Americans with Swedish ancestry derive that ancestry from Swedish immigration in the 19th century. I believe there were some Irish Catholic indentured servants in colonial America, but they were not demographically significant nor did they have a cultural or political impact on the founding of the US. They would have been subsumed by the wider British population.

    At any rate, you seem to be taking this personally, which is strange since you're not even Irish-American. Furthermore, I've never heard of Irish-Americans feeling slighted or bad about not being founding stock, or even thinking that they were founding stock.

    Thanks for that. No, I’m not taking it personally at all, I’m not even Irish for that matter. Not Australian either, though was born and raised here and my ancestors go back to 1802. Not sure what I am anymore, really.

    I find the subject of anthropology fascinating and American history profoundly provocative on that score alone especially given the USA as world hegemon and declared enemy of me and mine.

    Was just chatting to a Yank mate of mine about this subject and he directed me to Albion’s Seed as well as the blog Social Matter where ” the terms “Red Empire” and “Blue Empire” to distinguish between parts of the government controlled by Scots-Irish/Virginians vs. those controlled by Puritans, respectively.” “For example, the State Department is Blue Empire, the CIA is Red Empire.”

    He said:

    The thirteen colonies were settled by four groups:

    Puritans in New England (they’re the Judeocentric leftist usurers)

    Midlanders in the Mid-Atlantic (apolitical and align with whichever group is most powerful at the time)

    Royal nobility moved to Virginia (conservative, martial, the “First Families” culture)

    Scots-Irish moved to the other Southern states (very conservative, isolationist)

    The Civil War was a conflict of the Puritans and Midlanders against the Virginians and Scots-Irish

    They also extended this culture to the states that were settled after the Revolution; Scots-Irish moved to Texas and the Southwest, Puritans and Midlanders settled the upper Midwest etc.

    If you read the Declaration of Independence you can actually see the conflict presented in its text, because it simultaneously complains that the King was both exercising TOO much control over the colonies and not ENOUGH control (or more accurately, the King wasn’t allowing Puritans to exercise local control).

    What do you make of that? This is a better explanation of my original musings.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    I thought you were Irish-Australian?

    Aren't the Irish considered founding stock in Australia, since Irish immigration to Australia was significant from the beginning of the colonization of Australia, along with the English? Hence the term "Anglo-Celtic" Australians:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Celtic_Australians

    Yes, those four groups constitute the British founding stock cultures of the US. However, it would not be accurate to suggest that different parts of the US government today are controlled by the Scots-Irish or the Puritans.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Pat Hannagan
    Thanks for that. No, I'm not taking it personally at all, I'm not even Irish for that matter. Not Australian either, though was born and raised here and my ancestors go back to 1802. Not sure what I am anymore, really.

    I find the subject of anthropology fascinating and American history profoundly provocative on that score alone especially given the USA as world hegemon and declared enemy of me and mine.

    Was just chatting to a Yank mate of mine about this subject and he directed me to Albion's Seed as well as the blog Social Matter where " the terms "Red Empire" and "Blue Empire" to distinguish between parts of the government controlled by Scots-Irish/Virginians vs. those controlled by Puritans, respectively." "For example, the State Department is Blue Empire, the CIA is Red Empire."


    He said:

    The thirteen colonies were settled by four groups:

    Puritans in New England (they're the Judeocentric leftist usurers)

    Midlanders in the Mid-Atlantic (apolitical and align with whichever group is most powerful at the time)

    Royal nobility moved to Virginia (conservative, martial, the "First Families" culture)

    Scots-Irish moved to the other Southern states (very conservative, isolationist)

    The Civil War was a conflict of the Puritans and Midlanders against the Virginians and Scots-Irish


    They also extended this culture to the states that were settled after the Revolution; Scots-Irish moved to Texas and the Southwest, Puritans and Midlanders settled the upper Midwest etc.


    If you read the Declaration of Independence you can actually see the conflict presented in its text, because it simultaneously complains that the King was both exercising TOO much control over the colonies and not ENOUGH control (or more accurately, the King wasn't allowing Puritans to exercise local control).

    What do you make of that? This is a better explanation of my original musings.

    I thought you were Irish-Australian?

    Aren’t the Irish considered founding stock in Australia, since Irish immigration to Australia was significant from the beginning of the colonization of Australia, along with the English? Hence the term “Anglo-Celtic” Australians:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Celtic_Australians

    Yes, those four groups constitute the British founding stock cultures of the US. However, it would not be accurate to suggest that different parts of the US government today are controlled by the Scots-Irish or the Puritans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Hannagan
    1) Australian identity died with the end of the White Australia policy. It would be absurd for me to claim Irish hyphen whatever, it has never been an Oz thing to do. My ancestry is almost 100% Irish but, I can't claim to be Irish.

    2) I didn't think so either, but I liked that attempt.

    I guess I'm just White.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. @Anonymous
    I thought you were Irish-Australian?

    Aren't the Irish considered founding stock in Australia, since Irish immigration to Australia was significant from the beginning of the colonization of Australia, along with the English? Hence the term "Anglo-Celtic" Australians:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Celtic_Australians

    Yes, those four groups constitute the British founding stock cultures of the US. However, it would not be accurate to suggest that different parts of the US government today are controlled by the Scots-Irish or the Puritans.

    1) Australian identity died with the end of the White Australia policy. It would be absurd for me to claim Irish hyphen whatever, it has never been an Oz thing to do. My ancestry is almost 100% Irish but, I can’t claim to be Irish.

    2) I didn’t think so either, but I liked that attempt.

    I guess I’m just White.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Right, I understand that "Irish-Australian" was not really a commonly used term there like "Irish-American" is.

    From what I understand, non-British/Irish immigration to Australia was not very significant until after WW2. By contrast, significant non-British Protestant immigration to the US began in the 1840s and lasted for almost a century.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. Karl says:
    @Svigor

    white nationalists cover the waterfront. some are extreme. others are reasonable.
     
    I like to think I'm both. But not extremely reasonable. Maybe reasonably extreme?

    > I like to think I’m both. But not extremely reasonable. Maybe reasonably extreme?

    Please visit the Russian Orthodox churches in Afula. Practice your ballroom dancing skills so you feel at home.

    I don’t know if their clergy loves us or hates us, but I do know that they visit Russia twice a year….. but always come back.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. guest says:
    @Pat Casey
    Is the alt-right a political movement or a social movement? Or both? I guess a social movement would encompass a political movement. Anyways. "The struggle of your people"---that sounds like a more animated phenomenon than I take Jarod Taylor to be guiding. Racial Consciousness or Racialism?

    I guess Citizenism is dead. Sorry Steve. You know I was rooting for you.

    I will say the strangeness, and it is pretty strange, when you think about what Richard Spencer is passionate about, is that Trump is a perfect Citizenist, and Spencer is still interested in advocating Friedrich Nietzsche. Does anyone remember the pagan youtube videos he said inspired him back at alternative right dot come? That guy was overweight wearing a homemade halloween costume and a complete lunatic. He kinda jumped the gun and told Hillary he wasn't going to let her...make him do what she would like for him to do, because he's a Machiavellian.

    Ok, next blog post, what would Machiavelli write? Maybe sly old Mach would only Tweet, just because... I know! He would only tweet nonsense! To make Hilary think I don't what I'm doing! Shit I already told her I'm a Machiavellian though. Maybe I should prophesy again, or maybe just remind them of my prophecy. Damnit I need to let the new guys know when and where the Pagan Rites are going to be held by me and my boy Jack Donovan. My Jack my D-man. Gosh is Jack's so strong and hard, when he just yells at people, who give him the stink eye, about the intermittent grunting in public, they think he's a retard like slingblade, then my D-man shows him that yelling is like roaring, when you just keep screaming I Can Grunt All I Want Damnit!

    Has anyone ever seen a philosophy paper out of Richard Spencer, that doesn't hum along to Nietzsche I mean? Prety sure he's never written anything like a Sharon Statement either. Maybe thats his real secret. Nice and shiny opinions I guess. Say, where'd they come from? Is it true he had HBD ME tattooed on the small of his back? Or its not on the small of his back exactly is what they say?

    Please rephrase this post in the form of sense.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Pat Hannagan
    1) Australian identity died with the end of the White Australia policy. It would be absurd for me to claim Irish hyphen whatever, it has never been an Oz thing to do. My ancestry is almost 100% Irish but, I can't claim to be Irish.

    2) I didn't think so either, but I liked that attempt.

    I guess I'm just White.

    Right, I understand that “Irish-Australian” was not really a commonly used term there like “Irish-American” is.

    From what I understand, non-British/Irish immigration to Australia was not very significant until after WW2. By contrast, significant non-British Protestant immigration to the US began in the 1840s and lasted for almost a century.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. @Anonymous
    I don't think many Chinese and other Asian immigrants actually identify as Buddhist though. Most of them seem to be affiliated with no religion or some Christian denomination. You see lots of Chinese and Korean churches from the increase in immigration, but no Buddhist temples.

    So what % of American Buddhists do you figure are Jews?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. Brutusale says:
    @Romanian
    Pak Protectors = high IQ + tribalism + amorality

    The average Zionist is EXACTLY like a Pak Protector. The survival of their breeders is paramount.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. Brutusale says:
    @Bee
    "Why should I give a damn what they think?"

    Beats me. But people always invoke the founding stockers around these parts.

    Even the purebred litters have their culls.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. juster says:
    @SFG
    They're either not really your friends, or not really WN as the term is usually understood. It's possible you hung out with a bunch of Breitbart-level American nationalists who are willing to accept minorities who play by the rules, but read the Daily Stormer or TheRightStuff's response to Joshua Seidel. They don't want any Jews, period (and are quite forceful about it).

    I suspect the background is the neocon takeover--they're afraid if they let any in their movement will eventually be run by Jews. I think the Buckley purge had more to do with WFB wanting to look respectable to the general public (WW2 was still fresh in everyone's mind and he probably could see which way the civil rights movement was going)...but I can see where these guys are coming from.

    Sorry to get back to you so late. Some are Breitbarters, some are European identitarians. I think “not wanting Jews to take over their movement” is utterly reasonable. But the way politics works is that you need friends. If someone agrees with me on core issues, I care less about their race or ethnicity than the fact they agree with me. I think that’s the bottom line for the people I know.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Bee
    BTW, I didn't read the article (too long), but I find the headline, "The Answer to Hillary’s Charge of “Racism” Is the Charge of Treason—Against America, and Its Founding Stock"

    to be quite funny.

    Politicians of founding-stock American ancestry (Lincoln Chaffee, Jeb Bush, William Weld, Howard Dean, etc.) tend to agree with Hillary Clinton on immigration, not with non-founding stocker Donald Trump (well, Clinton isn't of founding stock descent, either).

    Politicians of founding-stock American ancestry (Lincoln Chaffee, Jeb Bush, William Weld, Howard Dean, etc.) tend to agree with Hillary Clinton on immigration

    Politicians are filtered by the donors.

    If a politician doesn’t agree with the cheap labor lobby then they won’t get funding and their opponent will.

    Same reason so many politicians are blackmailable – donors like their puppets nice and obedient.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
A simple remedy for income stagnation