The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Vox: "I’m an Environmental Journalist, But I Never Write About Overpopulation. Here’s Why."
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From Vox:

I’m an environmental journalist, but I never write about overpopulation. Here’s why.
Since you asked (many times).
Updated by David [email protected]@vox.com Sep 26, 2017

I thought I would explain, once and for all, why I hardly ever talk about population, and why I’m unlikely to in the future. …

When political movements or leaders adopt population control as a central concern … let’s just say it never goes well. In practice, where you find concern over “population,” you very often find racism, xenophobia, or eugenics lurking in the wings. …

History is replete with examples, but perhaps the most germane recent episode was less than 20 years ago, at the Sierra Club, which was riven by divisions over immigration. A group of grassroots members, with some help from powerful funders, attempted to take over the national organization.

These members advocated sharply restricting immigration, saying the US should be reducing rather than increasing its population. …

The Sierra Club won that fight, and the “green anti-immigrant” movement has mostly been driven to the fringes, but conservative media is still getting ratings out of it. If you can stomach it, watch this entire segment with Tucker Carlson of Fox News — it hits all the usual notes, culminating in an interview with some professor who wrote a book about reducing immigration for environmental reasons.

https://youtu.be/6zYTjC8LuB0

Not surprisingly, the text string “Africa” does not appear in the Vox article.

 
Hide 332 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. In the UK, the “Green” Party wants effectively open borders. Here’s the 2015 manifesto. Remember the current system, which has produced a situation where 30% of primary schoolkids are “minority”, is apparently too cruel!

    “Some controls on immigration will be needed for the foreseeable future; for now, we reject an open borders approach. We also reject the imposition of an arbitrary numerical cap on net migration. The latter in particular is impossible to achieve (especially given that there is no control on the numbers emigrating) and leads to many individual injustices.

    Any controls must respect the following principles:
    • Mutual legal obligations within the EU on freedom of movement.
    • International obligations to accept refugees, whether seeking sanctuary from wars, political repression or climate change.
    • Respect for the integrity of families. The arrival of a grandmother might well have no direct economic effect, but her contribution to family life may contribute hugely to our society. We would in particular–abolish the policy that requires a British citizen to have an income of at least £18,600 a year before their partner can come to live in the UK, which discriminates against poorer people ,–make it much easier for adult dependants, mainly elderly parents, of British citizens to come and live here.
    • No restrictions on foreign students. Foreign students contribute hugely to our education system, both financially and in terms of the wider perspectives they bring. They also take back to their home countries skills that they have learnt here that will be valuable at home and positive attitudes towards the UK. In particular we would–allow students to work in the UK for two years after graduation;–widen the Youth Mobility Scheme to allow those from poorer countries to participate.
    • No priority simply for economic reasons. We would in particular aim to retain more of those trained in the UK in the health service so that we have less need to take health service workers from countries that can ill afford to lose them.

    We would also:
    • Review the rules for those wishing to set up or do business here to ensure they are not discriminatory against smaller businesses.
    • Not simply accept people just because they are rich. The London housing market in particular has been gravely distorted by the number of rich migrants buying property, bidding up prices all along the housing chain.
    • Ensure that no prospective immigrant is held in detention. As a matter of urgency, the administrative detention of children and pregnant women should cease immediately.
    • Review the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, particularly with regard to issues of access to legal advice, childcare and levels of subsistence allowance, and reintroduce Legal Aid for reasonable levels of immigration and asylum work.

    In addition, once immigrants have arrived, we would:
    • Assist integration by making available free or affordable English or Welsh language lessons to all new immigrants who want them, costing about £200 million a year.
    • Open up ways for existing irregular migrants who have been here for three years to become legal. In particular, a legal status must be provided for people who have not succeeded in their claim for humanitarian protection but who cannot be returned to their country of origin owing to the political situation there.”

    Incidentally the UK Green Party’s 2010 manifesto was written by a professor at Keele University, who resigned his post after being convicted of various charges. Not a story that I heard on the BBC.

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/renowned-academic-government-advisor-who-9655870

    “A renowned academic, Government advisor and former Green Party Parliamentary candidate had sexually explicit chats with underage girls and downloaded images of child abuse.”

    • Replies: @bomag
    Assist integration by making available free or affordable English or Welsh language lessons to all new immigrants who want them, costing about £200 million a year.

    Integrating into what? From what I see, British culture consists of accommodating Pakistani rape squads and other foreign vibrancy. I wasn't aware of any language barrier.

    Weird that such a manifesto would give a dollar figure.
    , @Autochthon

    We also reject the imposition of an arbitrary numerical cap on net migration. The latter in particular is impossible to achieve (especially given that there is no control on the numbers emigrating).
     
    I think I learned about tautologies some time around eighth grade. These adults have not yet. Note the laziness, too; the verbiage is only slightly different from a balder statement: “It is impossible to control things we refuse to control.” Their obfucation-wu is slipping.

    It is also worth noting the adjective “arbitrary” is a tendentious and goofy straw-man; has anyone ever advocated arbitrary numbers in this regard? Many of us advocate numbers based upon objectively measurable things like crowding, traffic, housing costs, wages, pollution, water’s availability, and so on. I have never encounted a proposal for arbitrary limits in my life.


    They also take back to their home countries skills that they have learnt here.
     
    If only they would go back to their home countries for a change....
    , @415 reasons
    Lol I’m sure there will be a line around the block for free Welsh lessons
    , @unpc downunder
    This fits in with the general pattern of left-wing parties supporting refugee immigration, and right-wing parties supporting economic immigration. In the 1990s a lot of green parties said that immigration should be in line with a nation's environmental " "carrying capacity," but most seem to have abandoned that idea. The Green Party in New Zealand said NZ's carrying capacity is 5 million. However, the population has already reached 4.8 million and they haven't said anything about reducing refugee quotas or tightening family reunification policies.
    , @pyrrhus
    What a surprise, a leftist pedophile....I'm shocked, shocked....
    , @Olorin
    Those immigrant children are just doing the jobs that British children won't do in servicing his libido.

    Gotta import 'em. House 'em. Feed 'em. School 'em. Socialserve 'em. National helf 'em.

    And help them breed the next generation of child sex workers for the globelite. Though I do realize that for academics, ten years is a long time to wait.

    PS--the link 403'ed for me ("Forbidden").

  2. Steve,

    What was not reported in the Vox article was the real reason why the “green anti-immigration” Sierra Club movement was defeated. That was the 100 million dollar “donation” by Wall Street fat cat David Gelbaum in 2000-2001. Gelbaum essentially made the SC an offer they couldn’t refuse.

    • Replies: @Unladen Swallow
    Steve reported it years ago.
    , @Rod1963
    Yep Wall Street captured the Sierra Club and the environmental movement in general. I mean population control was one of the big issues for a long time with conservationists. Then boom here come along a bunch of rich white urban faux environmentalists with corporate funding who support the opposite.

    Global Warming IMO was nothing one but one giant diversion and scam to get people to stop thinking about population control and to promote what amounted to corporate welfare through various "green" energy programs.

    The sane can be said with the rise of identity politics and the collapse of economic issues within the DNC and Democratic party in general . It's no accident that it happened as Silicon Valley really started flexing it's muscles within the Democratic party.

    Tribal/identity politics only benefit the wealthy since it serves as a hot button wedge issue that keeps the various groups within the Democratic party fractured and pissed at the wrong people - namely the white middle-class. All the while Silicon Valley and other groups make out like bandits and screw American people over.

    Bigger picture: The rich whites have declared war on the lower class whites via economic and demographic warfare. Until whites across the board from Bernie Brother and Trump voters recognize they all have the same enemy, we're toast.

    , @I, commenter

    What was not reported in the Vox article was the real reason why the “green anti-immigration” Sierra Club movement was defeated.
     
    It's interesting how the left now supports wealthy, powerful globalists subverting democracy and democratic process. once of the clauses to the donation was that the SC would never broach the subject of immigration again.
    , @lavoisier
    Yes, I know, incredibly dishonest are these liberals. And sanctimonious to boot.

    The Sierra Club was hijacked by an open borders Jewish donor who, like far too many of his tribe, are completely on board with swamping Western nations with the Third World.

    Do not expect this angle of the story to be reported by the honorable David Roberts any time soon.

    As long as the world is being overpopulated by people of color migrating to the West all is working out for the best in this most perfect of worlds.
    , @Olorin
    Precisely correct, Dan.

    While the Vox article attempts to present this as a "takeover" from the grassroots, Sierra in fact had a highly democratic process for electing its board members. It was the MEMBERSHIP who elected those candidates.

    The takeover was Carl Pope and his rich handlers' attempts to overturn what the membership had voted. Sound familiar?

    I presume Voxy McRoberts prefers his special interests to be financiers and members of the IT/data corporate state to guys like, oh, say, SPLC's reviled and targeted John Tanton.

    Note that Roberts echoes SPLC talking points here by asserting this.

    https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2002/john-tanton-mastermind-behind-organized-anti-immigration-movement

    VDARE still has Brenda Walker's series on the entire matter.

    Last I Ducked, LA Times had taken down its pretty good piece (or pieces, can't recall) on the matter.

    This push against grassroots, heartland, and urban environmentalists was a corollary of the billionaire takeover of the DNC for the personal use of global elites. Who are devotees of the cult of Growth Uber Alles. A lot of the extreme rhetoric we've seen in recent years derives from this effort to distract attention from the 1% who fund Situationist street theatre to bitch about the 1%.

    This is a flawed piece but limns some of actual events in that takeover quite well IMO:

    https://www.counterpunch.org/2013/03/15/the-progressive-movement-is-a-pr-front-for-rich-democrats/

  3. I am a fan of Britain’s National Health Service. I can go to the doctor when ever I need to, and I don’t have to worry about awkward, criminal insurance companies or the prospect of bankruptcy.

    However, I find myself completly out-of-step with those on the Left who berate the Evil Tories for not providing enough money to cope with “rising demand.”

    What accounts for this risng demand? Well, it may advances in medical technology. I suspect more likely it is down to Coca-Cola and MacDonalds, and the poor health outcomes associated with consuming their products. However, it is completely verboten for anybody to mention the other obvious fact – rising population, almost entirely explained by immigration.

    • Replies: @unclesam

    I am a fan of Britain’s National Health Service. I can go to the doctor when ever I need to, and I don’t have to worry about awkward, criminal insurance companies or the prospect of bankruptcy.
     
    I would claim that Britain's pointed lack of innovation and entrepreneurship is directly related to the fact that they tax the living shit out anyone who makes significant money. Your ability to manufacture is for shit. You can't even make a decent automobile. I mean, what the fuck do you folks even do that carries any global impact. Last time I was in an electronics store, most of your stuff sucked ass. Going to an average grocery store, or electronics store is like a 1950's version of an American one. The packaging of your grocery items is old fashioned and stupid. You can't even make a milkshake. It's like a special item, if you can find it.

    Stop trying to brag about anything contemporary and British. Your political system sucks ass. You finally got your wits about you with Brexit, but it's too little, too late. You're a cultural and demographic dead man walking. The first thing any successful entertainer does when they hit pay dirt is to get the hell out of your country.

    By the way, the mean little fat fuck you're so proud of, Winston Churchill, tricked us into getting involved in a stupid civil war he helped to orchestrate, and for what? What did all the Americans die for? On those fucking beaches Hitler ran your silly asses off of at the get-go? So you could establish a Muslim Caliphate that used to be London? And who pays to defend your country now, when push comes to shove?

    WE do. If you had to pay for a military that wasn't a joke, your "free" health benefits would not be free.

    And speaking of your great insurance that you're taxed up the ass for, many of your inhabitants teeth are still atrocious. Out in your hinterlands, Brits can still be found with giant misshapen heads, under serviced jawlines, and every other manifestation of concentrated inbreeding, even after all these years.

    In short, you've been a bunch of fucking two-faced assholes since 1770's, and your shit hasn't changed.

    So... quit trying to feed our sociopath liberals blank ammunition by bragging about your stupid insurance plans. Your country is on welfare. We're carrying your fat brit asses.

    Shut up, and show some respect.
    , @jim jones

    I can go to the doctor when ever I need to
     
    It takes me two weeks to get a ten minute appointment with my GP and then she will never refer me to a hospital unless I am in a critical state.
    , @NickG
    The UK National Health Service is a mixed bag. It's very much a postcode lottery. I'm in leafy Surrey and can see the NHS doctor the same day. In other areas you can wait two weeks.

    I've this very day had my second cataract op on the NHS after about a 4 month wait since going to the GP, that's pretty good (I'm young at 57 for the Op, likely due to some combination of genetic pre-disposition and decades in sunny climes). My optometrist told me some NHS areas have a much longer wait and some will only do the cataract on one eye on the NHS.

    My experience in South Africa on an insurance based system is perhaps better, though secondary care there - nursing - is getting iffy, seemingly because of race preference hiring practices in nursing. I have heard of UK patients on waiting lists going to SA to have procedures and billing the NHS.

    NHS cases pay for quick ops in South Africa

    , @Colleen Pater
    NHS wonderful? yeah right. and its not just populations size, here in usa we keep tabs on things by race and its population quality non whites are like ten times more unhealthy
    , @German_reader

    I am a fan of Britain’s National Health Service.
     
    You probably shouldn't, compared to other countries in Western Europe Britain's health system seems to be pretty bad. It's bizarre how it has been quasi-sacralized in British public discourse (e.g. the horrible opening ceremony of the 2012 Olympics).
    , @The Alarmist
    Increased demand from immigration is part of the problem, but decreased supply is another major problem in many parts of the country. The NHS meets the supply/demand imbalance in some ways by importing a large number of doctors, paraprofessionals, and nurses from the third world, and it is increasingly showing in the decline of knowledge, skills and abilities of its human capital as well as a significant decline in the cleanliness and safety of its facilities.

    If you have a good GP who has clean offices, good on you mate... chances are he or she is a contractor ... but an increasing number of your fellow country mates are being killed, maimed and sickened by the NHS every day.
    , @al gore rhythms
    The fact that people are living longer is also an obvious reason why the NHS takes up more resources.
    , @Charles Erwin Wilson II
    Fan == Fanatic, no?

    GB's NHS is a good example of how to live off of the sacrifices, and the resulting social capital accumulation, of previous generations. But eating the seed corn of next years planting may not give you what you expect, or even what you need. Check the administrator-to-hospital-bed ratio of your NHS over the last 75 years - and then explain to me how those administrators have improved your health care.

    You have signed on to the societal organization that ensures substandard results. I am pleased to once again see the wisdom of our American Founding Fathers. Keep your socialized health care, and your soul-suffocating socialism to yourself.

    But hey, see if you can recruit to Britain the socialists that want to visit the stupidity of your system onto the American people; start with AndrewR and add 27-Year-Old, and Corvinus if you can.
    , @Charles Erwin Wilson II
    Fan == Fanatic, no?

    GB's NHS is a good example of how to live off of the sacrifices, and the resulting social capital accumulation, of previous generations. But eating the seed corn of next years planting may not give you what you expect, or even what you need. Check the administrator-to-hospital-bed ratio of your NHS over the last 75 years - and then explain to me how those administrators have improved your health care.

    You have signed on to the societal organization that ensures substandard results. I am pleased to once again see the wisdom of our American Founding Fathers. Keep your socialized health care, and your soul-suffocating socialism to yourself.

    But hey, see if you can recruit to Britain the socialists that want to visit the stupidity of your system onto the American people; start with AndrewR and add 27-Year-Old, and Corvinus if you can.
  4. Human population is an integral part of the environment. Anyone refusing to discuss human overpopulation should not be able to call themselves an environmental journalist.

    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    Nothing will get the space elevator constructed faster, than the threat of overpopulation.
    , @AM

    Human population is an integral part of the environment. Anyone refusing to discuss human overpopulation should not be able to call themselves an environmental journalist.
     
    Which highlights the point that modern environmental movements are essentially neo-Gnosticism.

    It isn't about the environment, it's about getting rid of all those evil, nasty people who are made of flesh (again.)

    This was never about population control either, because Westerners have only successful neutered themselves and those who enter into their societies (a process which takes a generation or so.)

    You want population control and nice environments?

    -Lower the West's standard of living. No fresh vegetables, less travel, no ski resorts, etc, etc.

    -Raise the West's day to day lifestyle. Get women to stay home. Less income, smaller houses, less travel, more sanity.

    -Spread the fear of God over Africa. They don't use birth control. Give it up. It's not happening. Only Westerners are quite so special needs as to completely divorce sex from children. You might however, convince the average African that God is watching and wishes them to properly take care of the children in monogamous, lifelong relationships. That real men stick around and raise their children and real women don't let themselves be doormats on the point.

    -Close all of the West's borders and allow only private charities to operate in Africa. No more large scale UN or foriegn aid, including meddling with reproductive habits.

    And almost everything I have stated would be anathema to average self proclaimed environmentalist concerned about populations.

    Which brings me back around to the idea that modern environmentalism is neo-Gnosticism in a green coat. Modern environmentalism has little or nothing to do with effective results, and everything to do with assuming that people are bad, which is why the average environmentalist is so wholly for open borders.

  5. In other words, the Pope was right about birth control?

    • Replies: @dearieme
    The Pope is never right about anything. It is his job to be wrong.
  6. In the DC suburb of Fairfax, Virginia, I grew up with kids in the 60s-70s that came from Catholic families of 12-18 kids. Hell, we were Waspy Scot/Half Greek (the good half Greek), and we had 7 in our family. Then the EPA got going, Green this-and-that and before you knew it, big families evil, small families good. And boy did the Western White comply. Unfortunately, the Public Service Message didn’t make it to India, HispanicLand, Africa, Paki-Whaki or anywhere in the Middle East at all.

    Of course, we put all our women to work, made Saints of slutty single mothers who mostly limited their numbers of spawn, except for the Blacks of course, who also didn’t get the message about smaller families. Here so we are, short of Whites, importing all else, including for the military. Everyone but White breed like rats..

    How’s that working for us? We have infrastructure to support, many problems to solve that don’t get solved by people we brought here from third-world countries, which is why those countries are third-world. Do the authors of any of this look at things and say, “Oooopsie!”?

    • Replies: @AM

    except for the Blacks of course, who also didn’t get the message about smaller families
     
    Your post is largely correct except for blacks. They're below replacement in the US and have been for sometime. That's why they're going to shrink as an overall percentage of the population.

    Child rearing is hard work. Once you get out the message that you can respectably have sex without children and children are actually bad anyway, it's not a hard sell.
    , @Ouzo 140 proof
    Your concerns are legitimate, fellow half-Greek, but otherwise you've got it wrong. Fertility rates have dropped dramatically all over the world, with the exception of SSA and Afghanistan/Iraq. Steve has written extensively on this.

    There's no conspiracy against the white race, however you define it, otherwise why would the 2nd+ generation immigrants' fertility rates to levels close to the host population in 1st world countries? And why would the African American population in the US (excluding black immigrants) stagnate?

    There's plenty other reasons why fertility rates drop and no nation or race is immune to it (excluding SSA countries for now, sure).

    Interesting stats:
    https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.TFRT.IN/?year_high_desc=true

    Even India's TFR has dropped to 2.4, and muslim countries' TFR keeps going down.
    , @Opinionator
    What does "the good half Greek" mean?
  7. He’s kicking the can down the road, so that he doesn’t have to get in the middle of what he considers a shitshow. Leaving a much bigger shitshow for posterity, while patting himself on the back, and telling himself he’s a “good person.” The idea of our somehow changing the culture of how men treat women in Liberia is infantile. They have road signs there saying, “Please, don’t rape,” for godssake.

    Closet nihilists never have a good plan for posterity.

    In any case, it’s better to tackle the problem of population now, and far more directly, than to wait until we’re severely lacking in resources here, and the last gorilla has coughed up his last breath in Africa.

    We’re debating about poor people’s right to fuck and have as many kids as they want.

    What community purpose does this serve in the long-run?

    We know limiting immigration limits population growth. We’ve done it before, and it worked well. We’ve never tried educating the world to empower women as equals to men. Why would we choose the latter strategy, when we’re under pressure now? If it doesn’t work, we’ll be under quadruple the pressure for resources, far more community strife, and tribal/political confusion and hatred.

    Essentially he’s indicating that we must empower women, and if we fail, we deserve what’s coming to us. But don’t forget to honor the Muslims, I would presume.

    The man is a nihilist. Nihilists should paint and write poetry. They don’t belong in the middle of public discourse. It never leads to any good.

  8. @Dan Hayes
    Steve,

    What was not reported in the Vox article was the real reason why the "green anti-immigration" Sierra Club movement was defeated. That was the 100 million dollar "donation" by Wall Street fat cat David Gelbaum in 2000-2001. Gelbaum essentially made the SC an offer they couldn't refuse.

    Steve reported it years ago.

    • Replies: @conatus
    What's wrong with repeating the story of David Gelbaum buying the Sierra Club's silence?
    from here:
    https://www.noozhawk.com/article/021712_joe_guzzardi_sierra_club


    "But the biggest donation the Sierra Club ever received is the one that altered it forever. In 2004, the Los Angeles Times revealed a $100 million gift made by investor David Gelbaum. Unfortunately for environmentalists, Gelbaum’s money came with the string attached that the club never speak out against or try to limit immigration into the United States no matter how obvious it became that adding more people has severe ecological consequences."

    This is representative of our entire public forum. Money buys silence and the Legacy Frog looks warily around at the demographic changes occurring, as Froggy notices the water getting ever so slightly hotter in the frying pan called the USA.
    And nobody says anything.

    , @Mr. Anon

    Steve reported it years ago.
     
    Much as I like it, Steve's blog is not a widely influential national news source. There's a big difference between Steve reporting it and the New York Times reporting it.
  9. I thought I would explain, once and for all, why I hardly ever talk about population, and why I’m unlikely to in the future. …

    When political movements or leaders adopt population control as a central concern … let’s just say it never goes well. In practice, where you find concern over “population,” you very often find racism, xenophobia, or eugenics lurking in the wings.

    I’m willing to bet money that this guy is a good liberal who favors legal abortion for white women, though.

    • Replies: @Fredrik
    Unlike conservatives who oppose them for black women.

    And black women are much, much more likely to have abortions...
  10. History is replete with examples, but perhaps the most germane recent episode was less than 20 years ago, at the Sierra Club, which was riven by divisions over immigration.

    germane
    riven
    replete
    = gay as Ungaro spring frock

    • Replies: @dearieme
    gay because he's got a decent vocabulary? Are you a neanderthal with a chip on your shoulder?
  11. @Tsar Nicholas
    I am a fan of Britain's National Health Service. I can go to the doctor when ever I need to, and I don't have to worry about awkward, criminal insurance companies or the prospect of bankruptcy.

    However, I find myself completly out-of-step with those on the Left who berate the Evil Tories for not providing enough money to cope with "rising demand."

    What accounts for this risng demand? Well, it may advances in medical technology. I suspect more likely it is down to Coca-Cola and MacDonalds, and the poor health outcomes associated with consuming their products. However, it is completely verboten for anybody to mention the other obvious fact - rising population, almost entirely explained by immigration.

    I am a fan of Britain’s National Health Service. I can go to the doctor when ever I need to, and I don’t have to worry about awkward, criminal insurance companies or the prospect of bankruptcy.

    I would claim that Britain’s pointed lack of innovation and entrepreneurship is directly related to the fact that they tax the living shit out anyone who makes significant money. Your ability to manufacture is for shit. You can’t even make a decent automobile. I mean, what the fuck do you folks even do that carries any global impact. Last time I was in an electronics store, most of your stuff sucked ass. Going to an average grocery store, or electronics store is like a 1950’s version of an American one. The packaging of your grocery items is old fashioned and stupid. You can’t even make a milkshake. It’s like a special item, if you can find it.

    Stop trying to brag about anything contemporary and British. Your political system sucks ass. You finally got your wits about you with Brexit, but it’s too little, too late. You’re a cultural and demographic dead man walking. The first thing any successful entertainer does when they hit pay dirt is to get the hell out of your country.

    By the way, the mean little fat fuck you’re so proud of, Winston Churchill, tricked us into getting involved in a stupid civil war he helped to orchestrate, and for what? What did all the Americans die for? On those fucking beaches Hitler ran your silly asses off of at the get-go? So you could establish a Muslim Caliphate that used to be London? And who pays to defend your country now, when push comes to shove?

    WE do. If you had to pay for a military that wasn’t a joke, your “free” health benefits would not be free.

    And speaking of your great insurance that you’re taxed up the ass for, many of your inhabitants teeth are still atrocious. Out in your hinterlands, Brits can still be found with giant misshapen heads, under serviced jawlines, and every other manifestation of concentrated inbreeding, even after all these years.

    In short, you’ve been a bunch of fucking two-faced assholes since 1770’s, and your shit hasn’t changed.

    So… quit trying to feed our sociopath liberals blank ammunition by bragging about your stupid insurance plans. Your country is on welfare. We’re carrying your fat brit asses.

    Shut up, and show some respect.

    • Agree: Jack Hanson
    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    "Britain’s pointed lack of innovation and entrepreneurship is directly related to the fact that they tax the living shit out anyone who makes significant money. "

    You're out of date.

    Top income tax rate is 45% as compared to US 39.6%.

    Top Capital Gains is the same in both countries, though the UK one kicks in at a much lower gain.

    On the other hand, people in private equity i.e. the UK equivalent of KKR etc only pay 10% capital gains, making PE the way to get very rich. So buy a company at £100 million, sweat assets and staff, sell at £200 million, that's £90m in your back pocket after the "Entrepreneurs Relief" capital gains tax.

    There are other ways of not paying - Philip Green, wealthy retail owner, has a wife resident in Monaco who owns all his shares - not tax at all AFAIK on dividends remitted there. The Duke of Westminster own half of London, but when a duke dies his heirs pay very little "inheritance tax" (40% for lesser mortals) thanks to a collection of perfectly legal trusts.

    "You can’t even make a decent automobile."

    Having owned both Chryslers and Toyotas, I wouldn't start chucking those particular rocks.
    , @Harold
    Britain is in much better demographic shape than America.
    , @Lurker

    The packaging of your grocery items is old fashioned and stupid.
     
    I'm fascinated by this phrase, can you give any examples or specific comparisons?
    , @Big Bill
    Two words: "Ariel Atom".

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbsYPXAJhxU
    , @Big Bill
    Two words: "Ariel Atom".

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbsYPXAJhxU
    , @Big Bill
    Two words: "Ariel Atom".

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbsYPXAJhxU
    , @bomag
    This needs a LOL and Agree button.
    , @oddsbodkins

    By the way, the mean little fat fuck you’re so proud of, Winston Churchill, tricked us into getting involved in a stupid civil war he helped to orchestrate, and for what?
     
    That's Pat Buchanan talking. Why is it that he considers Germany threatened by encirclement in 1914, but proposes that Britain accept encirclement in the summer of 1940?
    , @Tsar Nicholas
    @Unclesam

    The NHS doesn't require the British people to have the shit taxed out of them. European health systems in general are cheaper than the American one because they not only have to pay dividends to shareholders, but they also lack that element of racketeering characteristic of health provision in the United States.

    But you make the same error that many commit when talking of public debt. Yes, it may be bad to have a large public sector deficit, but it doesn't do any good if you simply shift that debt over to private individuals, as with tuition fees and the ready availablity of credit to make up for low wages. Similarly, you have to pay for healthcare unless you are willing to die of minor illnesses or endure pain for no good reason. But paying through the nose to a private insurer who just wants to rip you off seems to be the worst possible way to go about financing your medical sector, rather like scrapping the police and putting public protection in the hands of the Mafia.
  12. @Verymuchalive
    Human population is an integral part of the environment. Anyone refusing to discuss human overpopulation should not be able to call themselves an environmental journalist.

    Nothing will get the space elevator constructed faster, than the threat of overpopulation.

    • Replies: @jamie b.
    You envision tens of millions of humans being shipped off to lifeless Mars?
    , @Thea
    I'm not a physicist but I think the earth's mass needs to be within a certain range. If make things and ship them and a bunch of people to Mars or wherever, we'll have issues here.
    , @Henry Bowman
    How are adding millions more 65 IQ africans going to make that possible again?
  13. @Tsar Nicholas
    I am a fan of Britain's National Health Service. I can go to the doctor when ever I need to, and I don't have to worry about awkward, criminal insurance companies or the prospect of bankruptcy.

    However, I find myself completly out-of-step with those on the Left who berate the Evil Tories for not providing enough money to cope with "rising demand."

    What accounts for this risng demand? Well, it may advances in medical technology. I suspect more likely it is down to Coca-Cola and MacDonalds, and the poor health outcomes associated with consuming their products. However, it is completely verboten for anybody to mention the other obvious fact - rising population, almost entirely explained by immigration.

    I can go to the doctor when ever I need to

    It takes me two weeks to get a ten minute appointment with my GP and then she will never refer me to a hospital unless I am in a critical state.

  14. The leftist propaganda pieces often begin with “Here’s why” or “Here’s what you need to know.”. I find it quite irritating.

    • Agree: Kylie
  15. “”””A group of grassroots members, with some help from powerful funders, attempted to take over the national organization.

    These members advocated sharply restricting immigration, saying the US should be reducing rather than increasing its population. …

    The Sierra Club won that fight,”””

    Great job in rewriting history. As pointed out above the most powerful funder was David Gelbaum and his $100 million for open borders.

    And since Sierra Club pretends to be a member run organization wouldn’t the have “won that fight” if the open borders types had won or lost?

    • Replies: @another fred
    IIRC, one of the founders of the Sierra Club left the organization because they accepted this "donation."
    , @Alden
    A Jew, why am I not surprised? Their names are all over everything bad that has happened to America since around 1910.
  16. @YetAnotherAnon
    In the UK, the "Green" Party wants effectively open borders. Here's the 2015 manifesto. Remember the current system, which has produced a situation where 30% of primary schoolkids are "minority", is apparently too cruel!

    "Some controls on immigration will be needed for the foreseeable future; for now, we reject an open borders approach. We also reject the imposition of an arbitrary numerical cap on net migration. The latter in particular is impossible to achieve (especially given that there is no control on the numbers emigrating) and leads to many individual injustices.

    Any controls must respect the following principles:
    • Mutual legal obligations within the EU on freedom of movement.
    • International obligations to accept refugees, whether seeking sanctuary from wars, political repression or climate change.
    • Respect for the integrity of families. The arrival of a grandmother might well have no direct economic effect, but her contribution to family life may contribute hugely to our society. We would in particular–abolish the policy that requires a British citizen to have an income of at least £18,600 a year before their partner can come to live in the UK, which discriminates against poorer people ,–make it much easier for adult dependants, mainly elderly parents, of British citizens to come and live here.
    • No restrictions on foreign students. Foreign students contribute hugely to our education system, both financially and in terms of the wider perspectives they bring. They also take back to their home countries skills that they have learnt here that will be valuable at home and positive attitudes towards the UK. In particular we would–allow students to work in the UK for two years after graduation;–widen the Youth Mobility Scheme to allow those from poorer countries to participate.
    • No priority simply for economic reasons. We would in particular aim to retain more of those trained in the UK in the health service so that we have less need to take health service workers from countries that can ill afford to lose them.

    We would also:
    • Review the rules for those wishing to set up or do business here to ensure they are not discriminatory against smaller businesses.
    • Not simply accept people just because they are rich. The London housing market in particular has been gravely distorted by the number of rich migrants buying property, bidding up prices all along the housing chain.
    • Ensure that no prospective immigrant is held in detention. As a matter of urgency, the administrative detention of children and pregnant women should cease immediately.
    • Review the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, particularly with regard to issues of access to legal advice, childcare and levels of subsistence allowance, and reintroduce Legal Aid for reasonable levels of immigration and asylum work.

    In addition, once immigrants have arrived, we would:
    • Assist integration by making available free or affordable English or Welsh language lessons to all new immigrants who want them, costing about £200 million a year.
    • Open up ways for existing irregular migrants who have been here for three years to become legal. In particular, a legal status must be provided for people who have not succeeded in their claim for humanitarian protection but who cannot be returned to their country of origin owing to the political situation there."
     
    Incidentally the UK Green Party's 2010 manifesto was written by a professor at Keele University, who resigned his post after being convicted of various charges. Not a story that I heard on the BBC.

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/renowned-academic-government-advisor-who-9655870

    "A renowned academic, Government advisor and former Green Party Parliamentary candidate had sexually explicit chats with underage girls and downloaded images of child abuse."
     

    Assist integration by making available free or affordable English or Welsh language lessons to all new immigrants who want them, costing about £200 million a year.

    Integrating into what? From what I see, British culture consists of accommodating Pakistani rape squads and other foreign vibrancy. I wasn’t aware of any language barrier.

    Weird that such a manifesto would give a dollar figure.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    ...costing about £200 million a year.

    Weird that such a manifesto would give a dollar figure.
     
    Looks like a sterling figure to me.

    Either way, it $u¢k$, and they can go to he££.
  17. @Unladen Swallow
    Steve reported it years ago.

    What’s wrong with repeating the story of David Gelbaum buying the Sierra Club’s silence?
    from here:
    https://www.noozhawk.com/article/021712_joe_guzzardi_sierra_club

    “But the biggest donation the Sierra Club ever received is the one that altered it forever. In 2004, the Los Angeles Times revealed a $100 million gift made by investor David Gelbaum. Unfortunately for environmentalists, Gelbaum’s money came with the string attached that the club never speak out against or try to limit immigration into the United States no matter how obvious it became that adding more people has severe ecological consequences.”

    This is representative of our entire public forum. Money buys silence and the Legacy Frog looks warily around at the demographic changes occurring, as Froggy notices the water getting ever so slightly hotter in the frying pan called the USA.
    And nobody says anything.

    • Agree: Dan Hayes, Frau Katze
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Why didn't the "green anti-immigrant" faction of the Sierra Club break off and form a new group?
    , @dfordoom

    Money buys silence
     
    Environmentalism has nothing to do with the environment. It's all about money. If you want a share of the money and we're talking a lot of money here) you stick to the party line or you miss out.
  18. @Hippopotamusdrome
    In other words, the Pope was right about birth control?

    The Pope is never right about anything. It is his job to be wrong.

    • LOL: Alden
    • Replies: @Neuday

    The Pope is never right about anything. It is his job to be wrong.
     
    NAPALT
  19. When political movements or leaders adopt population control as a central concern … let’s just say it never goes well. In practice, where you find concern over “population,” you very often find racism, xenophobia, or eugenics lurking in the wings. …

    It appears that Mexico et al’s population control consists of shipping a significant number of their people to the US where they could practice racism; xenophobia; and eugenics.

    So, predictably, our Vox friend might not be interested in the distasteful aspects of immigration policy; but the distasteful aspects of immigration policy are interested in him.

  20. @Clyde
    History is replete with examples, but perhaps the most germane recent episode was less than 20 years ago, at the Sierra Club, which was riven by divisions over immigration.

    germane
    riven
    replete
    = gay as Ungaro spring frock

    gay because he’s got a decent vocabulary? Are you a neanderthal with a chip on your shoulder?

    • Agree: MBlanc46
    • Disagree: Abe
    • Replies: @psmith
    strong user name to post content ratio in your comment fam
    , @International Jew

    Are you a neanderthal with a chip on your shoulder?
     
    He's from the future:
    https://youtu.be/A6CZ2J8gJtk
    , @Langley
    If humans can already detect peoples agendas in their writing - why not other behaviors/intentions?

    If computers can scan pictures of faces to determine sexual preference why not have them scan peoples writing?

    I have been re-reading Philip K. Dick recently. Scary world we are building.
    , @guest
    There are people who associate high culture as such with homosexuality, not entirely without foundation. But for this poster I assume it's not so much about the decentness of his vocabulary, nor that the words are relatively obscure, nor that he uses them correctly. The above poster finds a patter in the quality of the words. They sound not merely intellectual and recondite, but distinctly like something a gay man would say.

    Much like you might guess a person is Catholic because he uses words found in the Bible, the catechism, and the writings of St. Thomas. Or if you guessed a writer is a military man because he uses military terminology. Faggy words in the context of this article are subtler to detect. Unless the author throws in finger-snaps and the word "breeder."

  21. No one wants to talk about 8 billion people industrializing using the most pollution-intensive methods possible? How many billions of tons of GHGs will be released just by cement production alone?

  22. As pointed out in the article, fertility declines with wealth. Therefore the simple solution is to make everyone rich. Making everyone rich is simple, just give everybody money.

    Problem solved.

    /Do I need one? Really?

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
    Would be nice if we could give the money while they're still over there, but the criminal elite are hell-bent to bring them over here and then give them our money. They really do hate us.
  23. @DJF
    """"A group of grassroots members, with some help from powerful funders, attempted to take over the national organization.

    These members advocated sharply restricting immigration, saying the US should be reducing rather than increasing its population. …

    The Sierra Club won that fight,"""

    Great job in rewriting history. As pointed out above the most powerful funder was David Gelbaum and his $100 million for open borders.

    And since Sierra Club pretends to be a member run organization wouldn't the have "won that fight" if the open borders types had won or lost?

    IIRC, one of the founders of the Sierra Club left the organization because they accepted this “donation.”

  24. “I’m an environmental journalist, but I never write about overpopulation. Here’s why.”

    “I like being able to eat and pay my rent.”

    “Thank you.”

    • LOL: Nico, TWS
  25. If these climate change alarmists actually believed that we’re decades away from making the planet uninhabitable, you think they’d start talking about population growth. Unless they truly think that the death of the entire human species is better than allowing”racism.”

    • Agree: bomag, NickG
    • Replies: @AKAHorace

    If these climate change alarmists actually believed that we’re decades away from making the planet uninhabitable, you think they’d start talking about population growth. Unless they truly think that the death of the entire human species is better than allowing”racism.”
     
    It is also energetically cheaper to live in warm climates where heating and insulation is not necessary. So they would encourage people from Northern countries to move closer to the equator, the reverse of what is happening now.
    , @Thomas

    Unless they truly think that the death of the entire human species is better than allowing”racism.”
     
    John Derbyshire has called this trait among leftists “better dead than rude.” (Echoing “better dead than red.”)
    , @whorefinder
    It's how you know the vast majority of them don't believe in global warming/climate change, but instead use it as a convenient excuse to gain power to control people and do things they wanted to do anyway.

    Much like how you can tell most Kennedy Conspiracy authors don't actually believe their own nonsense, because almost none of them posit falsifiable alternative hypotheses stating who, what, when, where, why, and how beyond vague assertions that "the man on the grassy knoll" and "the CIA and the mob" did it. OPEN YOUR EYES, SHEEPLE!
    , @AnotherDad

    If these climate change alarmists actually believed that we’re decades away from making the planet uninhabitable, you think they’d start talking about population growth.
     
    and nuclear power.

    If you really believe we have a crisis of civilization, then concerns about nuclear waste--which you can easily mix into glass and drop into the ocean at a subduction zone to be recycled by the earth--would be small beer. Managing proliferation as well.

    Basically you have carbon free energy source that is proven to work. If you believe there an existential CO2 driven crisis, you'd want to scale it up to save the planet. Unless ... this is about something else entirely.
  26. @Verymuchalive
    Human population is an integral part of the environment. Anyone refusing to discuss human overpopulation should not be able to call themselves an environmental journalist.

    Human population is an integral part of the environment. Anyone refusing to discuss human overpopulation should not be able to call themselves an environmental journalist.

    Which highlights the point that modern environmental movements are essentially neo-Gnosticism.

    It isn’t about the environment, it’s about getting rid of all those evil, nasty people who are made of flesh (again.)

    This was never about population control either, because Westerners have only successful neutered themselves and those who enter into their societies (a process which takes a generation or so.)

    You want population control and nice environments?

    -Lower the West’s standard of living. No fresh vegetables, less travel, no ski resorts, etc, etc.

    -Raise the West’s day to day lifestyle. Get women to stay home. Less income, smaller houses, less travel, more sanity.

    -Spread the fear of God over Africa. They don’t use birth control. Give it up. It’s not happening. Only Westerners are quite so special needs as to completely divorce sex from children. You might however, convince the average African that God is watching and wishes them to properly take care of the children in monogamous, lifelong relationships. That real men stick around and raise their children and real women don’t let themselves be doormats on the point.

    -Close all of the West’s borders and allow only private charities to operate in Africa. No more large scale UN or foriegn aid, including meddling with reproductive habits.

    And almost everything I have stated would be anathema to average self proclaimed environmentalist concerned about populations.

    Which brings me back around to the idea that modern environmentalism is neo-Gnosticism in a green coat. Modern environmentalism has little or nothing to do with effective results, and everything to do with assuming that people are bad, which is why the average environmentalist is so wholly for open borders.

    • Replies: @Issac
    I'm not sure Gnostic is an apt descriptor. Gnostics think the world itself is a demonic imposition. They'd be just as apt to kill themselves as to wade in on matters of the environment. The Open Border Greens are probably best described as cowards with a nature fetish. Fervent enough to make life hellish for the responsible denizens of the first world who are insufficiently fetishist for nature. Cowardly enough not to promote those same hellish standards to anyone else, lest they be indicted for wrong-think.
    , @MBlanc46
    Leave the Africans to live as they choose. But keep them confined to Africa.
  27. Another one to add to Der List, along with the article slandering Miller!

  28. When reading the history of the French Revolution one is struck by the realization that, in the lead up, Louis XVI understood and anticipated that something was very wrong in the kingdom. What took him down was his refusal to imagine, until he was forced, that it might be possible to break the Fundamental Laws on the separation of the chambers of the Estates General. Having this failed to convince the newly emerged body politic of his magnanimity, he arguably sealed the fate of his reign and indeed of the French throne by the end of June 1789.

    But if Louis XVI’s failure to master the harness of the forces of history can be traced to his failure to acknowledge in a timely manner the magnitude of what was brewing beneath, I see little or no evidence that he ever intentionally covered his eyes to political realities. That is at least more than I can say for modern American liberalism as exemplified by the bloke Sailer cites here.

  29. The so-called “environmentalist movement” is bought and paid for. The Sierra Club sold their soul to a California Jew who made sure immigration was not connected to environmental degradation. Harvey Weinstein is not the only California Jew who is a disgusting nation-wrecker and sicko.

    I wrote this in 2013:

    NH Sen. Jeanne Shaheen and the Sierra Club have combined in an environment-destroying effort to flood the U.S. with 30 million immigrants over the next 10 years.

    Shaheen was tireless in her toil to pass the OBAMA/SHAHEEN/RUBIO illegal alien amnesty–mass immigration surge bill(S.744). On April 25, 2013, the Sierra Club added their support for the 30 million immigrant mass movement of foreigners into the U.S. The bill passed the U.S. Senate in June.

    Why would Shaheen and the Sierra Club favor the importation of 30 million foreigners into the U.S. over the next decade? Greed, greed, and more filthy greed is the answer.

    Shaheen is a bought and paid for puppet of billionaires. The billionaires want to destroy nation-states. Mass immigration is the weapon billionaire-controlled stooges like Shaheen are using to crush the historic and traditional U.S.

    The Sierra Club is now an evil front group for billionaires who use fake environmental propaganda as a smokescreen to cover their sovereignty-sapping agenda of transnationalism. The plutocrats want to pulverize the very concept of the nation-state by pushing globalizer themes of “global warming” and allusions to a “global bio-sphere.”

    The corruption of the Sierra Club was complete about 20 years ago. David Gelbaum, a wealthy Wall Street financier, made it clear that environmentally-friendly immigration restrictionism was to be suppressed at the Sierra Club. Carl Pope, Sierra Club executive director at the time, cravenly capitulated to the command.

    Kenneth R. Weiss, in an October 27 2004 LA Times article “The Man Behind the Land,” quotes Gelbaum as saying, “I did tell Carl Pope in 1994 or 1995 that if they(Sierra Club) ever came out anti-immigration, they would never get a dollar from me.”

    Gelbaum purchased the open-border immigration policy position of the Sierra Club for about $100 million.

    • Replies: @lavoisier
    And Carl Pope and the leadership of the Sierra Club will be forever known as whores without any integrity.

    Quite a high price to pay for that 100 million dollars.
  30. @Tsar Nicholas
    I am a fan of Britain's National Health Service. I can go to the doctor when ever I need to, and I don't have to worry about awkward, criminal insurance companies or the prospect of bankruptcy.

    However, I find myself completly out-of-step with those on the Left who berate the Evil Tories for not providing enough money to cope with "rising demand."

    What accounts for this risng demand? Well, it may advances in medical technology. I suspect more likely it is down to Coca-Cola and MacDonalds, and the poor health outcomes associated with consuming their products. However, it is completely verboten for anybody to mention the other obvious fact - rising population, almost entirely explained by immigration.

    The UK National Health Service is a mixed bag. It’s very much a postcode lottery. I’m in leafy Surrey and can see the NHS doctor the same day. In other areas you can wait two weeks.

    I’ve this very day had my second cataract op on the NHS after about a 4 month wait since going to the GP, that’s pretty good (I’m young at 57 for the Op, likely due to some combination of genetic pre-disposition and decades in sunny climes). My optometrist told me some NHS areas have a much longer wait and some will only do the cataract on one eye on the NHS.

    My experience in South Africa on an insurance based system is perhaps better, though secondary care there – nursing – is getting iffy, seemingly because of race preference hiring practices in nursing. I have heard of UK patients on waiting lists going to SA to have procedures and billing the NHS.

    NHS cases pay for quick ops in South Africa

    • Replies: @David Davenport
    I’ve this very day had my second cataract op on the NHS after about a 4 month wait since going to the GP, that’s pretty good (I’m young at 57 for the Op, likely due to some combination of genetic pre-disposition and decades in sunny climes). My optometrist told me some NHS areas have a much longer wait and some will only do the cataract on one eye on the NHS.

    What replacement intraocular lenses did they implant? If your answer is, "Dunno, whatever the doc said or whatever the NHS uses," that does not speak well for the NHS.

    Did they tell you you your new IOL's would not require you to wear glasses, at least for distance vision? Or did the NHS say "Sorry, you'll need to wear glasses for both distance and near vision after cataract surgery?

    I suspect that the NHS implanted poor man's replacement lenses in your eyes. Don't despair, those lenses could be exchanged for better lenses -- But your NHS won't do that.

  31. Add environmentalism to the list of things the anti-White left has kicked to the curb to pursue its real goals. Welcome, environmentalism, to the same club as workers’ rights, affordable housing, safe communities, national sovereignty, and women’s rights. Suicide pills are available in the corner.

    • Agree: Thea, AndrewR
    • Replies: @Thea
    Brilliant!

    Also education and peace can join that club.
  32. @Tsar Nicholas
    I am a fan of Britain's National Health Service. I can go to the doctor when ever I need to, and I don't have to worry about awkward, criminal insurance companies or the prospect of bankruptcy.

    However, I find myself completly out-of-step with those on the Left who berate the Evil Tories for not providing enough money to cope with "rising demand."

    What accounts for this risng demand? Well, it may advances in medical technology. I suspect more likely it is down to Coca-Cola and MacDonalds, and the poor health outcomes associated with consuming their products. However, it is completely verboten for anybody to mention the other obvious fact - rising population, almost entirely explained by immigration.

    NHS wonderful? yeah right. and its not just populations size, here in usa we keep tabs on things by race and its population quality non whites are like ten times more unhealthy

  33. @Tsar Nicholas
    I am a fan of Britain's National Health Service. I can go to the doctor when ever I need to, and I don't have to worry about awkward, criminal insurance companies or the prospect of bankruptcy.

    However, I find myself completly out-of-step with those on the Left who berate the Evil Tories for not providing enough money to cope with "rising demand."

    What accounts for this risng demand? Well, it may advances in medical technology. I suspect more likely it is down to Coca-Cola and MacDonalds, and the poor health outcomes associated with consuming their products. However, it is completely verboten for anybody to mention the other obvious fact - rising population, almost entirely explained by immigration.

    I am a fan of Britain’s National Health Service.

    You probably shouldn’t, compared to other countries in Western Europe Britain’s health system seems to be pretty bad. It’s bizarre how it has been quasi-sacralized in British public discourse (e.g. the horrible opening ceremony of the 2012 Olympics).

    • Replies: @AM

    It’s bizarre how it has been quasi-sacralized in British public discourse (e.g. the horrible opening ceremony of the 2012 Olympics).
     
    Whatever the NHS is, it has become the unifying project of living Brits. Farage actually used the inability to properly manage the NHS as an argument against immigration. I remember think the speech was spot on until he got to that point and I thought What???
    , @whorefinder
    The Left has realized that if you stick a government program in there long enough, it will eventually become too entrenched to be removed. Hence why no one outside of a few Cato Institute wackos talk about repealing social security in the U.S., despite the program being a huge drag and boondoggle. The Left has tried this with Obama care, which is less than a decade old, and the arguments are still having the effect.

    Too bad, because all government welfare programs are bad and make the people weaker. NHS is a prime example: it's pure socialism that has made the British people incredibly dependent.
  34. @Tsar Nicholas
    I am a fan of Britain's National Health Service. I can go to the doctor when ever I need to, and I don't have to worry about awkward, criminal insurance companies or the prospect of bankruptcy.

    However, I find myself completly out-of-step with those on the Left who berate the Evil Tories for not providing enough money to cope with "rising demand."

    What accounts for this risng demand? Well, it may advances in medical technology. I suspect more likely it is down to Coca-Cola and MacDonalds, and the poor health outcomes associated with consuming their products. However, it is completely verboten for anybody to mention the other obvious fact - rising population, almost entirely explained by immigration.

    Increased demand from immigration is part of the problem, but decreased supply is another major problem in many parts of the country. The NHS meets the supply/demand imbalance in some ways by importing a large number of doctors, paraprofessionals, and nurses from the third world, and it is increasingly showing in the decline of knowledge, skills and abilities of its human capital as well as a significant decline in the cleanliness and safety of its facilities.

    If you have a good GP who has clean offices, good on you mate… chances are he or she is a contractor … but an increasing number of your fellow country mates are being killed, maimed and sickened by the NHS every day.

    • Replies: @Lurker

    The NHS meets the supply/demand imbalance in some ways by importing a large number of doctors, paraprofessionals, and nurses from the third world, and it is increasingly showing in the decline of knowledge, skills and abilities of its human capital as well as a significant decline in the cleanliness and safety of its facilities.
     
    I'm sure there is a story to be written about the key role the NHS has played in the immigration disaster.

    I've taken friends to a couple of private hospitals recently. At one the only diversity visible were the hot Polish nurses. At the other I also saw an Asian bloke who seemed to work there. While everyone waiting in reception seemed to be white/white British.

    I suspect there is some sort of white flight from the NHS underway, the immigrants who staff it treat other immigrants. Eventually we could reach a theoretical point where no natives are involved at all. Apart from paying for it of course.
  35. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    OT:

    Man charged in U. Maryland swastika vandalism is black former UMD employee

    https://www.thecollegefix.com/post/37909/

    You wouldn’t know it by reading news from the University of Maryland or its student newspaper, but the suspect charged in connection with a spray-painted swastika on campus is … African-American.

    Back on October 6 the campus paper The Diamondback reported the following:

    Police issued Ronald Alford, 52, from Hyattsville a criminal summons for one count of malicious destruction of property and one count of disturbing the operations of a school, according to a news release. He was served the summons on Thursday and issued a denial of access to the campus.

    Local news reported much the same. Ditto the Associated Press, although it added that public and court records had no phone number or attorney listed on Alford’s behalf.

    A Diamondback story from three days ago adds to the tale, noting (only) that Alford is an ex-employee of the university:

    The man University of Maryland Police identified and charged with malicious destruction of property after a swastika was spray-painted on a campus trash cart last month is a former employee at this university. …

    Alford is no longer an employee at this university, spokeswoman Jessica Jennings wrote in a statement.

    “Diversity and inclusion are core values of our institution, and these values will and must be upheld,” the statement read. “We are currently leading forward a campus-wide action plan to combat hate and create a safer campus for all.”

    Indeed. U. Maryland has been quite busy “combatting hate” — in the form of ditching the state song due to its connections to the Confederacy, responding to student demands to deal with “hate speech,” and students even demanding “hate speech” be classified as a cult activity.

  36. @another fred
    As pointed out in the article, fertility declines with wealth. Therefore the simple solution is to make everyone rich. Making everyone rich is simple, just give everybody money.

    Problem solved.

    /Do I need one? Really?

    Would be nice if we could give the money while they’re still over there, but the criminal elite are hell-bent to bring them over here and then give them our money. They really do hate us.

  37. History is replete with examples, but perhaps the most germane recent episode was less than 20 years ago, at the Sierra Club, which was riven by divisions over immigration. A group of grassroots members, with some help from powerful funders, attempted to take over the national organization.

    That’s an inversion of the actual history, amounting to an outright lie, is it not? It was a powerful funder, David Gelbaum, who persuaded the Sierra Club with a $100 million gift to drop any mention of immigration.

    • Replies: @ben tillman
    Yes, it is lie that would have given Pinocchio a nose 9 miles long.
  38. When you look back on the annals of history, you find that the most dastardly thing Hitler ever did was to restrict immigration into Germany.

    • Replies: @Peter Akuleyev
    When you look back on the annals of history, you find that the most dastardly thing Hitler ever did was to restrict immigration into Germany

    The irony is that Hitler had to import millions of Poles, Russians, French, etc. into Germany to keep the war machine going. By 1945 there were more "immigrants" living in Germany as a percentage of population than you would find today. And they weren't all POWs - thousands of Polish civilian young women were brought to Germany to works as nannies, cleaning women, or just in factories. The Nazis actually set the precedent for the Gastarbeiter programs of the 1960s, at least as far as getting Germans accustomed to the idea of importing foreigners to work in their factories or as domestics.
  39. Xenophobia and racism are intellectual leprosy.

    “I would criticize immigration and overpopulation if I were intellectually honest and consistent, but then I might be exposed to leprosy.”

    “Now the leper on whom the sore is, his clothes shall be torn and his head bare; and he shall cover his mustache, and cry, ‘Unclean! Unclean!’ 46 He shall be unclean. All the days he has the sore he shall be unclean. He is unclean, and he shall dwell alone; his dwelling shall be outside the camp.

  40. @Unladen Swallow
    Steve reported it years ago.

    Steve reported it years ago.

    Much as I like it, Steve’s blog is not a widely influential national news source. There’s a big difference between Steve reporting it and the New York Times reporting it.

    • Replies: @whorefinder

    Steve’s blog is not a widely influential national news source.
     
    False. Steve is incredibly influential. Many NR-type cucks come here on the sly to get some truth before they go back to shilling for their corporate masters, and race-realist lefties such as little Matty Yglesias are also lurking here, vacuuming up race realism before they have to go back to pretending race doesn't exist. (Yglesias in particular lurks here a bunch, due to the fact that he was personally subject to a racial knockout game attack by blacks in Washington, D.C.)

    It takes a bit, but many of Steve's ideas eventually get into the bigger corporate media, though with enough time and change of wording as to make sure there's plausible deniability that they read such a "racist." Ross Douthat and David Brooks are prime examples.
  41. I love this quote from the article:

    Tackling population growth can be done without the enormous, unnecessary risks involved in talking about population growth.[emphasis in article]

    Because, of course, that strategy has worked great so far. Just look at the graphs! Who’s afraid of an exponential curve?

    Really, that quote is our modern left in a nutshell. He just used his outside voice, against their rules.

    • Replies: @res

    Because, of course, that strategy has worked great so far.
     
    I know. Isn't everyone aware that the the best approach to solving problems is not to talk about them.
  42. If you can stomach it, watch this entire segment with Tucker Carlson of Fox News — it hits all the usual notes, culminating in an interview with some professor who wrote a book about reducing immigration for environmental reasons.

    “If you can stomach it”.

    Somebody saying bad things about immigration………….how sickening! Tucker Carlson – my God – he’s practically Julius Streicher.

    Somebody get David Roberts some smelling salts. He’s got the vapors.

    • Replies: @MBlanc46
    Leave the Africans to live as they choose. But keep them confined to Africa.
    , @MBlanc46
    “Literally Julius Streicher!” I’m sure we’ll be hearing that before long.
  43. In the video above, what’s with the flag-wearing puppy icon in the lower right? At 2:00 this image moves toward the middle of the screen and become larger, then disappears from the middle of the screen. What’s that all about?

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
    That was superimposed on the YouTube video by the poster, who goes by the name The Liberty Hound.
  44. @conatus
    What's wrong with repeating the story of David Gelbaum buying the Sierra Club's silence?
    from here:
    https://www.noozhawk.com/article/021712_joe_guzzardi_sierra_club


    "But the biggest donation the Sierra Club ever received is the one that altered it forever. In 2004, the Los Angeles Times revealed a $100 million gift made by investor David Gelbaum. Unfortunately for environmentalists, Gelbaum’s money came with the string attached that the club never speak out against or try to limit immigration into the United States no matter how obvious it became that adding more people has severe ecological consequences."

    This is representative of our entire public forum. Money buys silence and the Legacy Frog looks warily around at the demographic changes occurring, as Froggy notices the water getting ever so slightly hotter in the frying pan called the USA.
    And nobody says anything.

    Why didn’t the “green anti-immigrant” faction of the Sierra Club break off and form a new group?

    • Replies: @Alden
    They turned to vdare.com But there really is no funding for anti immigration lobbies because all the government, charity* and corporate donors plus people who could afford a few thousand a year are all for unlimited non White immigration.
    * charities aka scam artists and con men aka non profit pimps.
  45. @dearieme
    gay because he's got a decent vocabulary? Are you a neanderthal with a chip on your shoulder?

    strong user name to post content ratio in your comment fam

  46. This is example eleventy billion that Progressivism is a religion, not a political ideology. He’s not avoiding the population issue because it is not germane. He avoids it because he fears it could lead to heresy. Like all virtuous Progs, this guy believes mentioning population will lead to xenophobia, eugenics and the 12th Invisible Hitler emerging to impose the Fourth Reich.

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    "Like all virtuous Progs, this guy believes mentioning population will lead to xenophobia, eugenics and the 12th Invisible Hitler emerging to impose the Fourth Reich."

    That means that, for Hidden Hitler to emerge from occultation, there must be (or have been) 10 other Hitlers since the first, and at the rate I've been reading about "the new Hitler" we must be going through them fast.

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

    Saddam I'm pretty sure was the new Hitler, George Bush II was, Trump definitely is - that's three. Is Assad?

    I bet Nasser was the new Hitler back in the day. Any other candidates?
    , @BenKenobi
    Wait, I thought that was our plan?
  47. @YetAnotherAnon
    In the UK, the "Green" Party wants effectively open borders. Here's the 2015 manifesto. Remember the current system, which has produced a situation where 30% of primary schoolkids are "minority", is apparently too cruel!

    "Some controls on immigration will be needed for the foreseeable future; for now, we reject an open borders approach. We also reject the imposition of an arbitrary numerical cap on net migration. The latter in particular is impossible to achieve (especially given that there is no control on the numbers emigrating) and leads to many individual injustices.

    Any controls must respect the following principles:
    • Mutual legal obligations within the EU on freedom of movement.
    • International obligations to accept refugees, whether seeking sanctuary from wars, political repression or climate change.
    • Respect for the integrity of families. The arrival of a grandmother might well have no direct economic effect, but her contribution to family life may contribute hugely to our society. We would in particular–abolish the policy that requires a British citizen to have an income of at least £18,600 a year before their partner can come to live in the UK, which discriminates against poorer people ,–make it much easier for adult dependants, mainly elderly parents, of British citizens to come and live here.
    • No restrictions on foreign students. Foreign students contribute hugely to our education system, both financially and in terms of the wider perspectives they bring. They also take back to their home countries skills that they have learnt here that will be valuable at home and positive attitudes towards the UK. In particular we would–allow students to work in the UK for two years after graduation;–widen the Youth Mobility Scheme to allow those from poorer countries to participate.
    • No priority simply for economic reasons. We would in particular aim to retain more of those trained in the UK in the health service so that we have less need to take health service workers from countries that can ill afford to lose them.

    We would also:
    • Review the rules for those wishing to set up or do business here to ensure they are not discriminatory against smaller businesses.
    • Not simply accept people just because they are rich. The London housing market in particular has been gravely distorted by the number of rich migrants buying property, bidding up prices all along the housing chain.
    • Ensure that no prospective immigrant is held in detention. As a matter of urgency, the administrative detention of children and pregnant women should cease immediately.
    • Review the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, particularly with regard to issues of access to legal advice, childcare and levels of subsistence allowance, and reintroduce Legal Aid for reasonable levels of immigration and asylum work.

    In addition, once immigrants have arrived, we would:
    • Assist integration by making available free or affordable English or Welsh language lessons to all new immigrants who want them, costing about £200 million a year.
    • Open up ways for existing irregular migrants who have been here for three years to become legal. In particular, a legal status must be provided for people who have not succeeded in their claim for humanitarian protection but who cannot be returned to their country of origin owing to the political situation there."
     
    Incidentally the UK Green Party's 2010 manifesto was written by a professor at Keele University, who resigned his post after being convicted of various charges. Not a story that I heard on the BBC.

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/renowned-academic-government-advisor-who-9655870

    "A renowned academic, Government advisor and former Green Party Parliamentary candidate had sexually explicit chats with underage girls and downloaded images of child abuse."
     

    We also reject the imposition of an arbitrary numerical cap on net migration. The latter in particular is impossible to achieve (especially given that there is no control on the numbers emigrating).

    I think I learned about tautologies some time around eighth grade. These adults have not yet. Note the laziness, too; the verbiage is only slightly different from a balder statement: “It is impossible to control things we refuse to control.” Their obfucation-wu is slipping.

    It is also worth noting the adjective “arbitrary” is a tendentious and goofy straw-man; has anyone ever advocated arbitrary numbers in this regard? Many of us advocate numbers based upon objectively measurable things like crowding, traffic, housing costs, wages, pollution, water’s availability, and so on. I have never encounted a proposal for arbitrary limits in my life.

    They also take back to their home countries skills that they have learnt here.

    If only they would go back to their home countries for a change….

    • Replies: @CJ

    “It is impossible to control things we refuse to control.”
     
    Good distillation. I may have to steal that.
    , @AndrewR
    Well on some level, it is arbitrary. It's impossible to measure the effect of a single immigrant in a country of 60 million. For any "non-arbitrary" number n an immigration restrictionist would choose as the maximum number of immigrants to allow, the country could survive n + 1.

    Yes, immigrants have real effects on all those things you mentioned (not all necessarily negative effects), but to say that you could pick a non-arbitrary number is absurd. In theory, there could be a "straw that broke the camel's back" but that exact number would infinitely exceed the capacity of anyone to predict.
    , @AM

    Many of us advocate numbers based upon objectively measurable things like crowding, traffic, housing costs, wages, pollution, water’s availability, and so on. I have never encounted a proposal for arbitrary limits in my life.
     
    Why not? Don't you think it's strange?

    That's thing. We can get on the Sierra Club for being bought off. But nothing about the environmental movement has even a whiff of practicality about it. There's nothing serious that isn't some sort of imposition on poor people over there, to be determined later, with results we never measure.

    Nothing that environmentalists propose actually work. Sure cut off immigration. I'm in agreement for many different reasons. But it doesn't return water the Colorado River. It doesn't make houses smaller or get families to go to one income. It doesn't get environmentalists to stop jetting around the world or even in this case importing students from literally 1/2 way around the world. Immigration is simply just the most obvious hypocrisy of a movement that isn't about the environment.
  48. “I won’t talk about overpopulation because the facts directly contradict my religious beliefs.”

    If you think of Leftism as a religion and not a political ideology, much of the Left’s behavior makes sense. There is a reason that Communism is so anti-religion; it directly competes with religion.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Is any ideology free of sacred cows? Is any individual free of them? How many people would be able and willing to talk dispassionately about literally any topic? Probably 100% of those people would either be complete sociopaths or have severe Asperger's, assuming they even exist at all. We are fundamentally beasts, even if some of us are occasionally able to transcend our animal natures.

    While it's easy for anyone who regularly reads Sailer to scoff at the cowardice, ignorance and dishonesty of the libtards who write for Vox, we all have our own blind spots and emotional triggers that render meaningful debate impossible.

  49. “I’m a crime reporter, but I never pay attention to the race of victims and perpetrators of homicide. Here’s why …

    [Okay, I might occasionally take the teeny-tiniest little peeky-peek if the victim is Black and the shooter was a police officer. Maybe. Don’t judge me …”]

  50. The left hits itself while crying out in pain:

    Dear friends, I write this with a heavy but hopeful heart. If and when you have time, I would appreciate your thoughts…

    Posted by Laura Moriarty on Saturday, October 14, 2017

  51. @Arthur Pierce
    Add environmentalism to the list of things the anti-White left has kicked to the curb to pursue its real goals. Welcome, environmentalism, to the same club as workers' rights, affordable housing, safe communities, national sovereignty, and women's rights. Suicide pills are available in the corner.

    Brilliant!

    Also education and peace can join that club.

    • Replies: @EdwardM
    And free expression.
  52. Because we all know that curbing immigration will automatically lead to rounding up some folks, gassing them and cremating them in ovens. It’s the next logical step.
    .
    .

  53. @candid_observer
    I love this quote from the article:

    Tackling population growth can be done without the enormous, unnecessary risks involved in talking about population growth.[emphasis in article]
     
    Because, of course, that strategy has worked great so far. Just look at the graphs! Who's afraid of an exponential curve?

    Really, that quote is our modern left in a nutshell. He just used his outside voice, against their rules.

    Because, of course, that strategy has worked great so far.

    I know. Isn’t everyone aware that the the best approach to solving problems is not to talk about them.

  54. “once and for all”

    What an odd phrase to include. “Once and for all,” as in “Never again?” Never ever?

    He’s sorta correct in that the opportunity to raise the issue in a polite, rational way came and went a generation ago. In the future, things won’t be polite and rational at all.

  55. @Maj. Kong
    Nothing will get the space elevator constructed faster, than the threat of overpopulation.

    You envision tens of millions of humans being shipped off to lifeless Mars?

    • Replies: @MEH 0910, @Maj. Kong
    The space elevator is supposed to promise large cost reductions, making asteroid mining feasible. That means a power source and raw materials to build on Mars. And if you can build a space elevator, you can probably build giant orbital mirrors to make Mars warmer.

    The long term solution is probably some kind of cryonics that will freeze people long enough to get to another star system.
  56. OT

    This little video from TV points out an obvious point – Fox news landed on its feet with the removal of Bill O’Reilly. A year or two ago I wondered how Fox News was going to manage it’s transition. O’Reilly seemed to be on top of the world. He was having books cranked out under his name that seemed to dominate the best seller lists. His nightly news shows were similarly dominating the cable TV ratings. He had dropped most of his goofy fillers like the woman who analyzed the handwriting of political figures. He seemed to be riding high.

    But there was trouble lurking.

    Bill himself was starting to fray around the edges. Increasingly he was blowing his top on camera. It was also becoming clear that he was very impressed with himself. It wasn’t just that he couldn’t even feign humility his jokes about being a ‘simple man’ were wearing thin. Big Bill had a serious case of self adoration. He was dizzy with self regard.

    He was also getting old. We had seen how the sweet natured and funny young David Letterman had gone rancid in front of millions of watchers. Could the same thing be happening to O’Reilly the anchor of anchors? We all dreaded the day when he also started to grow a bushy beard.

    O’Reilly still kept holding down the center of the Fox nightly news lineup. His formula was interesting. He purported to serve up hard news but in fact he larded his hour with comedians. Almost every night there would be a segment with Dennis Miller or Greg Gutfeld. This seemed to be his response to the lefty Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart. O’Reilly himself could tell a good joke too.

    So Fox was riding the tiger. They had to get off and get off soon but they feared that first step down. There was no successor in sight. Eric Bowling was dull as dirt. Gutfeld was probably the most talented and the smartest but his shtick was anti-gravitas.

    Somehow it all worked out for Fox. Tucker Carlson had been knocking around the environs of TV News for years. Yet somehow was still baby faced. He seemed like more of a morning show personality than an evening lynchpin. Yet Fox has landed on its feet. Carlson should be good for many decades yet to come. He seems to be the best informed and the best prepared anchor anyone has ever seen on the airwaves. He is as smart as Eric Sevareid once was, but has a bubbly boyish demeanor. He is a heavy weight player who wore an airhead disguise for years so as to escape the notice of the guys with the knives – sort of like Claudius.

    • Agree: Dan Hayes
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    As someone who literally has never watched Letterman for more than two minutes per year, can you describe Letterman's psychological transformation (which even I vaguely perceived), in detail for people like me?
    , @EdwardM
    Great post. I had the same thought at the time. To think that Fox News was faced with the departure of two-thirds of its prime-time lineup and its two highest-rated hosts -- there are plenty of legitimate criticisms of Megyn Kelly, but she brought gravitas and was a good complement to O'Reilly and Hannity -- as well as having the hapless Murdoch sons step up in place of Rupert, and end up better off afterward is astonishing.

    I agree about Carlson. He has stretched the boundary of what is acceptable to discuss on television more than anyone, and without getting in trouble. He has mentioned the concept that, in a political system that elevates identity politics over all else, it's understandable that whites would get on board with it -- which no other mainstream conservative would dare say. He mentioned that the Charlottesville protesters deserve free speech too, even if they are "white nationalists," "white supremacists," or even "Nazis" (not that he that they are) which is a surprisingly rare point of view. He has been covering the Vegas shooting intensively, and focusing on the seeming incompetence of the police, which conservatives rarely do.

    And, to top it off, Laura Ingraham will be starting a new show in two weeks. She will be fantastic. People here have occasionally worried that Fox would go National Review-style "never Trump," but in fact have gone the opposite direction. I don't know if it's due to strictly business considerations or ideology, but it scarcely matters.
    , @anonguy
    I never could stand Bill O'Reilly.

    Always respected Tucker.
    , @Harry Baldwin
    Agree with your analysis. I like Tucker Carlson. I always found O'Reilly insufferably pompous and ideologically incoherent.
    , @Mr. Anon

    His formula was interesting. He purported to serve up hard news but in fact he larded his hour with comedians. Almost every night there would be a segment with Dennis Miller or Greg Gutfeld.
     
    Miller hasn't been funny in a long while. Gutfeld, as far as I can tell, never was. He seems to amuse himself, with his smug little smile and his smarmy asides hinting at being some kind of sexual deviant, but he has never amused me.

    The thing to remember about O'Reilly is that his viewership had one foot in the grave. The median Factor Viewer (What does "The Factor" even mean, by the way - it's a stupid name for a show) was something like 68 years old. His audience were largely old-folks in retirement communities who think that America can "come back" if we just had another General Patton or something. It was obvious from the commercials shown during O'Reilly's show (reverse mortgages, catheters, etc.) and from his...........painfully..............slow............way..........of.............talking................during................his................monologues (finger gesture).

    Carlson is, as you say, much better. He tries to appeal to a younger audience and apparently does, to some degree at least. And his selection of guests is much better. FOX shows seem to consist mainly of FOX personalities talking to other FOX personalities. Carlson's show still does that - unfortunately to still too large a degree - but he does at least have some interesting guests on as well. He actually had a guy on who had written a book about the North Korean regime to talk about North Korea. Imagine that - somebody who is a real expert on the Hermit Kingdom, rather than, say, Charles Krauthammer or Monica Crowley. Carlson even had James Howard Kunstler on his show - now that's something you don't see on cable TV everyday.
    , @Alden
    I stopped watching Fox years ago because it has as many ignorant yammering jabbering incoherent blacks as BET. The Fox blacks just blurt out an incoherent collection of words and keep repeating the same babble.

    It's no different than the babbling blacks begging in the 7-11 parking lot. And Fox tells me nothing I don't know
    , @JohnnyWalker123
    Very good analysis.

    I agree Tucker Carlson is much better. He's a very thoughtful, witty, and engaging guy who deals in serious ideas. O'Reilly was sort of entertaining, but he was never much of a thinker. O'Reilly just threw lots of red meat to his audience without saying much that was meaningful. O'Reilly also seems like a bit of a grifter that was interested in making money off the right-wing gravy train, but didn't care much about conservative ideas or policy.

    I don't dislike him. I used to watch his show occasionally, but it was just entertainment. You watch O'Reilly to see his bombast, not to see any profound analysis.
  57. Er, since virtually all Green Parties support open borders the donation by Gelbaum isn’t the only reason the Sierra Club isn’t interested in population control.

    • Replies: @Dieter Kief

    Er, since virtually all Green Parties support open borders.
     
    The Austrian pro open border Greens are not in the new parliament. German pro open border Greens are suffering too - just got thrown out of the regional parliament in Lower Saxony. Boris Palmer, German Green mayor of lovely Tübingen, has a book out: "We can't help them all" (them=migrants etc.). It sells well.

    But by and large, the fact that what Philip Cafaro states - that there is a relation between environmentalism and population growth, seems to be all too clear.

    That it isn't seen by most greens, is a big mystery to me, I have to admit.

    The love of nature is not necessarily a love of one species - it's biological diversity, that counts, no?

    Jonathan Franzen is at times very close to that position. As is T. C. Boyle.

    German novelist Herman Peter Piwitt is the only contemporary I can think of, who is since decades clearly on the side of biological diversity. His formula: Beware of humans - we're badly domesticated predator apes.

    , @Nico
    Back in the initial days of modern environmentalism, the Club of Rome was very concerned with population growth, in the 1970s. The institutions which gave rise to the Green Movement were NOT inevitably left-wing at the outset. In 1981 there was considerable ambiguity as to whether Green electors in the first round of the French presidential election would broke for Giscard d'Estaing or for Mitterrand, in the second round.

    The Gelbaum donation was of course far from the only factor in the transformation, but it is a powerful illustration of the step-by-step co-optation of the Greens into the corporate-hippie column. You had academic and financial backers stepping up pressure and encouraging Bright Young Things to join in: naturally the presence of these latter signified a leftward tilt as they came of age and took over leadership. But you also had the right, especially the Anglo-American right, simply cast aside anything "eco" as it embraced a sort of dogmatic commitment to neo-liberalism during the Reagan years. This is why so many conservative commentators are as blind to ongoing ecological disasters as most NYT columnists are to the disgusting sewer the immigration policies and BLM terrorists they fawn over are turning the U.S. into.

  58. There are some national conversations we don’t need to have.

  59. @Autochthon

    We also reject the imposition of an arbitrary numerical cap on net migration. The latter in particular is impossible to achieve (especially given that there is no control on the numbers emigrating).
     
    I think I learned about tautologies some time around eighth grade. These adults have not yet. Note the laziness, too; the verbiage is only slightly different from a balder statement: “It is impossible to control things we refuse to control.” Their obfucation-wu is slipping.

    It is also worth noting the adjective “arbitrary” is a tendentious and goofy straw-man; has anyone ever advocated arbitrary numbers in this regard? Many of us advocate numbers based upon objectively measurable things like crowding, traffic, housing costs, wages, pollution, water’s availability, and so on. I have never encounted a proposal for arbitrary limits in my life.


    They also take back to their home countries skills that they have learnt here.
     
    If only they would go back to their home countries for a change....

    “It is impossible to control things we refuse to control.”

    Good distillation. I may have to steal that.

  60. The Greenbaum SECRET BRIBE, which is the correct name, was made in the 1990s. It took all the way till 2004 for the MSM to report on it.

    A lot of people left the Sierra Club after it became known. As far as I can tell the Sierra Club in California is as dead as the dodo, in terms of doing anything politically.

    It was middle class white persons thing. And the all the honest environmentalists left years ago.

  61. @dearieme
    gay because he's got a decent vocabulary? Are you a neanderthal with a chip on your shoulder?

    Are you a neanderthal with a chip on your shoulder?

    He’s from the future:

    • Replies: @JohnnyWalker123
    If you talk slowly in a deep voice (like Vin Diesel and the Rock), you'll always sound tough, authoritative, and masculine.

    Talk like this.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llTxpIod1s8

    Or this.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFjBsqfVTMw

    If you talk in that type of voice, you could be speaking about the Pythagorean Theorem and still sound like an alpha male.
  62. The Vox journalist is also lying when he claims that an attempt was made to “take over” the Sierra Club by reinstating opposition to immigration. It is simply an historical fact that opposition to overpopulation and immigration into the US was the original position of the Sierra Club. The attempt was made to return — not introduce — opposition to overpopulation and immigration as Sierra Club policies. Hardly a take over.

  63. @Dr. X

    I thought I would explain, once and for all, why I hardly ever talk about population, and why I’m unlikely to in the future. …

    When political movements or leaders adopt population control as a central concern … let’s just say it never goes well. In practice, where you find concern over “population,” you very often find racism, xenophobia, or eugenics lurking in the wings.
     
    I'm willing to bet money that this guy is a good liberal who favors legal abortion for white women, though.

    Unlike conservatives who oppose them for black women.

    And black women are much, much more likely to have abortions…

  64. Reminds me of a recently released book by the international affairs columnist Doug Saunders, Maximum Canada: Why 35 Million Canadians Are Not Enough.

    To face the future, Canada needs more Canadians. But why and how many?

    Canada’s population has always grown slowly, when it has grown at all. That wasn’t by accident. For centuries before Confederation and a century after, colonial economic policies and an inward-facing world view isolated this country, attracting few of the people and building few of the institutions needed to sustain a sovereign nation. In fact, during most years before 1967, a greater number of people fled Canada than immigrated to it. Canada’s growth has faltered and left us underpopulated ever since.

    At Canada’s 150th anniversary, a more open, pluralist and international vision has largely overturned that colonial mindset and become consensus across the country and its major political parties. But that consensus is ever fragile. Our small population continues to hamper our competitive clout, our ability to act independently in an increasingly unstable world, and our capacity to build the resources we need to make our future viable.

    In Maximum Canada, a bold and detailed vision for Canada’s future, award-winning author and Globe and Mail columnist Doug Saunders proposes a most audacious way forward: to avoid global obscurity and create lasting prosperity, to build equality and reconciliation of indigenous and regional divides, and to ensure economic and ecological sustainability, Canada needs to triple its population.

    I read thought a bit of it while at the bookstore. The idea regarding ecological sustainability is that people living in dense cities actually consume less resources than the countryside or the suburbs. So if we pack as many people into Downtown Vancouver or Toronto, we’ll be good.

    Except, of course, when immigrants come to Canada, they often go to the Toronto or Vancouver suburbs, since – wouldn’t you know – life in the dense urban cores are so expensive they are affordable to only the rich of all nations.

    Likewise it hard to see how it could build equality (see comment about real estate prices) or promote regional reconciliation (but concentrating even more power in Vancouver and Toronto?) or indigenous reconciliation (unless they live in urban area next to the booming areas, it not going to change much for them).

    But, like ‘female empowerment’ that Roberts talks about, these are all good things SPWL, i.e. the people who read The Globe and Mail, Vox and regularly purchase actual books for actual reading. The idea that these goals might conflict with one another is anathema to them, so they look upon people like Saunders and Roberts to tell them there is no conflict at all.

  65. @Autochthon

    We also reject the imposition of an arbitrary numerical cap on net migration. The latter in particular is impossible to achieve (especially given that there is no control on the numbers emigrating).
     
    I think I learned about tautologies some time around eighth grade. These adults have not yet. Note the laziness, too; the verbiage is only slightly different from a balder statement: “It is impossible to control things we refuse to control.” Their obfucation-wu is slipping.

    It is also worth noting the adjective “arbitrary” is a tendentious and goofy straw-man; has anyone ever advocated arbitrary numbers in this regard? Many of us advocate numbers based upon objectively measurable things like crowding, traffic, housing costs, wages, pollution, water’s availability, and so on. I have never encounted a proposal for arbitrary limits in my life.


    They also take back to their home countries skills that they have learnt here.
     
    If only they would go back to their home countries for a change....

    Well on some level, it is arbitrary. It’s impossible to measure the effect of a single immigrant in a country of 60 million. For any “non-arbitrary” number n an immigration restrictionist would choose as the maximum number of immigrants to allow, the country could survive n + 1.

    Yes, immigrants have real effects on all those things you mentioned (not all necessarily negative effects), but to say that you could pick a non-arbitrary number is absurd. In theory, there could be a “straw that broke the camel’s back” but that exact number would infinitely exceed the capacity of anyone to predict.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    Somewhat contra Autochthon, but I think a lot of people favor criteria-based immigration rather than quota-based. If you make the criteria stringent enough, there's no need to set a numerical cap, and the n+1 problem is solved.
    , @Autochthon
    You are applying an autistic mathematician’s interpretation to the term; I am applying a meaningful, connotative significance to it.

    Sure, allowing fifty million immigrants in each year is arbitrary vis-a-vis its distinction in effect from allowing forty-nine million, nine hundred ninety-nine thousand, nine hundred, and ninety nine.

    It is, however, not arbitrary at all to decide that, all things considered, more than, about fifty million immigrants permitted annually is inarguably deleterious to the common weal, and, some numerical limit being needed to administer the matter meaningfully, fifty million is as good as any, and as nearly right as can be determined; wheras twelve and five hundred billion (or even thirty or sixty million) decidedly would not be.

    Your autistic mathematician’s demand for precision renders meaningless any number of useful and by no means arbitrary numbers: speed limits, medical implants’ useful lifetimes, mileage advisable between changing oil and filters, and so on.

    I think you know all this, because your commentary suggests you generally have your poop together, so maybe your just with the lady in Vermont who irrationally derides environmentalism.

    In the event. The emigration cited originally is another stupid straw-man (as if Europe, Canada, what used to be the U.S.A., Australia, and New Zealand have ever had or will have in the foreseeable future meaningful numbers of people emigrating such that the matter must be monitored (indeed, net emigration is of no concern in any event, as it only renders unto those of us who remain greater resources per capita...).

    What’s more, as to whether or not this or that limit on immigration is arbitrary (in my commonsense, meaningful use of the term or your pedantic, unhelpful one): the proper limit is obvious and not arbitrary at all, because it is zero. Zero immigrants should be permitted into what used to be the U.S.A. We’re full up, thanks. Paco, Ting Tong, Bhavagushnajaruthan, and Ndawajongo can try the next hotel down the road, and good luck to them.
    , @Big Bill
    "Real effects" of immigration?

    In my youth, California offered free college tuition to its residents and there were plenty of part-time jobs to pay for room, board, books and fees.

    California public K12 was number three or four in the country.

    Now, the only states keeping California public K12 off the bottom of the list are Arkansas and Mississippi.
    , @dwb
    The use of the word "arbitrary" to mean "random" illustrates how, through sloppy and permissive usage, vulgar understandings change the understanding of a word.

    At its root, "arbitrary" has the same origins as "arbitrate," where an expert listened to evidence and then rendered a decision. It did not have the connotation of "random" or "capricious."

    In reality, we make decisions all the time around where the limits ought to be. Because the world we live in is not a sophomoric mathematical model.

    Yes - the impact of the n+1 immigrant is zero compared to the impact of the first n. And by a sort of through the looking glass math induction, *no* level of immigration can be set.

    It's an absurd notion, because obviously, at some point between 0 immigrants and 7 billion (every person on earth in the US) there is a point where the country could not sustain the environmental (not to mention economic and social) impact. Because we cannot precisely model what that number is (is it 100,000 vs 101,000, or 1 million versus 1.01 million?) we are unable to make *any* rule?

    I think this is, from my old days in school, akin to Zeno's paradox, and one of the reasons that integral calculus was created.

    When I was in high school, we were shown an instructive lesson called "Infinite Acres," to illustrate some of the limitations of mathematics in the practical world. A conic is formed where 1/x , x->00 is rotated about the X axis. The volume area of such an object is finite due to the limitations for the integral, but the surface area is unbounded (integrate 1/x, as x-> 00).

    So one could theoretically fill up the cone inside with paint, but not cover the outside surface.

    Countries make choices all the time - we set speed limits at 65 mph in the US because it's ridiculous to imagine cars travelling at 200 mph or more on the roads. We set voting ages at 18 because we cannot have 3 year olds voting.

    And we put limits on integration, because unlike the conic, the volume (and surface area) of the US is in fact, limited.
    , @MBlanc46
    So the number is arbitrary? Who said that we had to have an infinite number of immigrants unless we can calculate a non-arbitrary limit?
  66. @whorefinder
    "I won't talk about overpopulation because the facts directly contradict my religious beliefs."

    If you think of Leftism as a religion and not a political ideology, much of the Left's behavior makes sense. There is a reason that Communism is so anti-religion; it directly competes with religion.

    Is any ideology free of sacred cows? Is any individual free of them? How many people would be able and willing to talk dispassionately about literally any topic? Probably 100% of those people would either be complete sociopaths or have severe Asperger’s, assuming they even exist at all. We are fundamentally beasts, even if some of us are occasionally able to transcend our animal natures.

    While it’s easy for anyone who regularly reads Sailer to scoff at the cowardice, ignorance and dishonesty of the libtards who write for Vox, we all have our own blind spots and emotional triggers that render meaningful debate impossible.

    • Replies: @whorefinder

    100% of those people would either be complete sociopaths
     
    False . Sociopaths don't deal with facts, just rhetoric. This is why sociopaths are gathered on the Left.

    While it’s easy for anyone who regularly reads Sailer to scoff at the cowardice, ignorance and dishonesty of the libtards who write for Vox, we all have our own blind spots and emotional triggers that render meaningful debate impossible.
     
    Your religious defensiveness to protect the Left's sacred cows is noted, little one.

    Now, repeat after me: A Left wing environmental writer openly states he will not discuss overpopulation as an environmental hazard PRECISELY BECAUSE it contradicts his left-wing religious beliefs.

    This is not a blind spot, this is openly stating that FACTS DON'T MATTER to the Left because their religious dogma IS MORE IMPORTANT than truth.
    , @Issac
    "we all have our own blind spots and emotional triggers that render meaningful debate impossible"

    Everyone has some, but those with a particularly vast collection are notable for that reason. Refusal to address the relative trigger load would be to assume the absolute futility of communication. If you actually believed it, you would have just performed a contradictory action by saying so.
  67. Environmentalist journalists not talking about overpopulation is like a physician not talking about cancer or heart disease. Their discipline and careers have been appropriated to a higher moral calling. Their leftism preempts their environmental concerns, just like leftism preempts history among post-modern historians and academic pursuits among academics and so on.

    • Replies: @Olorin
    J, the other issue here is how many "environmental journalists" are plumb-dumb no-holds-barred stupid about the science and math of ecological systems and effects.

    Seriously, I met many who didn't even comprehend the exponential function of a fixed rate of increase.

    When you start getting into more complex topics, and the details involved, they can't follow so they resort to repeating elements of the Prog Religion catechism.

    And for good reason: your "environmental journalism" career isn't advanced by running the numbers and helping change the supertanker's course. It's advanced by piling on the solar-powered eco-yachts in far-flung chic Life Bucket places with the globalists and repeating whatever bromides they regurgitated between the roasted artisan radicchio and the crystal-scrying mud massage.

    IME these people are about at the level of sports reporters for DQ (dolt quotient). The worst ones are those who talk about "multidisciplinary" or "integrated" or suchlike approaches.

  68. OT

  69. @Pat Boyle
    OT

    This little video from TV points out an obvious point - Fox news landed on its feet with the removal of Bill O'Reilly. A year or two ago I wondered how Fox News was going to manage it's transition. O'Reilly seemed to be on top of the world. He was having books cranked out under his name that seemed to dominate the best seller lists. His nightly news shows were similarly dominating the cable TV ratings. He had dropped most of his goofy fillers like the woman who analyzed the handwriting of political figures. He seemed to be riding high.

    But there was trouble lurking.

    Bill himself was starting to fray around the edges. Increasingly he was blowing his top on camera. It was also becoming clear that he was very impressed with himself. It wasn't just that he couldn't even feign humility his jokes about being a 'simple man' were wearing thin. Big Bill had a serious case of self adoration. He was dizzy with self regard.

    He was also getting old. We had seen how the sweet natured and funny young David Letterman had gone rancid in front of millions of watchers. Could the same thing be happening to O'Reilly the anchor of anchors? We all dreaded the day when he also started to grow a bushy beard.

    O'Reilly still kept holding down the center of the Fox nightly news lineup. His formula was interesting. He purported to serve up hard news but in fact he larded his hour with comedians. Almost every night there would be a segment with Dennis Miller or Greg Gutfeld. This seemed to be his response to the lefty Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart. O'Reilly himself could tell a good joke too.

    So Fox was riding the tiger. They had to get off and get off soon but they feared that first step down. There was no successor in sight. Eric Bowling was dull as dirt. Gutfeld was probably the most talented and the smartest but his shtick was anti-gravitas.

    Somehow it all worked out for Fox. Tucker Carlson had been knocking around the environs of TV News for years. Yet somehow was still baby faced. He seemed like more of a morning show personality than an evening lynchpin. Yet Fox has landed on its feet. Carlson should be good for many decades yet to come. He seems to be the best informed and the best prepared anchor anyone has ever seen on the airwaves. He is as smart as Eric Sevareid once was, but has a bubbly boyish demeanor. He is a heavy weight player who wore an airhead disguise for years so as to escape the notice of the guys with the knives - sort of like Claudius.

    As someone who literally has never watched Letterman for more than two minutes per year, can you describe Letterman’s psychological transformation (which even I vaguely perceived), in detail for people like me?

    • Replies: @Pat Boyle
    I first encountered David Letterman on an obscure game show. As I remember Betty White was also a panelist. The set up was they showed the celebrity panelists some strange object and they made up a story about it. Letterman was terrific. He was funny and imaginative. Soon he was grabbed up by the major networks and I lost track of him. Flash forward to Carson's retirement. Leno won out but Letterman also got a late night spot.

    Another flash forward and he had turned bitter and nasty. He seemed to have gone rancid. All his jokes were political and he became insufferable. Sorry, my memory is extremely episodic. I don't know just when he became sour.
  70. @bomag
    Assist integration by making available free or affordable English or Welsh language lessons to all new immigrants who want them, costing about £200 million a year.

    Integrating into what? From what I see, British culture consists of accommodating Pakistani rape squads and other foreign vibrancy. I wasn't aware of any language barrier.

    Weird that such a manifesto would give a dollar figure.

    …costing about £200 million a year.

    Weird that such a manifesto would give a dollar figure.

    Looks like a sterling figure to me.

    Either way, it $u¢k$, and they can go to he££.

  71. When political movements or leaders adopt population control as a central concern … let’s just say it never goes well.

    Yet, when population does get out of control it works goes well … like in … I dunno, Africa? Bangladesh? I’d be the last one to have supported the Commie Chairman Mao of China on anything, but the 1-child policy, as wicked as it was, put a stop to a whole metric shit-ton of poverty that would have resulted otherwise. Every last one of China’s environmental problems, moreso than anywhere else I can think of, is a result of just too many people on too little good land.

    I agree with Whorefinder in comment #32: It’s a religion to these people. I mean, “Let’s just say it never goes well.” Let’s NOT say that, cause there’s no reason TO say it.

    Thanks to the multiple commenters that brought up the David Gelbaum blackmail of the Sierra Club. VDare has been all over this since it’s occurence (or their start-up whichever came last). Here’s an old Tucker Carlson interview with one of these imbeciles, or possibly a member of the cntrl-left under cover of imbecility.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Ignore my links. This site’s got a bug that puts some extra characters at the end of my links (after numbers, after ‘submit’). I’m trying to figure it out, as it doesn’t affect any old links.
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    I want to test this link: VDare main page
    , @Romanian
    Not that the Chinese were not having children before, they were, but it was Mao who put them on the path of explosive growth that he later needed to curb.
    , @whorefinder
    The 1-child policy is leading us to a major war. The large imbalance between men and women in China---because in Chinese society boys were favored over girls, women aborted female fetuses s---has created a large number of now-grown men with no romantic prospects. Historically, a large number of unattached men with no sexual outlets in a given society has created a society eager to invade/attack others for the (literal) booty.

    This is what happened with the early Romans (rape of the Sabine), the Vikings (lack of marriageable women led to their invasions), and currently in the Middle East, especially the Saudis (where the Saudi royals have snapped up so many women as harem/wives that the remainder of the men are easily radicalized in their desperate states, as the 9/11 hijackers (all Saudis) showed).

    China is going to start massive invasions of local countries for their women, or somehow begin massive imports from somewhere else, which will also lead to conflict with nations they import them from. If I were a female I would not "vacation" in China in the next 25 years, as the government will likely begin or allow kidnapping of women on a wide scale.

    Likely North Korea will be a prime place for Chinese men to import brides (by force), and this is why Japan is experiencing a new stereotype: the suave Chinese exchange student picking up Japanese women. Chinese men are becoming the Don Juans of East Asia simply because they need to be.

  72. Probably OT, but a nice quote from Lisa De Pasquale of BRIGHT on Sebastian Kurz, the 31-year-old elected chancellor of Austria:

    Not to be disrespectful, but I feel like Kurz, France’s Macron and Canada’s Trudeau could form a pretty successful boy band.

    She’s also written The Social Justice Warrior Handbook, which many of us are kicking ourselves for not thinking of first. The new Christian Lander?

  73. @Achmed E. Newman

    When political movements or leaders adopt population control as a central concern … let’s just say it never goes well.
     
    Yet, when population does get out of control it works goes well ... like in ... I dunno, Africa? Bangladesh? I’d be the last one to have supported the Commie Chairman Mao of China on anything, but the 1-child policy, as wicked as it was, put a stop to a whole metric shit-ton of poverty that would have resulted otherwise. Every last one of China’s environmental problems, moreso than anywhere else I can think of, is a result of just too many people on too little good land.

    I agree with Whorefinder in comment #32: It’s a religion to these people. I mean, “Let’s just say it never goes well.” Let’s NOT say that, cause there’s no reason TO say it.

    Thanks to the multiple commenters that brought up the David Gelbaum blackmail of the Sierra Club. VDare has been all over this since it’s occurence (or their start-up whichever came last). Here’s an old Tucker Carlson interview with one of these imbeciles, or possibly a member of the cntrl-left under cover of imbecility.

    Ignore my links. This site’s got a bug that puts some extra characters at the end of my links (after numbers, after ‘submit’). I’m trying to figure it out, as it doesn’t affect any old links.

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
    This Ron Unz post might be relevant:
    Open Thread: Software Bugs?
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    So sorry, Ron Unz, for trying to debug this on another thread. I finally got to another machine - tablet was putting in wrong wacky quote marks. I feel much better now, after figuring it out!
  74. @dearieme
    gay because he's got a decent vocabulary? Are you a neanderthal with a chip on your shoulder?

    If humans can already detect peoples agendas in their writing – why not other behaviors/intentions?

    If computers can scan pictures of faces to determine sexual preference why not have them scan peoples writing?

    I have been re-reading Philip K. Dick recently. Scary world we are building.

    • Replies: @Massimo Heitor

    If humans can already detect peoples agendas in their writing – why not other behaviors/intentions?

    If computers can scan pictures of faces to determine sexual preference why not have them scan peoples writing?
     
    "sentiment analysis" of text is already an active field in Computer Science.

    Remember, reality is on our side. We have to use new technologies better and more effectively than our opponents.
  75. Tackling population growth can be done without the enormous, unnecessary risks involved in talking about population growth.

    Wow. “We’re going to reorder the entire world, just please don’t make us look politically incorrect.”

    • Replies: @pyrrhus
    Within a couple of decades, the 3d world will face a massive food (and water) crisis due to two inexorable trends. First, population is still growing, while it has already outstripped food production in those countries. Not one country in Africa can feed itself, for example.Second, topsoil and fresh water aquifers are depleting rapidly, and the nutritional content of food is declining (per the Scientific American)....No doubt the greens will want to let the starving billions into the West, at which point population control will no longer be an academic discussion....
  76. @AndrewR
    Is any ideology free of sacred cows? Is any individual free of them? How many people would be able and willing to talk dispassionately about literally any topic? Probably 100% of those people would either be complete sociopaths or have severe Asperger's, assuming they even exist at all. We are fundamentally beasts, even if some of us are occasionally able to transcend our animal natures.

    While it's easy for anyone who regularly reads Sailer to scoff at the cowardice, ignorance and dishonesty of the libtards who write for Vox, we all have our own blind spots and emotional triggers that render meaningful debate impossible.

    100% of those people would either be complete sociopaths

    False . Sociopaths don’t deal with facts, just rhetoric. This is why sociopaths are gathered on the Left.

    While it’s easy for anyone who regularly reads Sailer to scoff at the cowardice, ignorance and dishonesty of the libtards who write for Vox, we all have our own blind spots and emotional triggers that render meaningful debate impossible.

    Your religious defensiveness to protect the Left’s sacred cows is noted, little one.

    Now, repeat after me: A Left wing environmental writer openly states he will not discuss overpopulation as an environmental hazard PRECISELY BECAUSE it contradicts his left-wing religious beliefs.

    This is not a blind spot, this is openly stating that FACTS DON’T MATTER to the Left because their religious dogma IS MORE IMPORTANT than truth.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    I don't understand what I said that created the urge in you to be so disrespectful towards me, but your status as a bully and a troll have been duly noted.
  77. @Clement Pulaski
    If these climate change alarmists actually believed that we're decades away from making the planet uninhabitable, you think they'd start talking about population growth. Unless they truly think that the death of the entire human species is better than allowing"racism."

    If these climate change alarmists actually believed that we’re decades away from making the planet uninhabitable, you think they’d start talking about population growth. Unless they truly think that the death of the entire human species is better than allowing”racism.”

    It is also energetically cheaper to live in warm climates where heating and insulation is not necessary. So they would encourage people from Northern countries to move closer to the equator, the reverse of what is happening now.

    • Replies: @whorefinder

    It is also energetically cheaper to live in warm climates where heating and insulation is not necessary. So they would encourage people from Northern countries to move closer to the equator, the reverse of what is happening now.
     
    The Earth Pagans of the Left have been whining for some time now about air conditioning. Not only is it "bad for the environment", it's created "urban sprawl" since it's allowed people to build new buildings that by themselves use lots of energy (such as a.c.) to be habitable, and also done the unspeakable sin of making the South viable for industry.
  78. @Mr. Anon

    Steve reported it years ago.
     
    Much as I like it, Steve's blog is not a widely influential national news source. There's a big difference between Steve reporting it and the New York Times reporting it.

    Steve’s blog is not a widely influential national news source.

    False. Steve is incredibly influential. Many NR-type cucks come here on the sly to get some truth before they go back to shilling for their corporate masters, and race-realist lefties such as little Matty Yglesias are also lurking here, vacuuming up race realism before they have to go back to pretending race doesn’t exist. (Yglesias in particular lurks here a bunch, due to the fact that he was personally subject to a racial knockout game attack by blacks in Washington, D.C.)

    It takes a bit, but many of Steve’s ideas eventually get into the bigger corporate media, though with enough time and change of wording as to make sure there’s plausible deniability that they read such a “racist.” Ross Douthat and David Brooks are prime examples.

    • Replies: @Father O'Hara
    Certainly Pod the Lesser lurks here. You here today Pod? Ya rpllnt son of a
    , @Father O'Hara
    Certainly Pod the Lesser lurks here. You here today Pod? Ya rpllnt son of a
    , @Mr. Anon
    Steve may be influential in the way you say, but that is not the same as being a national news source that one may freely quote without repercussion. Any pundit on TV can freely say "It has even been reported in the New York Times that..........." whereas that same pundit would never say "As Steve Sailer has pointed out................."

    This site is samizdat.
  79. @Clement Pulaski
    If these climate change alarmists actually believed that we're decades away from making the planet uninhabitable, you think they'd start talking about population growth. Unless they truly think that the death of the entire human species is better than allowing"racism."

    Unless they truly think that the death of the entire human species is better than allowing”racism.”

    John Derbyshire has called this trait among leftists “better dead than rude.” (Echoing “better dead than red.”)

  80. @Clement Pulaski
    If these climate change alarmists actually believed that we're decades away from making the planet uninhabitable, you think they'd start talking about population growth. Unless they truly think that the death of the entire human species is better than allowing"racism."

    It’s how you know the vast majority of them don’t believe in global warming/climate change, but instead use it as a convenient excuse to gain power to control people and do things they wanted to do anyway.

    Much like how you can tell most Kennedy Conspiracy authors don’t actually believe their own nonsense, because almost none of them posit falsifiable alternative hypotheses stating who, what, when, where, why, and how beyond vague assertions that “the man on the grassy knoll” and “the CIA and the mob” did it. OPEN YOUR EYES, SHEEPLE!

  81. @Achmed E. Newman

    When political movements or leaders adopt population control as a central concern … let’s just say it never goes well.
     
    Yet, when population does get out of control it works goes well ... like in ... I dunno, Africa? Bangladesh? I’d be the last one to have supported the Commie Chairman Mao of China on anything, but the 1-child policy, as wicked as it was, put a stop to a whole metric shit-ton of poverty that would have resulted otherwise. Every last one of China’s environmental problems, moreso than anywhere else I can think of, is a result of just too many people on too little good land.

    I agree with Whorefinder in comment #32: It’s a religion to these people. I mean, “Let’s just say it never goes well.” Let’s NOT say that, cause there’s no reason TO say it.

    Thanks to the multiple commenters that brought up the David Gelbaum blackmail of the Sierra Club. VDare has been all over this since it’s occurence (or their start-up whichever came last). Here’s an old Tucker Carlson interview with one of these imbeciles, or possibly a member of the cntrl-left under cover of imbecility.

    I want to test this link: VDare main page

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    See, software put an extra double-quote on the end of vdare.com, and it put extra characters on the end of my links too. Yet, someone up the thread has a working amazon link. Let me work through this ....

    Yeah, most previous links work.

  82. @Achmed E. Newman
    I want to test this link: VDare main page

    See, software put an extra double-quote on the end of vdare.com, and it put extra characters on the end of my links too. Yet, someone up the thread has a working amazon link. Let me work through this ….

    Yeah, most previous links work.

  83. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    An admittance that ideological blinders mentally forbid him from dealing with real pressing issues.

    A perfect example of PC and journalism.

    In the USSR, the state forced blinders on reporters.

    Today, the PC virus colonizes minds of journalists and they self-censor. Of course, another reason is PC is necessary as status marker in Progopolis. If one writes about inconvenient matters, the shunning begins.

    • Replies: @I, commenter

    Today, the PC virus colonizes minds of journalists and they self-censor.
     
    The left actually takes pride in its own stupidity - we're seeing more and more articles like this where the writer gives witness to his 'pure faith' by saying he's happily willing to ignore reality.
  84. @AKAHorace

    If these climate change alarmists actually believed that we’re decades away from making the planet uninhabitable, you think they’d start talking about population growth. Unless they truly think that the death of the entire human species is better than allowing”racism.”
     
    It is also energetically cheaper to live in warm climates where heating and insulation is not necessary. So they would encourage people from Northern countries to move closer to the equator, the reverse of what is happening now.

    It is also energetically cheaper to live in warm climates where heating and insulation is not necessary. So they would encourage people from Northern countries to move closer to the equator, the reverse of what is happening now.

    The Earth Pagans of the Left have been whining for some time now about air conditioning. Not only is it “bad for the environment”, it’s created “urban sprawl” since it’s allowed people to build new buildings that by themselves use lots of energy (such as a.c.) to be habitable, and also done the unspeakable sin of making the South viable for industry.

  85. @whorefinder

    100% of those people would either be complete sociopaths
     
    False . Sociopaths don't deal with facts, just rhetoric. This is why sociopaths are gathered on the Left.

    While it’s easy for anyone who regularly reads Sailer to scoff at the cowardice, ignorance and dishonesty of the libtards who write for Vox, we all have our own blind spots and emotional triggers that render meaningful debate impossible.
     
    Your religious defensiveness to protect the Left's sacred cows is noted, little one.

    Now, repeat after me: A Left wing environmental writer openly states he will not discuss overpopulation as an environmental hazard PRECISELY BECAUSE it contradicts his left-wing religious beliefs.

    This is not a blind spot, this is openly stating that FACTS DON'T MATTER to the Left because their religious dogma IS MORE IMPORTANT than truth.

    I don’t understand what I said that created the urge in you to be so disrespectful towards me, but your status as a bully and a troll have been duly noted.

    • Replies: @whorefinder
    rofl.

    "bully"= anyone who says anything kinda mean to AndrewR

    "troll"= anyone who contradicts AndrewR.

    Don't you have some leftists to go apologize for, cucky?
    , @MBlanc46
    Bullies and trolls, oh no!
  86. @Langley
    If humans can already detect peoples agendas in their writing - why not other behaviors/intentions?

    If computers can scan pictures of faces to determine sexual preference why not have them scan peoples writing?

    I have been re-reading Philip K. Dick recently. Scary world we are building.

    If humans can already detect peoples agendas in their writing – why not other behaviors/intentions?

    If computers can scan pictures of faces to determine sexual preference why not have them scan peoples writing?

    “sentiment analysis” of text is already an active field in Computer Science.

    Remember, reality is on our side. We have to use new technologies better and more effectively than our opponents.

    • Replies: @Dube
    "Sentiment analysis," defined as "the process of computationally identifying and categorizing opinions expressed in a piece of text, especially in order to determine whether the writer's attitude towards a particular topic, product, etc., is positive, negative, or neutral."

    Easily done by humans, with a bit of practice--involving a sense, a feeling we share of emotive language, read as expressing approval/disapproval, followed by reduction to neutral. It enables description of positions relative to each other--e.g., DAYE: "The glass is half full;" KNIGHT: "The glass is half empty." They agree in factual belief, that the glass has content in half its capacity, and they disagree in attitude, with Daye approving and Knight disapproving the adequacy of the amount. But the AI guys should not stop short at the reduction to neutral, which discloses the armature of factual belief.

    Read that through a few times, and it should (emotive approval) sharpen up the writing and wit here even further. Be thankful to the ethicist Charles L. Stevenson and his colleague, logician Irving M. Copi.

    BTW, this explains why, as Oliver Wendell Holmes put it, "You cannot argue a man into liking a glass of beer."
  87. @The Alarmist
    Increased demand from immigration is part of the problem, but decreased supply is another major problem in many parts of the country. The NHS meets the supply/demand imbalance in some ways by importing a large number of doctors, paraprofessionals, and nurses from the third world, and it is increasingly showing in the decline of knowledge, skills and abilities of its human capital as well as a significant decline in the cleanliness and safety of its facilities.

    If you have a good GP who has clean offices, good on you mate... chances are he or she is a contractor ... but an increasing number of your fellow country mates are being killed, maimed and sickened by the NHS every day.

    The NHS meets the supply/demand imbalance in some ways by importing a large number of doctors, paraprofessionals, and nurses from the third world, and it is increasingly showing in the decline of knowledge, skills and abilities of its human capital as well as a significant decline in the cleanliness and safety of its facilities.

    I’m sure there is a story to be written about the key role the NHS has played in the immigration disaster.

    I’ve taken friends to a couple of private hospitals recently. At one the only diversity visible were the hot Polish nurses. At the other I also saw an Asian bloke who seemed to work there. While everyone waiting in reception seemed to be white/white British.

    I suspect there is some sort of white flight from the NHS underway, the immigrants who staff it treat other immigrants. Eventually we could reach a theoretical point where no natives are involved at all. Apart from paying for it of course.

    • Replies: @whorefinder

    I’m sure there is a story to be written about the key role the NHS has played in the immigration disaster.
     
    Ostensible "do-gooder" organizations are the false front that has caused much of this problem. Corruption in medicine and charities goes largely unremarked upon, and they've been among the worst in terms of human trafficking and skimming off the mess.

    Not to mention in medicine the price gouging is extreme. Even though we always hear about "skyrocketing medical costs" corporate media never bothers to check which costs or whose raising them---or if some heads should roll for it.
  88. @Jim Christian
    In the DC suburb of Fairfax, Virginia, I grew up with kids in the 60s-70s that came from Catholic families of 12-18 kids. Hell, we were Waspy Scot/Half Greek (the good half Greek), and we had 7 in our family. Then the EPA got going, Green this-and-that and before you knew it, big families evil, small families good. And boy did the Western White comply. Unfortunately, the Public Service Message didn't make it to India, HispanicLand, Africa, Paki-Whaki or anywhere in the Middle East at all.

    Of course, we put all our women to work, made Saints of slutty single mothers who mostly limited their numbers of spawn, except for the Blacks of course, who also didn't get the message about smaller families. Here so we are, short of Whites, importing all else, including for the military. Everyone but White breed like rats..

    How's that working for us? We have infrastructure to support, many problems to solve that don't get solved by people we brought here from third-world countries, which is why those countries are third-world. Do the authors of any of this look at things and say, "Oooopsie!"?

    except for the Blacks of course, who also didn’t get the message about smaller families

    Your post is largely correct except for blacks. They’re below replacement in the US and have been for sometime. That’s why they’re going to shrink as an overall percentage of the population.

    Child rearing is hard work. Once you get out the message that you can respectably have sex without children and children are actually bad anyway, it’s not a hard sell.

  89. @German_reader

    I am a fan of Britain’s National Health Service.
     
    You probably shouldn't, compared to other countries in Western Europe Britain's health system seems to be pretty bad. It's bizarre how it has been quasi-sacralized in British public discourse (e.g. the horrible opening ceremony of the 2012 Olympics).

    It’s bizarre how it has been quasi-sacralized in British public discourse (e.g. the horrible opening ceremony of the 2012 Olympics).

    Whatever the NHS is, it has become the unifying project of living Brits. Farage actually used the inability to properly manage the NHS as an argument against immigration. I remember think the speech was spot on until he got to that point and I thought What???

  90. @Dan Hayes
    Steve,

    What was not reported in the Vox article was the real reason why the "green anti-immigration" Sierra Club movement was defeated. That was the 100 million dollar "donation" by Wall Street fat cat David Gelbaum in 2000-2001. Gelbaum essentially made the SC an offer they couldn't refuse.

    Yep Wall Street captured the Sierra Club and the environmental movement in general. I mean population control was one of the big issues for a long time with conservationists. Then boom here come along a bunch of rich white urban faux environmentalists with corporate funding who support the opposite.

    Global Warming IMO was nothing one but one giant diversion and scam to get people to stop thinking about population control and to promote what amounted to corporate welfare through various “green” energy programs.

    The sane can be said with the rise of identity politics and the collapse of economic issues within the DNC and Democratic party in general . It’s no accident that it happened as Silicon Valley really started flexing it’s muscles within the Democratic party.

    Tribal/identity politics only benefit the wealthy since it serves as a hot button wedge issue that keeps the various groups within the Democratic party fractured and pissed at the wrong people – namely the white middle-class. All the while Silicon Valley and other groups make out like bandits and screw American people over.

    Bigger picture: The rich whites have declared war on the lower class whites via economic and demographic warfare. Until whites across the board from Bernie Brother and Trump voters recognize they all have the same enemy, we’re toast.

    • Replies: @Charles Pewitt
    The transnationalist plutocrats want to keep the Great Lakes German Americans and the Southern Anglo-Celts from combining. The so-called "blue wall" states -- Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania...etc. -- were supposed to stay in the Democrat Party camp. People forget just how many frigging Krauts there are in the United States. Trump and his campaign knew all along that the Great Lakes Germans were the key to winning the White house.

    The Democrats were counting on a Jebby Bush or Teddy Cruz to win the Republican Party presidential nomination. Jebby and Teddy are globalizers who are well known for being rancid whores for plutocrat donors. The Great Lakes Germans -- Independents, Democrats -- were the key for Trump. I don't give a rat's ass about the Cruz victory in the Wisconsin GOP presidential primary. Cruz would not have beaten Clinton in the general because Cruz has no appeal to independents and Democrats like Trump has.

    The globalizer plutocrats know that whoever can win the votes of the Great Lakes Germans and the Southern Anglo-Celts will be able to win the electoral college battle.

    Let us not forget Florida:

    President Trump's repeated campaign pledges to defend and protect Medicare and Social Security won the state of Florida. Jebby Bush and Teddy Cruz wanted to take a meat cleaver and cut Medicare and Social Security.
  91. @Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY)
    In the video above, what's with the flag-wearing puppy icon in the lower right? At 2:00 this image moves toward the middle of the screen and become larger, then disappears from the middle of the screen. What's that all about?

    That was superimposed on the YouTube video by the poster, who goes by the name The Liberty Hound.

  92. @Lurker

    The NHS meets the supply/demand imbalance in some ways by importing a large number of doctors, paraprofessionals, and nurses from the third world, and it is increasingly showing in the decline of knowledge, skills and abilities of its human capital as well as a significant decline in the cleanliness and safety of its facilities.
     
    I'm sure there is a story to be written about the key role the NHS has played in the immigration disaster.

    I've taken friends to a couple of private hospitals recently. At one the only diversity visible were the hot Polish nurses. At the other I also saw an Asian bloke who seemed to work there. While everyone waiting in reception seemed to be white/white British.

    I suspect there is some sort of white flight from the NHS underway, the immigrants who staff it treat other immigrants. Eventually we could reach a theoretical point where no natives are involved at all. Apart from paying for it of course.

    I’m sure there is a story to be written about the key role the NHS has played in the immigration disaster.

    Ostensible “do-gooder” organizations are the false front that has caused much of this problem. Corruption in medicine and charities goes largely unremarked upon, and they’ve been among the worst in terms of human trafficking and skimming off the mess.

    Not to mention in medicine the price gouging is extreme. Even though we always hear about “skyrocketing medical costs” corporate media never bothers to check which costs or whose raising them—or if some heads should roll for it.

  93. @Autochthon

    We also reject the imposition of an arbitrary numerical cap on net migration. The latter in particular is impossible to achieve (especially given that there is no control on the numbers emigrating).
     
    I think I learned about tautologies some time around eighth grade. These adults have not yet. Note the laziness, too; the verbiage is only slightly different from a balder statement: “It is impossible to control things we refuse to control.” Their obfucation-wu is slipping.

    It is also worth noting the adjective “arbitrary” is a tendentious and goofy straw-man; has anyone ever advocated arbitrary numbers in this regard? Many of us advocate numbers based upon objectively measurable things like crowding, traffic, housing costs, wages, pollution, water’s availability, and so on. I have never encounted a proposal for arbitrary limits in my life.


    They also take back to their home countries skills that they have learnt here.
     
    If only they would go back to their home countries for a change....

    Many of us advocate numbers based upon objectively measurable things like crowding, traffic, housing costs, wages, pollution, water’s availability, and so on. I have never encounted a proposal for arbitrary limits in my life.

    Why not? Don’t you think it’s strange?

    That’s thing. We can get on the Sierra Club for being bought off. But nothing about the environmental movement has even a whiff of practicality about it. There’s nothing serious that isn’t some sort of imposition on poor people over there, to be determined later, with results we never measure.

    Nothing that environmentalists propose actually work. Sure cut off immigration. I’m in agreement for many different reasons. But it doesn’t return water the Colorado River. It doesn’t make houses smaller or get families to go to one income. It doesn’t get environmentalists to stop jetting around the world or even in this case importing students from literally 1/2 way around the world. Immigration is simply just the most obvious hypocrisy of a movement that isn’t about the environment.

    • Agree: Nico
    • Replies: @ano
    exaggeration. clean air act really did work. Quite a few of the water pollution regulations were fine as well. Then, there is a fine tradition estwing of the environmental Movement by people like Wendell Berry that is pretty sane. But it really leads back to a much more traditional outlook on life. It leads to the idea of stable community over Generations, traditional families, and communities local control is anathema to the left.
    , @Opinionator
    What is the movement about?
    , @Achmed E.Newman
    AM, would you not agree with this: Every REAL* environmental problem would be that much better with fewer people on the same area of land.

    Please dont’ think I’m one of the “people suck” people (at least I don’t think I suck, for example. ;-}. You are correct in your early assesment that when the developed world - Western World, Japan, Russia, E. Europe decreased fertility drastically from the mid-‘60’s on, while Africa, India, and other parts had a population explosion, the future was basically ruined (last part is my writing, not by paraphrase of what you wrote above somewhere)

    We will be overrun, especially at the rate of immigration AND fertility rates within our countries, the way it is going right now.

    Back to environmentalism, just take some small thing like recycling. This is really not about running out of room to throw trash. It’s more just like the landfills end up farther out of town, making trash disposal more expensive. Anyway, I hate wasting stuff so more power to the recylers. Look though, we can recycle 1/2 of our stuff and be all proud, but if the city has grown to double the population, we are back to square one, as far as the landfill are concerned. All those blue cans, sorting/transfer stations, education via flyers hanging off doorknobs - all for NOTHING vs. keeping a stable population.

    * I’m referring specifically now to the scam designated by Peak Stupidity as Global Climate Disruption(TM). Note the trademark - use it at the pleasure of my lawyers. ;-}
  94. @jamie b.
    You envision tens of millions of humans being shipped off to lifeless Mars?
  95. @Achmed E. Newman

    When political movements or leaders adopt population control as a central concern … let’s just say it never goes well.
     
    Yet, when population does get out of control it works goes well ... like in ... I dunno, Africa? Bangladesh? I’d be the last one to have supported the Commie Chairman Mao of China on anything, but the 1-child policy, as wicked as it was, put a stop to a whole metric shit-ton of poverty that would have resulted otherwise. Every last one of China’s environmental problems, moreso than anywhere else I can think of, is a result of just too many people on too little good land.

    I agree with Whorefinder in comment #32: It’s a religion to these people. I mean, “Let’s just say it never goes well.” Let’s NOT say that, cause there’s no reason TO say it.

    Thanks to the multiple commenters that brought up the David Gelbaum blackmail of the Sierra Club. VDare has been all over this since it’s occurence (or their start-up whichever came last). Here’s an old Tucker Carlson interview with one of these imbeciles, or possibly a member of the cntrl-left under cover of imbecility.

    Not that the Chinese were not having children before, they were, but it was Mao who put them on the path of explosive growth that he later needed to curb.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Yes, true. I’ve been reading some of the “Mao Reconsidered” thread, and all this comes up there. It is the most idiotic article I have read on unz so far. Hey, not my business; I didn’t have to read it, but I sure felt obligated to comment.

    John Derbyhire - DO NOT CLICK ON GODFREE ROBERTS’S ARTICLE WITHOUT BLOOD PRESSURE MEDICATION CLOSE AT HAND!. Just a word to the wise.

    That is the Commie/Lefty method those, as often stated on-line: Complain about a problem. Enforce a solution under threat of violence. Complain about the resulting new problems. Enforce new solutions under the threat of violence. Rinse, lather, repeat, go to Target for more bluish green shampoo.
  96. @Thea
    Brilliant!

    Also education and peace can join that club.

    And free expression.

  97. Steve is a national treasure.

  98. @Pat Boyle
    OT

    This little video from TV points out an obvious point - Fox news landed on its feet with the removal of Bill O'Reilly. A year or two ago I wondered how Fox News was going to manage it's transition. O'Reilly seemed to be on top of the world. He was having books cranked out under his name that seemed to dominate the best seller lists. His nightly news shows were similarly dominating the cable TV ratings. He had dropped most of his goofy fillers like the woman who analyzed the handwriting of political figures. He seemed to be riding high.

    But there was trouble lurking.

    Bill himself was starting to fray around the edges. Increasingly he was blowing his top on camera. It was also becoming clear that he was very impressed with himself. It wasn't just that he couldn't even feign humility his jokes about being a 'simple man' were wearing thin. Big Bill had a serious case of self adoration. He was dizzy with self regard.

    He was also getting old. We had seen how the sweet natured and funny young David Letterman had gone rancid in front of millions of watchers. Could the same thing be happening to O'Reilly the anchor of anchors? We all dreaded the day when he also started to grow a bushy beard.

    O'Reilly still kept holding down the center of the Fox nightly news lineup. His formula was interesting. He purported to serve up hard news but in fact he larded his hour with comedians. Almost every night there would be a segment with Dennis Miller or Greg Gutfeld. This seemed to be his response to the lefty Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart. O'Reilly himself could tell a good joke too.

    So Fox was riding the tiger. They had to get off and get off soon but they feared that first step down. There was no successor in sight. Eric Bowling was dull as dirt. Gutfeld was probably the most talented and the smartest but his shtick was anti-gravitas.

    Somehow it all worked out for Fox. Tucker Carlson had been knocking around the environs of TV News for years. Yet somehow was still baby faced. He seemed like more of a morning show personality than an evening lynchpin. Yet Fox has landed on its feet. Carlson should be good for many decades yet to come. He seems to be the best informed and the best prepared anchor anyone has ever seen on the airwaves. He is as smart as Eric Sevareid once was, but has a bubbly boyish demeanor. He is a heavy weight player who wore an airhead disguise for years so as to escape the notice of the guys with the knives - sort of like Claudius.

    Great post. I had the same thought at the time. To think that Fox News was faced with the departure of two-thirds of its prime-time lineup and its two highest-rated hosts — there are plenty of legitimate criticisms of Megyn Kelly, but she brought gravitas and was a good complement to O’Reilly and Hannity — as well as having the hapless Murdoch sons step up in place of Rupert, and end up better off afterward is astonishing.

    I agree about Carlson. He has stretched the boundary of what is acceptable to discuss on television more than anyone, and without getting in trouble. He has mentioned the concept that, in a political system that elevates identity politics over all else, it’s understandable that whites would get on board with it — which no other mainstream conservative would dare say. He mentioned that the Charlottesville protesters deserve free speech too, even if they are “white nationalists,” “white supremacists,” or even “Nazis” (not that he that they are) which is a surprisingly rare point of view. He has been covering the Vegas shooting intensively, and focusing on the seeming incompetence of the police, which conservatives rarely do.

    And, to top it off, Laura Ingraham will be starting a new show in two weeks. She will be fantastic. People here have occasionally worried that Fox would go National Review-style “never Trump,” but in fact have gone the opposite direction. I don’t know if it’s due to strictly business considerations or ideology, but it scarcely matters.

    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
  99. Steve could you be dead wrong, and let us point to the subject: “Is population an issue that is part of anything, from economics, sociological tendencies, resource management, territory issues, race, ethnicity,” … it is.

    Does it deserve, needs, to be considered as a prime factoring tool, rather then a self-adjusting variable, it does.

    The cable news makes no sense as to the issue, but then, the absurdity and necessity of absurdity catering to the public is always there, as such “The cooking channel”. References to Nazism, eugenics(good and bad), it depends on the definition of. Especially now when non-intrusive methods show up at the horizon.

    Is Steve always wrong, certainly not, does Steve need to ajust this major dead angle, definitely. Does the dead angle affects his further viewpoints, most evidently. A core issue as to the credibility of the character, there is very little lee-way, as to historics, the territorial USA, the future of the planet.

  100. @Alec Leamas
    When you look back on the annals of history, you find that the most dastardly thing Hitler ever did was to restrict immigration into Germany.

    When you look back on the annals of history, you find that the most dastardly thing Hitler ever did was to restrict immigration into Germany

    The irony is that Hitler had to import millions of Poles, Russians, French, etc. into Germany to keep the war machine going. By 1945 there were more “immigrants” living in Germany as a percentage of population than you would find today. And they weren’t all POWs – thousands of Polish civilian young women were brought to Germany to works as nannies, cleaning women, or just in factories. The Nazis actually set the precedent for the Gastarbeiter programs of the 1960s, at least as far as getting Germans accustomed to the idea of importing foreigners to work in their factories or as domestics.

    • Replies: @anon
    Was told that the reason those Polish girls were brought to Germany late in the war, was to save them from rape by the Red Army.
    , @Jack D
    They weren't POWs but they didn't come voluntarily either. They would shanghai Polish civilians off the street.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundup_(history)

    This being the Germans, they had all sorts of grades and categories for their foreign workers - those who volunteered from Western Europe got treated the best. Jews and Russian POWs were treated the worst (3 million Soviet POWs died). Poles were somewhere in between but they were forced laborers who did not come by choice (with rare exceptions).
    , @ussr andy

    The Nazis actually set the precedent for the Gastarbeiter programs of the 1960s,
     
    One of the special features of imperialism connected with the facts I am describing, is the decline in emigration from imperialist countries and the increase in immigration into these countries from the more backward countries where lower wages are paid. As Hobson observes, emigration from Great Britain has been declining since 1884. In that year the number of emigrants was 242,000, while in 1900, the number was 169,000. Emigration from Germany reached the highest point between 1881 and 1890, with a total of 1,453,000 emigrants. In the course of the following two decades, it fell to 544,000 and to 341,000. On the other hand, there was an increase in the number of workers entering Germany from Austria, Italy, Russia and other countries. According to the 1907 census, there were 1,342,294 foreigners in Germany, of whom 440,800 were industrial workers and 257,329 agricultural workers. [10] In France, the workers employed in the mining industry are, “in great part”, foreigners: Poles, Italians and Spaniards. [11] In the United States, immigrants from Eastern and Southern Europe are engaged in the most poorly paid jobs, while American workers provide the highest percentage of overseers or of the better-paid workers. [12] Imperialism has the tendency to create privileged sections also among the workers, and to detach them from the broad masses of the proletariat.

    Lenin, 1916
  101. @Romanian
    Not that the Chinese were not having children before, they were, but it was Mao who put them on the path of explosive growth that he later needed to curb.

    Yes, true. I’ve been reading some of the “Mao Reconsidered” thread, and all this comes up there. It is the most idiotic article I have read on unz so far. Hey, not my business; I didn’t have to read it, but I sure felt obligated to comment.

    John Derbyhire – DO NOT CLICK ON GODFREE ROBERTS’S ARTICLE WITHOUT BLOOD PRESSURE MEDICATION CLOSE AT HAND!. Just a word to the wise.

    That is the Commie/Lefty method those, as often stated on-line: Complain about a problem. Enforce a solution under threat of violence. Complain about the resulting new problems. Enforce new solutions under the threat of violence. Rinse, lather, repeat, go to Target for more bluish green shampoo.

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    Has anyone here been in a Target since the Perverts in the Girls bathroom debacle?
  102. Here’s why.

    translation: i’m an anti-white political activist masquerading as a journalist who wants white people to be turned into a minority regardless of how much it harms them and their children.

    • Agree: MBlanc46
    • Replies: @CrunchyButRealistCon
    Concur.
    Simplest explanation: The managerial Elite controlling the Environmentalist megaphone simply WANT the growing 3rd World populations to overwhelm the developed World.
    This Elite harbors anger & resentment towards the developed, White, Euro-derived West & want it smashed, punished, transformed.
    Most of their contortions & Narrative sculpting is towards diverting attention away from reckless procreation in the 3rd World, and towards Techno-panaceas, gadgetry, & trimming consumption levels.
    The bottom line is that any reductions in consumption or technology improvements in the West will be swept away to irrelevance after a few Camp of the Saints invasions which they help facilitate.
  103. @Maj. Kong
    Nothing will get the space elevator constructed faster, than the threat of overpopulation.

    I’m not a physicist but I think the earth’s mass needs to be within a certain range. If make things and ship them and a bunch of people to Mars or wherever, we’ll have issues here.

    • Replies: @Jack D

    I’m not a physicist
     
    That's for sure. The earth is very massive (6,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 tons)so the amount of material that we could ever conceivably haul off the planet is insignificant in relation. Right now we can send maybe 2,500 tons up into space each year but even if that increased by a factor of thousands (no small thing because it currently costs around $10,000 per POUND to put something in space) it still would not be significant.
    , @another fred

    I’m not a physicist but I think the earth’s mass needs to be within a certain range. If make things and ship them and a bunch of people to Mars or wherever, we’ll have issues here.
     
    Not to worry, when the ship gets to Mars they just load it up with an equal tonnage of Mars rocks and ship them back to earth. Since the earth is closer to the sun it is a downhill haul all the way - cheap.

    Easy peasy. I dint go to engineering school for nothing.

  104. @Rod1963
    Yep Wall Street captured the Sierra Club and the environmental movement in general. I mean population control was one of the big issues for a long time with conservationists. Then boom here come along a bunch of rich white urban faux environmentalists with corporate funding who support the opposite.

    Global Warming IMO was nothing one but one giant diversion and scam to get people to stop thinking about population control and to promote what amounted to corporate welfare through various "green" energy programs.

    The sane can be said with the rise of identity politics and the collapse of economic issues within the DNC and Democratic party in general . It's no accident that it happened as Silicon Valley really started flexing it's muscles within the Democratic party.

    Tribal/identity politics only benefit the wealthy since it serves as a hot button wedge issue that keeps the various groups within the Democratic party fractured and pissed at the wrong people - namely the white middle-class. All the while Silicon Valley and other groups make out like bandits and screw American people over.

    Bigger picture: The rich whites have declared war on the lower class whites via economic and demographic warfare. Until whites across the board from Bernie Brother and Trump voters recognize they all have the same enemy, we're toast.

    The transnationalist plutocrats want to keep the Great Lakes German Americans and the Southern Anglo-Celts from combining. The so-called “blue wall” states — Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania…etc. — were supposed to stay in the Democrat Party camp. People forget just how many frigging Krauts there are in the United States. Trump and his campaign knew all along that the Great Lakes Germans were the key to winning the White house.

    The Democrats were counting on a Jebby Bush or Teddy Cruz to win the Republican Party presidential nomination. Jebby and Teddy are globalizers who are well known for being rancid whores for plutocrat donors. The Great Lakes Germans — Independents, Democrats — were the key for Trump. I don’t give a rat’s ass about the Cruz victory in the Wisconsin GOP presidential primary. Cruz would not have beaten Clinton in the general because Cruz has no appeal to independents and Democrats like Trump has.

    The globalizer plutocrats know that whoever can win the votes of the Great Lakes Germans and the Southern Anglo-Celts will be able to win the electoral college battle.

    Let us not forget Florida:

    President Trump’s repeated campaign pledges to defend and protect Medicare and Social Security won the state of Florida. Jebby Bush and Teddy Cruz wanted to take a meat cleaver and cut Medicare and Social Security.

  105. Not surprisingly, the text string “Africa” does not appear in the Vox article.

    How about utopia?

    • Replies: @eah
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DMRFH3MVwAAy9Nz.jpg
    , @Anonymous
    Doesn't this damned fool realise that the 'Capital' side of the capital/labor dichotomy are, (in the short term, at least), the winners in the uncontrolled immigration paradigm, and therefore are the biggest cheerleaders?

    Lefty pro-immigration sentiment is but a 'recent' development.
  106. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I just love the classic ‘green'(Marxist) lefty strawman sophistry de jour in we selling out of the concrete reality of the world population crisis.

    “Oh, it’s not a crisis of population” they cry, “it’s a crisis of *consumption*!” thereby killing two birds with one stone, deflecting any blame from the sacralized non-white third workers and dumping all the scorn on the hated universal punch-bag target, white males. It let’s the darkies and the lefties off the hook, diverts blame to ‘where it’s due’ and thoroughly side-steps the real crux of a genuinely urgent and vitally important dilemma, thus allowing the smug lefty the satisfaction of having to deal with any real ‘dirty work’ in tackling the crisis at source.

    Basically, it’s deceit, self-deceit,all compounding on denial. Plus a nifty bit of reflection and projection. A real triumph of the pathological liar’s art – but only in this particular case billions (literally) of lives of suffering and starvation are in play. Not to mention the death of the west.

    Anyhow, it’s rather simple to call the pathological liar’s bluff in this particular case. It is a simple matter to calculate the global ‘average’ level of material consumption, and to translate this into plain dollar terms. Thus any individual so minded can, if they will, live on the dollar salary consistent with this average, and if generous enough, donate the balance to a charity of his choice. Out goes the Hummer, central heating etc. The liar is earnestly entreated to set the example himself for fellow Americans to follow.

    Don’t hold your breath.

    • Agree: Nico
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Great comment Anonymous. That is such a good analysis of the lies. I usually can’t even begin to argue with some of these people because there are so many wrong premises in what they say, that you’ve got to start off with corrected definitions of everything involved. By the time you get through that, they have finished their lattes and are on the way to the Wymyns studies class (meanwhile I’ve thrown my chocolate yoohoo bottle out the window and am on my way home rockin to Lynyrd Skynyrd). NOBODY uses vowels anymore - it’s DeClass.
  107. @eah
    Not surprisingly, the text string “Africa” does not appear in the Vox article.

    How about utopia?

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DMR7n3cUEAUiGme.jpg

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    Please don't notice any geographic trend on that map either. Noticers will be sent to the back of the class.
  108. • LOL: Charles Pewitt
    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    Governor of Florida declares a state of emergency as Richard Spencer blows into town. Frog Twitter is already memeing "Rock You Like A Hurricane":

    https://twitter.com/NotMatthiasX1/status/920010718367375362
    , @eah
    https://twitter.com/RichardBSpencer/status/920010038323896320
    , @eah
    At the link there's a reference to Linda Gottfredson -- also a link to the source -- data is from 2003, but I don't imagine it's much different today.

    46% of Queens County Residents are Unable to Read Newspaper Articles, Brochures, and Identify Basic Information.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DMSGT0VU8AEus4K.jpg
  109. @Peter Akuleyev
    When you look back on the annals of history, you find that the most dastardly thing Hitler ever did was to restrict immigration into Germany

    The irony is that Hitler had to import millions of Poles, Russians, French, etc. into Germany to keep the war machine going. By 1945 there were more "immigrants" living in Germany as a percentage of population than you would find today. And they weren't all POWs - thousands of Polish civilian young women were brought to Germany to works as nannies, cleaning women, or just in factories. The Nazis actually set the precedent for the Gastarbeiter programs of the 1960s, at least as far as getting Germans accustomed to the idea of importing foreigners to work in their factories or as domestics.

    Was told that the reason those Polish girls were brought to Germany late in the war, was to save them from rape by the Red Army.

    • Replies: @Bies Podkrakowski
    Germans wanting to save Polish girls from rape? Don't think so.

    Besides they were safer in Poland. There Red Army was theoretically an allied army. Of course it was safer to avoid them. Especially rear and support troops. First line soldiers were more decent - at least that's the tale I was told.

    In Germany Red Army soldiers could got revenge and relieve their work stress and the officers were looking the other way.
    , @Joe Stalin
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEZxcSf9HwM
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKDk9OasxO0
  110. @YetAnotherAnon
    In the UK, the "Green" Party wants effectively open borders. Here's the 2015 manifesto. Remember the current system, which has produced a situation where 30% of primary schoolkids are "minority", is apparently too cruel!

    "Some controls on immigration will be needed for the foreseeable future; for now, we reject an open borders approach. We also reject the imposition of an arbitrary numerical cap on net migration. The latter in particular is impossible to achieve (especially given that there is no control on the numbers emigrating) and leads to many individual injustices.

    Any controls must respect the following principles:
    • Mutual legal obligations within the EU on freedom of movement.
    • International obligations to accept refugees, whether seeking sanctuary from wars, political repression or climate change.
    • Respect for the integrity of families. The arrival of a grandmother might well have no direct economic effect, but her contribution to family life may contribute hugely to our society. We would in particular–abolish the policy that requires a British citizen to have an income of at least £18,600 a year before their partner can come to live in the UK, which discriminates against poorer people ,–make it much easier for adult dependants, mainly elderly parents, of British citizens to come and live here.
    • No restrictions on foreign students. Foreign students contribute hugely to our education system, both financially and in terms of the wider perspectives they bring. They also take back to their home countries skills that they have learnt here that will be valuable at home and positive attitudes towards the UK. In particular we would–allow students to work in the UK for two years after graduation;–widen the Youth Mobility Scheme to allow those from poorer countries to participate.
    • No priority simply for economic reasons. We would in particular aim to retain more of those trained in the UK in the health service so that we have less need to take health service workers from countries that can ill afford to lose them.

    We would also:
    • Review the rules for those wishing to set up or do business here to ensure they are not discriminatory against smaller businesses.
    • Not simply accept people just because they are rich. The London housing market in particular has been gravely distorted by the number of rich migrants buying property, bidding up prices all along the housing chain.
    • Ensure that no prospective immigrant is held in detention. As a matter of urgency, the administrative detention of children and pregnant women should cease immediately.
    • Review the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, particularly with regard to issues of access to legal advice, childcare and levels of subsistence allowance, and reintroduce Legal Aid for reasonable levels of immigration and asylum work.

    In addition, once immigrants have arrived, we would:
    • Assist integration by making available free or affordable English or Welsh language lessons to all new immigrants who want them, costing about £200 million a year.
    • Open up ways for existing irregular migrants who have been here for three years to become legal. In particular, a legal status must be provided for people who have not succeeded in their claim for humanitarian protection but who cannot be returned to their country of origin owing to the political situation there."
     
    Incidentally the UK Green Party's 2010 manifesto was written by a professor at Keele University, who resigned his post after being convicted of various charges. Not a story that I heard on the BBC.

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/renowned-academic-government-advisor-who-9655870

    "A renowned academic, Government advisor and former Green Party Parliamentary candidate had sexually explicit chats with underage girls and downloaded images of child abuse."
     

    Lol I’m sure there will be a line around the block for free Welsh lessons

  111. @Peter Akuleyev
    When you look back on the annals of history, you find that the most dastardly thing Hitler ever did was to restrict immigration into Germany

    The irony is that Hitler had to import millions of Poles, Russians, French, etc. into Germany to keep the war machine going. By 1945 there were more "immigrants" living in Germany as a percentage of population than you would find today. And they weren't all POWs - thousands of Polish civilian young women were brought to Germany to works as nannies, cleaning women, or just in factories. The Nazis actually set the precedent for the Gastarbeiter programs of the 1960s, at least as far as getting Germans accustomed to the idea of importing foreigners to work in their factories or as domestics.

    They weren’t POWs but they didn’t come voluntarily either. They would shanghai Polish civilians off the street.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundup_(history)

    This being the Germans, they had all sorts of grades and categories for their foreign workers – those who volunteered from Western Europe got treated the best. Jews and Russian POWs were treated the worst (3 million Soviet POWs died). Poles were somewhere in between but they were forced laborers who did not come by choice (with rare exceptions).

    • Replies: @Ouzo 140 proof
    Some form of this Menschensortierung still persists among WNs, as one might ocxasionally notice. The hierarchy has changed, but not much. From best to worst:
    1. NW Euros
    2. Central Euros
    3. Eastern Euros
    4. Southern Euros
    5. Russians
    6. Blue eyed/Blond or red haired people outside Europe
    7. Honorary whites (Japanese)
    8. Albanians
    9. Everyone else

    Still wondering why ze Germans lost ze war.
  112. @Tsar Nicholas
    I am a fan of Britain's National Health Service. I can go to the doctor when ever I need to, and I don't have to worry about awkward, criminal insurance companies or the prospect of bankruptcy.

    However, I find myself completly out-of-step with those on the Left who berate the Evil Tories for not providing enough money to cope with "rising demand."

    What accounts for this risng demand? Well, it may advances in medical technology. I suspect more likely it is down to Coca-Cola and MacDonalds, and the poor health outcomes associated with consuming their products. However, it is completely verboten for anybody to mention the other obvious fact - rising population, almost entirely explained by immigration.

    The fact that people are living longer is also an obvious reason why the NHS takes up more resources.

  113. @anony-mouse
    Er, since virtually all Green Parties support open borders the donation by Gelbaum isn't the only reason the Sierra Club isn't interested in population control.

    Er, since virtually all Green Parties support open borders.

    The Austrian pro open border Greens are not in the new parliament. German pro open border Greens are suffering too – just got thrown out of the regional parliament in Lower Saxony. Boris Palmer, German Green mayor of lovely Tübingen, has a book out: “We can’t help them all” (them=migrants etc.). It sells well.

    But by and large, the fact that what Philip Cafaro states – that there is a relation between environmentalism and population growth, seems to be all too clear.

    That it isn’t seen by most greens, is a big mystery to me, I have to admit.

    The love of nature is not necessarily a love of one species – it’s biological diversity, that counts, no?

    Jonathan Franzen is at times very close to that position. As is T. C. Boyle.

    German novelist Herman Peter Piwitt is the only contemporary I can think of, who is since decades clearly on the side of biological diversity. His formula: Beware of humans – we’re badly domesticated predator apes.

  114. @Thea
    I'm not a physicist but I think the earth's mass needs to be within a certain range. If make things and ship them and a bunch of people to Mars or wherever, we'll have issues here.

    I’m not a physicist

    That’s for sure. The earth is very massive (6,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 tons)so the amount of material that we could ever conceivably haul off the planet is insignificant in relation. Right now we can send maybe 2,500 tons up into space each year but even if that increased by a factor of thousands (no small thing because it currently costs around $10,000 per POUND to put something in space) it still would not be significant.

    • Replies: @Thea
    But to terrascape Mars, what mass would that require?
  115. You always know there’ll be some epic content when the headline has ‘here’s why’ in the title.

    Stuff like this pisses me off. Because issues like the environment are largely based on a ‘sanctity’ morality, that is what is motivating him. He is thus unable to disentangle other sanctity motives from it, in his case immigration. Therefore immigration can’t be a problem for the environment.

    But it’s obvious to any observer of places like Brussels, London or Dublin that immigration drives a crisis shortage in housing leading to massive over-development, that consumes nature and destroys some of the most high-value, high productive farmland in the world.

    It’s obvious that new immigrants are highly mercenary with low attachment to their new homes and will thus not support environmental regulations or show much concern over global warming if they get in the way of any gibs for them, as those are more abstract concerns expressed and internalised by Westerners. Their influence on these democracies will thus undermine this.

    It’s obvious that people living Western countries consume more resources and thus increases the population through mass migration will hurt global resources.

    It’s obvious that people regard immigration as a huge directly existentially threatening political issue that will distract away from global warming in exactly those new developed Western countries with welfare states that have done so much to champion it. Reducing social trust and cohesion in the likes of Sweden, Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, etc is insane! Those states and populi should be considered the core of any movement towards more green economies and everything about them that powers that protected! This moron likely believes that if Americans hadn’t ‘gone crazy’ and elected Trump, we’d be making more progress, instead of understanding that political arguments about immigration are inevitable and Trump was given total monopoly on it by idiots like him.

    It’s further obvious that given the last point, making people focus on global warming by reminding them how many Bengali, Africans etc, who might be displaced and be able to guilt-trip developed nations as an argument in the West, is a good strategy.

    It’s shit like this that leads people to doubt in global warming for their own tribal-political reasons in reaction. (The reason people doubt the official narrative on race often despite their desire for it to be true as a result of the live experience of their lives, people doubt Global Warming because they didn’t want it to be true in the first place) Disasters like the March for Science, which was a bad enough idea itself, but within days of being announced had already been hijacked by SJWs, contribute.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Altai

    Regarding the 1st part of your post, you describe environmental problems that are (should be) obvious to all. You didn’t even get to the basics of it though: People have to throw out things, as we are not true omnivores, like billy goats. Besides simple garbage, along with more complicated garbage (say cars, the most recycled products there ever have been BTW – been to the junkyard lately? You can barely find a door handle still on the car), we can include real pollutants like oxides of nitrogen and particulates, and oils, heavy metals, old medicines, etc, in “things”.

    So, we’ve got stuff to get rid of. The smaller the population vs. the land area/ocean volume/atmospheric volume, the easier it is for Mother Earth (really just wind/rain/freezing-thawing ice/lots of bugs-worms-bacteria) to clean up after us. The American Indians have always been thought of as environmentalists, but with only 5-10 million people on 10 million square miles (just N. America, depending on how you define it), it’s more like Earth had time to clean up after them, that’s all.

    Oh back to your point, Altai, your view of Global Climate Disruption(TM – mine) as an “existential” problem shows that you have some kind of arrogance about those Trump voters, thinking you are so much smarter, I guess. People don’t doubt GCD for “tribal” reasons, as many have a lot more common sense than you, and understand that there IS NO WORKING MATH. MODEL OF THE ENTIRE WORLD CLIMATE!. Any significant predictions made have been wrong. I don’t expect a working model of the earth’s climate to be easy, and I respect climate science when it is not politicized. It IS politicized now, even to the dismay of many a real scientist just trying to study or model piece parts of the extremely complex climate of this planet.

    This climate nonsense is the biggest scam since the Diamond Business (continued here and here) and running a close 2nd to the ponzi scheme called Social Security. Leave this nonsense behind and FOCUS, Altai, on the real problems.
  116. Such mindset is precisely why Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstein got away with so much bad behavior for so long.

    Too many reporters just refuse to look into certain matters for ‘ideological’ reasons.

  117. @eah
    Not surprisingly, the text string “Africa” does not appear in the Vox article.

    How about utopia?

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DMR7n3cUEAUiGme.jpg

    Doesn’t this damned fool realise that the ‘Capital’ side of the capital/labor dichotomy are, (in the short term, at least), the winners in the uncontrolled immigration paradigm, and therefore are the biggest cheerleaders?

    Lefty pro-immigration sentiment is but a ‘recent’ development.

  118. @AndrewR
    I don't understand what I said that created the urge in you to be so disrespectful towards me, but your status as a bully and a troll have been duly noted.

    rofl.

    “bully”= anyone who says anything kinda mean to AndrewR

    “troll”= anyone who contradicts AndrewR.

    Don’t you have some leftists to go apologize for, cucky?

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    You're the most dishonest person I've seen on this website and that's saying a lot.
  119. “I’m an Environmental Journalist, But I Never Write About Overpopulation. Here’s Why.”

    short answer- because it’s ‘racist’. The icing on the cake is he’s willing to blatantly lie about why the SC changed their stance and allow the wealthy and powerful to corrupt its mission….

    in other words, he’d rather see the planet destroyed than even have a racist thought cross his mind.

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    he’d rather see the planet destroyed than even have a racist thought cross his mind.

    When I read about some tragically naive SJW who was beaten to death by blacks, I imagine his final thoughts: "It's not a black fist pounding my face, it's a human fist! No ugly stereotypes! No racist thoughts! Prepare to receive me, God, my heart is pure, I'm thinking no racist thoughts!"

  120. @eah
    OT

    Florida is Acting Like @RichardBSpencer is a One Man Hurricane

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DMR8sG_UEAAbfEF.jpg

    Governor of Florida declares a state of emergency as Richard Spencer blows into town. Frog Twitter is already memeing “Rock You Like A Hurricane”:

    https://twitter.com/NotMatthiasX1/status/920010718367375362

    • LOL: eah
  121. @anon
    Was told that the reason those Polish girls were brought to Germany late in the war, was to save them from rape by the Red Army.

    Germans wanting to save Polish girls from rape? Don’t think so.

    Besides they were safer in Poland. There Red Army was theoretically an allied army. Of course it was safer to avoid them. Especially rear and support troops. First line soldiers were more decent – at least that’s the tale I was told.

    In Germany Red Army soldiers could got revenge and relieve their work stress and the officers were looking the other way.

    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome


    Besides they were safer in Poland. There Red Army was theoretically an allied army.

     

    Huh? Allied?

    Soviet invasion of Poland, 17 September 1939
    , @anon
    You mightn't think so, but it's still a fact.
    Those S.S. Officers were ''very handsome'', at least according to my female Polish informant.
  122. @Anon
    An admittance that ideological blinders mentally forbid him from dealing with real pressing issues.

    A perfect example of PC and journalism.

    In the USSR, the state forced blinders on reporters.

    Today, the PC virus colonizes minds of journalists and they self-censor. Of course, another reason is PC is necessary as status marker in Progopolis. If one writes about inconvenient matters, the shunning begins.

    Today, the PC virus colonizes minds of journalists and they self-censor.

    The left actually takes pride in its own stupidity – we’re seeing more and more articles like this where the writer gives witness to his ‘pure faith’ by saying he’s happily willing to ignore reality.

  123. @whorefinder

    Steve’s blog is not a widely influential national news source.
     
    False. Steve is incredibly influential. Many NR-type cucks come here on the sly to get some truth before they go back to shilling for their corporate masters, and race-realist lefties such as little Matty Yglesias are also lurking here, vacuuming up race realism before they have to go back to pretending race doesn't exist. (Yglesias in particular lurks here a bunch, due to the fact that he was personally subject to a racial knockout game attack by blacks in Washington, D.C.)

    It takes a bit, but many of Steve's ideas eventually get into the bigger corporate media, though with enough time and change of wording as to make sure there's plausible deniability that they read such a "racist." Ross Douthat and David Brooks are prime examples.

    Certainly Pod the Lesser lurks here. You here today Pod? Ya rpllnt son of a

  124. @whorefinder

    Steve’s blog is not a widely influential national news source.
     
    False. Steve is incredibly influential. Many NR-type cucks come here on the sly to get some truth before they go back to shilling for their corporate masters, and race-realist lefties such as little Matty Yglesias are also lurking here, vacuuming up race realism before they have to go back to pretending race doesn't exist. (Yglesias in particular lurks here a bunch, due to the fact that he was personally subject to a racial knockout game attack by blacks in Washington, D.C.)

    It takes a bit, but many of Steve's ideas eventually get into the bigger corporate media, though with enough time and change of wording as to make sure there's plausible deniability that they read such a "racist." Ross Douthat and David Brooks are prime examples.

    Certainly Pod the Lesser lurks here. You here today Pod? Ya rpllnt son of a

  125. @Dan Hayes
    Steve,

    What was not reported in the Vox article was the real reason why the "green anti-immigration" Sierra Club movement was defeated. That was the 100 million dollar "donation" by Wall Street fat cat David Gelbaum in 2000-2001. Gelbaum essentially made the SC an offer they couldn't refuse.

    What was not reported in the Vox article was the real reason why the “green anti-immigration” Sierra Club movement was defeated.

    It’s interesting how the left now supports wealthy, powerful globalists subverting democracy and democratic process. once of the clauses to the donation was that the SC would never broach the subject of immigration again.

    • Agree: Dan Hayes
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Yep, I, for the leaders of the cntrl-left, it’s all about power, not ideas at all. For the masses of useful idiots that follow, well, they are idiots, so you know ....
  126. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    My experience with environmentalism in college in the late 90’s was that it was a haven for communists in denial about the collapse of the Soviet Union.

    My experience with environmentalism in the real world of the early 2000’s was that it was a stalking horse for rich people to get richer, through property development restrictions, cheap labor, or easy gdp/stock market growth.

    Although I still love being outdoors, i cannot stand the pretentiousness of the politics of it…

    • Agree: bomag
  127. OT: Are these people trying to make themselves look like fools? Is this the journalistic version of producing Springtime For Hitler ?

    • Replies: @whorefinder
    The problem isn't their lack of credibility, the problem is the monopoly they have on the megaphone. The Left has known for decades the rule of a high school gossip: if they keep repeating a lie to you enough, you'll believe it, no matter how little credibility they have.

    Smash the media monopolies, however, and they can't keep repeating it.
    , @Harry Baldwin
    House of Cards may be over-the-top, but it will give a more realistic idea of what goes on in American politics than the New York Times will.
  128. @Jack D

    I’m not a physicist
     
    That's for sure. The earth is very massive (6,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 tons)so the amount of material that we could ever conceivably haul off the planet is insignificant in relation. Right now we can send maybe 2,500 tons up into space each year but even if that increased by a factor of thousands (no small thing because it currently costs around $10,000 per POUND to put something in space) it still would not be significant.

    But to terrascape Mars, what mass would that require?

    • Replies: @jamie b.
    Mars already has enough CO2. If it doesn't have enough water, that would need to be supplied by redirected comets/asteroids. The biggest problem is the absence of nitrogen. Humans can't breathe an atmosphere of just O2 and CO2. You need nitrogen as a buffer (78 % of Earth's atmosphere). I've never seen any proposals for how to supply all that N2 to Mars.

    At any rate, nobody proposes that we ship all the necessary raw resources to Mars from Earth.
    , @Mr. Anon

    But to terrascape Mars, what mass would that require?
     
    More mass than Mars has available for the task. Terraforming Mars is a really bad idea. Mars has only a wispy atmosphere today because it doesn't have a gravitational field strong enough to hold on to an appreciable atmosphere. The most valuable resources to be found on Mars is water, which is mostly locked up in the form of ice (and perhaps some sub-surface liquid water). Harvesting it and pumping it out on to the surface as an atmosphere will result in it eventually being lost, leaving Mars even more barren than it already is even faster than it otherwise woud become.

    Terraforming isn't only a far-fetched idea, it is a bad idea. If people are someday going to live on Mars, it will be as mole-people, in mostly buried structures (which will also provide shielding against galactic cosmic rays) - much like Clavius base in 2001.
  129. @eah
    OT

    Florida is Acting Like @RichardBSpencer is a One Man Hurricane

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DMR8sG_UEAAbfEF.jpg

  130. IMMIGRATION MORATORIUM NOW!

  131. @AndrewR
    As someone who literally has never watched Letterman for more than two minutes per year, can you describe Letterman's psychological transformation (which even I vaguely perceived), in detail for people like me?

    I first encountered David Letterman on an obscure game show. As I remember Betty White was also a panelist. The set up was they showed the celebrity panelists some strange object and they made up a story about it. Letterman was terrific. He was funny and imaginative. Soon he was grabbed up by the major networks and I lost track of him. Flash forward to Carson’s retirement. Leno won out but Letterman also got a late night spot.

    Another flash forward and he had turned bitter and nasty. He seemed to have gone rancid. All his jokes were political and he became insufferable. Sorry, my memory is extremely episodic. I don’t know just when he became sour.

    • Replies: @whorefinder
    David Letterman seemed like a genius when I was 14. Then I turned 15.

    The man was a typical lefty: absolutely self-hating and miserable, who tried to make everyone else more miserable than him. As he got older, like most sociopaths (as Anonymous Conservative points out), it got harder and harder for him to hide his rancid bitterness, whereas when he was younger he was better at wearing the mask. his interview style---make the other person uncomfortable---was always just nasty and meanness-without-meaning, but early on he covered up with wit enough to give him plausible deniability.

    By the end, the mask had slipped, and had no more wit to give; he was exposed as just enjoying making people feel bad on camera.
    , @Lagertha
    Your last line: I so get that. I am horrified that there is not one late night show crazy, wild comedian I can find to sooth my nervous soul, or duh, laugh. Watching Stone & Parker is all what is left for purity of laughing my ass off.
  132. @eah
    OT

    Florida is Acting Like @RichardBSpencer is a One Man Hurricane

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DMR8sG_UEAAbfEF.jpg

    At the link there’s a reference to Linda Gottfredson — also a link to the source — data is from 2003, but I don’t imagine it’s much different today.

    46% of Queens County Residents are Unable to Read Newspaper Articles, Brochures, and Identify Basic Information.

  133. @unclesam

    I am a fan of Britain’s National Health Service. I can go to the doctor when ever I need to, and I don’t have to worry about awkward, criminal insurance companies or the prospect of bankruptcy.
     
    I would claim that Britain's pointed lack of innovation and entrepreneurship is directly related to the fact that they tax the living shit out anyone who makes significant money. Your ability to manufacture is for shit. You can't even make a decent automobile. I mean, what the fuck do you folks even do that carries any global impact. Last time I was in an electronics store, most of your stuff sucked ass. Going to an average grocery store, or electronics store is like a 1950's version of an American one. The packaging of your grocery items is old fashioned and stupid. You can't even make a milkshake. It's like a special item, if you can find it.

    Stop trying to brag about anything contemporary and British. Your political system sucks ass. You finally got your wits about you with Brexit, but it's too little, too late. You're a cultural and demographic dead man walking. The first thing any successful entertainer does when they hit pay dirt is to get the hell out of your country.

    By the way, the mean little fat fuck you're so proud of, Winston Churchill, tricked us into getting involved in a stupid civil war he helped to orchestrate, and for what? What did all the Americans die for? On those fucking beaches Hitler ran your silly asses off of at the get-go? So you could establish a Muslim Caliphate that used to be London? And who pays to defend your country now, when push comes to shove?

    WE do. If you had to pay for a military that wasn't a joke, your "free" health benefits would not be free.

    And speaking of your great insurance that you're taxed up the ass for, many of your inhabitants teeth are still atrocious. Out in your hinterlands, Brits can still be found with giant misshapen heads, under serviced jawlines, and every other manifestation of concentrated inbreeding, even after all these years.

    In short, you've been a bunch of fucking two-faced assholes since 1770's, and your shit hasn't changed.

    So... quit trying to feed our sociopath liberals blank ammunition by bragging about your stupid insurance plans. Your country is on welfare. We're carrying your fat brit asses.

    Shut up, and show some respect.

    “Britain’s pointed lack of innovation and entrepreneurship is directly related to the fact that they tax the living shit out anyone who makes significant money. “

    You’re out of date.

    Top income tax rate is 45% as compared to US 39.6%.

    Top Capital Gains is the same in both countries, though the UK one kicks in at a much lower gain.

    On the other hand, people in private equity i.e. the UK equivalent of KKR etc only pay 10% capital gains, making PE the way to get very rich. So buy a company at £100 million, sweat assets and staff, sell at £200 million, that’s £90m in your back pocket after the “Entrepreneurs Relief” capital gains tax.

    There are other ways of not paying – Philip Green, wealthy retail owner, has a wife resident in Monaco who owns all his shares – not tax at all AFAIK on dividends remitted there. The Duke of Westminster own half of London, but when a duke dies his heirs pay very little “inheritance tax” (40% for lesser mortals) thanks to a collection of perfectly legal trusts.

    “You can’t even make a decent automobile.”

    Having owned both Chryslers and Toyotas, I wouldn’t start chucking those particular rocks.

    • Agree: jim jones
  134. @Achmed E. Newman

    When political movements or leaders adopt population control as a central concern … let’s just say it never goes well.
     
    Yet, when population does get out of control it works goes well ... like in ... I dunno, Africa? Bangladesh? I’d be the last one to have supported the Commie Chairman Mao of China on anything, but the 1-child policy, as wicked as it was, put a stop to a whole metric shit-ton of poverty that would have resulted otherwise. Every last one of China’s environmental problems, moreso than anywhere else I can think of, is a result of just too many people on too little good land.

    I agree with Whorefinder in comment #32: It’s a religion to these people. I mean, “Let’s just say it never goes well.” Let’s NOT say that, cause there’s no reason TO say it.

    Thanks to the multiple commenters that brought up the David Gelbaum blackmail of the Sierra Club. VDare has been all over this since it’s occurence (or their start-up whichever came last). Here’s an old Tucker Carlson interview with one of these imbeciles, or possibly a member of the cntrl-left under cover of imbecility.

    The 1-child policy is leading us to a major war. The large imbalance between men and women in China—because in Chinese society boys were favored over girls, women aborted female fetuses s—has created a large number of now-grown men with no romantic prospects. Historically, a large number of unattached men with no sexual outlets in a given society has created a society eager to invade/attack others for the (literal) booty.

    This is what happened with the early Romans (rape of the Sabine), the Vikings (lack of marriageable women led to their invasions), and currently in the Middle East, especially the Saudis (where the Saudi royals have snapped up so many women as harem/wives that the remainder of the men are easily radicalized in their desperate states, as the 9/11 hijackers (all Saudis) showed).

    China is going to start massive invasions of local countries for their women, or somehow begin massive imports from somewhere else, which will also lead to conflict with nations they import them from. If I were a female I would not “vacation” in China in the next 25 years, as the government will likely begin or allow kidnapping of women on a wide scale.

    Likely North Korea will be a prime place for Chinese men to import brides (by force), and this is why Japan is experiencing a new stereotype: the suave Chinese exchange student picking up Japanese women. Chinese men are becoming the Don Juans of East Asia simply because they need to be.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Whorefinder, I know about the problem you explain here, so let me say a few more things. 1st, I was off by 3 years or so - the policy was NOT implemented by Mao. Sorry for this mistake. OK that was just a correction for the record, not an argument.

    Anyway, the population of China was 450 million or so even back. in the 1850’s! That’s more than the US population EVEN TODAY. The country has something like 1/3 of the livable land as the US - you must lop off the high mountains/desert of Tibet in the west and Xinjiang in the northwest - only. a small fraction of the population is there. Then subtract all the mountainous area that are steep as all get-out and can’t be developed (Yes, I’ve been all over the US and I know we have mountains and deserts, but we have still so much more usable land). That was all just to say that the place has been crowded forever.

    Again, the one-child policy is about the most tyranical thing I have ever seen implemented by any totalitarian “leader”, so I’d never be for that. It did have the affect anyway of avoiding a ramp up India-like population density, which even with the Chinese good work-ethic and smarts, would have been a disaster.

    Yes, there is a male/female imbalance, and that is solely due to the preference for boys, which is due to the Chinese way of expecting the 1st male to take care of the parents when they are old. This is changing as we speak. Also, the 1-child policy was rescinded in some big cities a good while back, and I will check, but I think it is not in effect anywhere. That doesn’t correct for 38 years, true. I think the “relief valve” (so to speak, haha) of Vietnam and other places will help, but agree that the tendency for the government to be more prone to war is there because of the excess of men.
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    More on this (just for the hell of it, I guess) China stuff. Part of my family has people in China. This family had 7 kids, trying to have a boy, who was indeed the last one (about time!). That’s the way it went BEFORE the 1-child policy. Even after it was implemented, people here shouldn’t think that someone would have been jailed or executed when the 2nd kid pops out. The eldest of the 7 kids had 2 babies, and both parents lost their jobs after that 2nd one The 2nd one, a girl BTW, after the 1st, BOY, kid, was unable to be properly registered for school or some such thing. Out in the country, the central gov couldn’t really control what was going. on*.

    It’s not like the 2nd kid had to live in the attic to hide. The kids just lived in the attic there anyway because everyone was poor in the day ;-}. As I wrote on the “Chairman Mao was the cat’s mao” thread (a complete imbecile named Godfree Roberts, right here on unz), China WAS pretty crime-free in the 1970’s because there was nothing to steal. Americans sent over corn, even though we were Cold War enemies. To this day, the Mom there won’t eat corn, as she got sick of feed corn (yeah, we weren’t sending our best sweet corn, haha!). Well, let them eat rice, right?



    * I admire this one part, where the local people do have a lot of control in some areas and tell central gov. people to go straight to hell - that is, only when the locals aren’t suck-ups to Mao like they were during the Cultural Rev., much like bought-off congressman/senators here.
  135. @Pat Boyle
    I first encountered David Letterman on an obscure game show. As I remember Betty White was also a panelist. The set up was they showed the celebrity panelists some strange object and they made up a story about it. Letterman was terrific. He was funny and imaginative. Soon he was grabbed up by the major networks and I lost track of him. Flash forward to Carson's retirement. Leno won out but Letterman also got a late night spot.

    Another flash forward and he had turned bitter and nasty. He seemed to have gone rancid. All his jokes were political and he became insufferable. Sorry, my memory is extremely episodic. I don't know just when he became sour.

    David Letterman seemed like a genius when I was 14. Then I turned 15.

    The man was a typical lefty: absolutely self-hating and miserable, who tried to make everyone else more miserable than him. As he got older, like most sociopaths (as Anonymous Conservative points out), it got harder and harder for him to hide his rancid bitterness, whereas when he was younger he was better at wearing the mask. his interview style—make the other person uncomfortable—was always just nasty and meanness-without-meaning, but early on he covered up with wit enough to give him plausible deniability.

    By the end, the mask had slipped, and had no more wit to give; he was exposed as just enjoying making people feel bad on camera.

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    I agree with your assessment. I got a negative vibe from him and never watched his show, but he had legions of fans so obviously there was a market for him.
    , @Rapparee
    You could say the same of countless comics; humour is often a sublimated expression of hostility toward the world. There are exceptions, of course, but generally speaking, successful comedians are not happy, well-adjusted people. The underlying bitterness often becomes more obvious with age.
  136. @The Z Blog
    This is example eleventy billion that Progressivism is a religion, not a political ideology. He's not avoiding the population issue because it is not germane. He avoids it because he fears it could lead to heresy. Like all virtuous Progs, this guy believes mentioning population will lead to xenophobia, eugenics and the 12th Invisible Hitler emerging to impose the Fourth Reich.

    “Like all virtuous Progs, this guy believes mentioning population will lead to xenophobia, eugenics and the 12th Invisible Hitler emerging to impose the Fourth Reich.”

    That means that, for Hidden Hitler to emerge from occultation, there must be (or have been) 10 other Hitlers since the first, and at the rate I’ve been reading about “the new Hitler” we must be going through them fast.

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

    Saddam I’m pretty sure was the new Hitler, George Bush II was, Trump definitely is – that’s three. Is Assad?

    I bet Nasser was the new Hitler back in the day. Any other candidates?

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    George Wallace, Lester Maddox, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Jesse Helms, Rudi Giuliani, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney--I'm pretty sure each of them was identified as the new Hitler at one time or another. Among foreign leaders, Slobodan Milošević.
  137. @Achmed E. Newman
    Ignore my links. This site’s got a bug that puts some extra characters at the end of my links (after numbers, after ‘submit’). I’m trying to figure it out, as it doesn’t affect any old links.

    This Ron Unz post might be relevant:
    Open Thread: Software Bugs?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    MEH 0910, thank you for the reply and your concern. I regret having done testing under a post here (they got deleted anyway), as 2 things that I hadn’t done yet were 1) get on another computer (a real one - this is a tablet) and then 2) try links elsewhere, as on my site. I did (2), then realized that the problem was somewhere on my end*, then (1) proved that my stupid tablet is putting in the wrong type of double-quote marks.

    I haven’t solved my problem yet, but understand it at least. (I had seen this thread you linked to, and it did seem weird that unz would have ANY kind of bug. I don’t agree with Mr. Unz all the time on politics, but his site is the “Cat’s Mao”.

    * but had to get to work and leave it behind till later.

  138. @unclesam

    I am a fan of Britain’s National Health Service. I can go to the doctor when ever I need to, and I don’t have to worry about awkward, criminal insurance companies or the prospect of bankruptcy.
     
    I would claim that Britain's pointed lack of innovation and entrepreneurship is directly related to the fact that they tax the living shit out anyone who makes significant money. Your ability to manufacture is for shit. You can't even make a decent automobile. I mean, what the fuck do you folks even do that carries any global impact. Last time I was in an electronics store, most of your stuff sucked ass. Going to an average grocery store, or electronics store is like a 1950's version of an American one. The packaging of your grocery items is old fashioned and stupid. You can't even make a milkshake. It's like a special item, if you can find it.

    Stop trying to brag about anything contemporary and British. Your political system sucks ass. You finally got your wits about you with Brexit, but it's too little, too late. You're a cultural and demographic dead man walking. The first thing any successful entertainer does when they hit pay dirt is to get the hell out of your country.

    By the way, the mean little fat fuck you're so proud of, Winston Churchill, tricked us into getting involved in a stupid civil war he helped to orchestrate, and for what? What did all the Americans die for? On those fucking beaches Hitler ran your silly asses off of at the get-go? So you could establish a Muslim Caliphate that used to be London? And who pays to defend your country now, when push comes to shove?

    WE do. If you had to pay for a military that wasn't a joke, your "free" health benefits would not be free.

    And speaking of your great insurance that you're taxed up the ass for, many of your inhabitants teeth are still atrocious. Out in your hinterlands, Brits can still be found with giant misshapen heads, under serviced jawlines, and every other manifestation of concentrated inbreeding, even after all these years.

    In short, you've been a bunch of fucking two-faced assholes since 1770's, and your shit hasn't changed.

    So... quit trying to feed our sociopath liberals blank ammunition by bragging about your stupid insurance plans. Your country is on welfare. We're carrying your fat brit asses.

    Shut up, and show some respect.

    Britain is in much better demographic shape than America.

  139. @jamie b.
    You envision tens of millions of humans being shipped off to lifeless Mars?

    The space elevator is supposed to promise large cost reductions, making asteroid mining feasible. That means a power source and raw materials to build on Mars. And if you can build a space elevator, you can probably build giant orbital mirrors to make Mars warmer.

    The long term solution is probably some kind of cryonics that will freeze people long enough to get to another star system.

    • Replies: @jamie b.
    I'm familiar with beanstalks, and wish that we'd seriously pursue their development. Nevertheless, they would do nothing to relieve or reduce overpopulation. Even if you could ship tens (hundreds?) of millions of humans off into space, there's really no place to send them. And even if you could terraform Mars within just a few centuries, you're still talking about shipping tens (hundreds?) of millions of humans off to a completely underdeveloped (and probably only marginally habitable) world that could at most support a tenth of Earth's population. And the idea of shipping a meaningful portion of humanity to an entirely different star system is too silly to even comment on.

    Our future might well be in space. But that will do little to help those teeming billions who will remain stuck on Earth.
  140. Jacques Cousteau was everybody’s favorite oceanographic environmentalist and he was an avowed eugenicist. Can’t get anymore population control than that. He thought the world should have a total population of 250 million people. I guess it depends on who is promoting population control. Hitler and Stalin and Pot Pol should have their own special hells, but because Cousteau and Sanger and Rachel Carson are favorites of the left, they are saints. And, of course, they never had a chance to “control” a population.

  141. @AM

    Human population is an integral part of the environment. Anyone refusing to discuss human overpopulation should not be able to call themselves an environmental journalist.
     
    Which highlights the point that modern environmental movements are essentially neo-Gnosticism.

    It isn't about the environment, it's about getting rid of all those evil, nasty people who are made of flesh (again.)

    This was never about population control either, because Westerners have only successful neutered themselves and those who enter into their societies (a process which takes a generation or so.)

    You want population control and nice environments?

    -Lower the West's standard of living. No fresh vegetables, less travel, no ski resorts, etc, etc.

    -Raise the West's day to day lifestyle. Get women to stay home. Less income, smaller houses, less travel, more sanity.

    -Spread the fear of God over Africa. They don't use birth control. Give it up. It's not happening. Only Westerners are quite so special needs as to completely divorce sex from children. You might however, convince the average African that God is watching and wishes them to properly take care of the children in monogamous, lifelong relationships. That real men stick around and raise their children and real women don't let themselves be doormats on the point.

    -Close all of the West's borders and allow only private charities to operate in Africa. No more large scale UN or foriegn aid, including meddling with reproductive habits.

    And almost everything I have stated would be anathema to average self proclaimed environmentalist concerned about populations.

    Which brings me back around to the idea that modern environmentalism is neo-Gnosticism in a green coat. Modern environmentalism has little or nothing to do with effective results, and everything to do with assuming that people are bad, which is why the average environmentalist is so wholly for open borders.

    I’m not sure Gnostic is an apt descriptor. Gnostics think the world itself is a demonic imposition. They’d be just as apt to kill themselves as to wade in on matters of the environment. The Open Border Greens are probably best described as cowards with a nature fetish. Fervent enough to make life hellish for the responsible denizens of the first world who are insufficiently fetishist for nature. Cowardly enough not to promote those same hellish standards to anyone else, lest they be indicted for wrong-think.

  142. OT: Antifa disturbances in major cities planned for November Fourth
    An Antifa goon visited 4chan and cleared some things up. It is possible that it was a LARP but this sounds credible.
    The general plan is a reboot of Occupy Wall Street, a perpetual demonstration in high traffic urban areas. Blocking traffic is a given, that’s their favorite thing in the world besides suckerpunching random people. Unlike Occupy they have only one message: the goverment must volutarily and extra-Constitutionally collapse. That’s not a policy position. It’s a mere attack on government legitimacy. This is sedition. It is not covered by the First Amendment. It is completely possible and legal for authorities to roll this up on day one, but they will probably let it happen, because there can be no better recruitment for the deplorable alt-right that the own-foot-blasting geniuses at Antifa.
    The anon said that the real goal was January Twentieth (anniversary of Presidential inauguration), and the point with the barricades starting Fourth of November was to set up footholds that could be useful later.
    Expect traffic delays if you commute into any urban area on November Fourth, at least on the first day. Do not go anywhere near Antifa or BAMN crowds. This is a big last harrah for these people, they’re all on board: BLM, BAMN, assorted anarchists, RevCom, The Avakianians, Black Bloc, and watered down hippies for optics. Expect shooting incidents in line with the Maidan or Arab Spring pattern, and remember that they shoot their own in order to play victim and maximize feelings of outrage. One of the perennial goals is to gin up or activate suggestible crazies who feel nudged to do something stupid, so don’t be near them. And if this disrupts your life then please let police and politicians know how you feel.

  143. And here’s a case of an African littering swastikas:
    http://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/145545713
    trib.al/HTAPUgd
    Yet another black racist graffitti hoax.

  144. @AndrewR
    Is any ideology free of sacred cows? Is any individual free of them? How many people would be able and willing to talk dispassionately about literally any topic? Probably 100% of those people would either be complete sociopaths or have severe Asperger's, assuming they even exist at all. We are fundamentally beasts, even if some of us are occasionally able to transcend our animal natures.

    While it's easy for anyone who regularly reads Sailer to scoff at the cowardice, ignorance and dishonesty of the libtards who write for Vox, we all have our own blind spots and emotional triggers that render meaningful debate impossible.

    “we all have our own blind spots and emotional triggers that render meaningful debate impossible”

    Everyone has some, but those with a particularly vast collection are notable for that reason. Refusal to address the relative trigger load would be to assume the absolute futility of communication. If you actually believed it, you would have just performed a contradictory action by saying so.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    My point is that, yes, obviously leftism is a religion and we all know that. But everyone has a religion (defined as a set of unfalsifiable beliefs about the world). This is not to say that some religions are not better or more rational than others.
  145. The banner of Conservationism is now carried by hunters and anglers in yet another political shift.

    Here in Arizona Jeff Flake is catching a lot of fire for talking about surrendering federal land to the state. Perhaps surprisingly, the red state outdoorsmen do not want this. Why you ask? Because states have a really bad track record of saying “We won’t lease or sell this land except in an emergency!” And then creating or inventing an emergency that can only be solved by leasing or selling this land. In Arizona its expected that any land would be sold to feed the bottomless stomach of the beast that is “education” in short order.

    It also appears the Humane Society is under progressive capture as well, as its pushing an initiative to ban the hunting of big cats. Which is ridiculous, because big cats face no pressure outside of humans and would absolutely ravage the non predatory big game that is making a return.

    But its not about big cats, its about nibbling at the edges to make hunting untenable. AZGFD has done such a great job managing things that you have jaguars (yes jaguars!) in the US as far north as the Mongollon Rim, but the Left wants to mess things up for the sake of their schizophrenic religion.

  146. @Jim Christian
    In the DC suburb of Fairfax, Virginia, I grew up with kids in the 60s-70s that came from Catholic families of 12-18 kids. Hell, we were Waspy Scot/Half Greek (the good half Greek), and we had 7 in our family. Then the EPA got going, Green this-and-that and before you knew it, big families evil, small families good. And boy did the Western White comply. Unfortunately, the Public Service Message didn't make it to India, HispanicLand, Africa, Paki-Whaki or anywhere in the Middle East at all.

    Of course, we put all our women to work, made Saints of slutty single mothers who mostly limited their numbers of spawn, except for the Blacks of course, who also didn't get the message about smaller families. Here so we are, short of Whites, importing all else, including for the military. Everyone but White breed like rats..

    How's that working for us? We have infrastructure to support, many problems to solve that don't get solved by people we brought here from third-world countries, which is why those countries are third-world. Do the authors of any of this look at things and say, "Oooopsie!"?

    Your concerns are legitimate, fellow half-Greek, but otherwise you’ve got it wrong. Fertility rates have dropped dramatically all over the world, with the exception of SSA and Afghanistan/Iraq. Steve has written extensively on this.

    There’s no conspiracy against the white race, however you define it, otherwise why would the 2nd+ generation immigrants’ fertility rates to levels close to the host population in 1st world countries? And why would the African American population in the US (excluding black immigrants) stagnate?

    There’s plenty other reasons why fertility rates drop and no nation or race is immune to it (excluding SSA countries for now, sure).

    Interesting stats:
    https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.TFRT.IN/?year_high_desc=true

    Even India’s TFR has dropped to 2.4, and muslim countries’ TFR keeps going down.

    • Replies: @notanon

    There’s no conspiracy against the white race, however you define it, otherwise why would the 2nd+ generation immigrants’ fertility rates to levels close to the host population in 1st world countries?
     
    Sure there is. When the native TFR of countries who don't have a hostile elite drops below replacement they implement policies to try and increase it. Countries with a hostile elite institute population replacement via immigration.

    The anti-white conspiracy isn't in lowering the fertility rate it's in ignoring it.
  147. Society has become more polarized. All the late shows have become political cesspits. They’ve even gotten to poor Jimmy Fallon.

  148. @AndrewR
    Well on some level, it is arbitrary. It's impossible to measure the effect of a single immigrant in a country of 60 million. For any "non-arbitrary" number n an immigration restrictionist would choose as the maximum number of immigrants to allow, the country could survive n + 1.

    Yes, immigrants have real effects on all those things you mentioned (not all necessarily negative effects), but to say that you could pick a non-arbitrary number is absurd. In theory, there could be a "straw that broke the camel's back" but that exact number would infinitely exceed the capacity of anyone to predict.

    Somewhat contra Autochthon, but I think a lot of people favor criteria-based immigration rather than quota-based. If you make the criteria stringent enough, there’s no need to set a numerical cap, and the n+1 problem is solved.

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    Why is there a need for any immigration?

    A nation of 330,000,000 has every type of person it needs (and too many of some).
  149. @Jack D
    They weren't POWs but they didn't come voluntarily either. They would shanghai Polish civilians off the street.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundup_(history)

    This being the Germans, they had all sorts of grades and categories for their foreign workers - those who volunteered from Western Europe got treated the best. Jews and Russian POWs were treated the worst (3 million Soviet POWs died). Poles were somewhere in between but they were forced laborers who did not come by choice (with rare exceptions).

    Some form of this Menschensortierung still persists among WNs, as one might ocxasionally notice. The hierarchy has changed, but not much. From best to worst:
    1. NW Euros
    2. Central Euros
    3. Eastern Euros
    4. Southern Euros
    5. Russians
    6. Blue eyed/Blond or red haired people outside Europe
    7. Honorary whites (Japanese)
    8. Albanians
    9. Everyone else

    Still wondering why ze Germans lost ze war.

  150. @anony-mouse
    Er, since virtually all Green Parties support open borders the donation by Gelbaum isn't the only reason the Sierra Club isn't interested in population control.

    Back in the initial days of modern environmentalism, the Club of Rome was very concerned with population growth, in the 1970s. The institutions which gave rise to the Green Movement were NOT inevitably left-wing at the outset. In 1981 there was considerable ambiguity as to whether Green electors in the first round of the French presidential election would broke for Giscard d’Estaing or for Mitterrand, in the second round.

    The Gelbaum donation was of course far from the only factor in the transformation, but it is a powerful illustration of the step-by-step co-optation of the Greens into the corporate-hippie column. You had academic and financial backers stepping up pressure and encouraging Bright Young Things to join in: naturally the presence of these latter signified a leftward tilt as they came of age and took over leadership. But you also had the right, especially the Anglo-American right, simply cast aside anything “eco” as it embraced a sort of dogmatic commitment to neo-liberalism during the Reagan years. This is why so many conservative commentators are as blind to ongoing ecological disasters as most NYT columnists are to the disgusting sewer the immigration policies and BLM terrorists they fawn over are turning the U.S. into.

  151. @eah
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DMRFH3MVwAAy9Nz.jpg

    Please don’t notice any geographic trend on that map either. Noticers will be sent to the back of the class.

  152. @AM

    Many of us advocate numbers based upon objectively measurable things like crowding, traffic, housing costs, wages, pollution, water’s availability, and so on. I have never encounted a proposal for arbitrary limits in my life.
     
    Why not? Don't you think it's strange?

    That's thing. We can get on the Sierra Club for being bought off. But nothing about the environmental movement has even a whiff of practicality about it. There's nothing serious that isn't some sort of imposition on poor people over there, to be determined later, with results we never measure.

    Nothing that environmentalists propose actually work. Sure cut off immigration. I'm in agreement for many different reasons. But it doesn't return water the Colorado River. It doesn't make houses smaller or get families to go to one income. It doesn't get environmentalists to stop jetting around the world or even in this case importing students from literally 1/2 way around the world. Immigration is simply just the most obvious hypocrisy of a movement that isn't about the environment.

    exaggeration. clean air act really did work. Quite a few of the water pollution regulations were fine as well. Then, there is a fine tradition estwing of the environmental Movement by people like Wendell Berry that is pretty sane. But it really leads back to a much more traditional outlook on life. It leads to the idea of stable community over Generations, traditional families, and communities local control is anathema to the left.

  153. @Thea
    I'm not a physicist but I think the earth's mass needs to be within a certain range. If make things and ship them and a bunch of people to Mars or wherever, we'll have issues here.

    I’m not a physicist but I think the earth’s mass needs to be within a certain range. If make things and ship them and a bunch of people to Mars or wherever, we’ll have issues here.

    Not to worry, when the ship gets to Mars they just load it up with an equal tonnage of Mars rocks and ship them back to earth. Since the earth is closer to the sun it is a downhill haul all the way – cheap.

    Easy peasy. I dint go to engineering school for nothing.

    • LOL: Daniel Chieh
  154. I think a reason (besides their buyout by corporate, pro-open borders donors) the left ignores over-population is because it gets to the essential anti-human aspect of their environmentalism. If you accept that every other living thing has as much right to exist that we do, the most rational, logically consistent conclusion is that of the voluntary extinction movement. Humans, after all, are the harbingers of mass extinction #6. Since you can’t popularize any movement on anything so radical, they accept their current state of incoherence. Been watching a David Attenborough nature series on Netflix called the Hunt. Most of the episodes are your standard (excellent) BBC nature documentary where you follow different species of animal. One, however, focused on how humanity can protect the predators shown in the previous episodes. All of the solutions were banally stupid because all of the problems were due to overpopulation. India’s population is growing and some people move to the forest to compete with tigers? Pay them to move to the city (cause I’m sure the city will contain an infinite number of people). People farming have their cattle eaten by lions? Pay tribesmen off to tell other people not to kill in retaliation.

    But I can’t be too harsh on them as I have yet to find a fully coherent philosophical basis for protecting nature. The libertarian position amounts to: any human policy should be focused on human benefit. Pollution?: Polluted land is economically unusable so generally is avoided anyway. We can regulate when it becomes a negative externality. Extinction/conservation?: If something is truly of collective value to humanity, a market for it will emerge to preserve it (zoos, ecotourism, controlled hunting). But there really isn’t any means of controlling population there. For some cultures, an ultimate value is having lots of kids, one that would override a value for the natural world around them. Perhaps related to the “collective value” point is another “conservative” position which approaches nature as something more like a part of our heritage, a cultural treasure like the Mona Lisa or the Sistine Chapel. Not to put the Nazis in a laudable light, but I’d posit Goring charging the Heck brothers in back-breeding Aurochs (Heck cattle, in their case) in order to recreate Roman quarry as an example of this flavor of environmentalism. The National Park System perhaps is another. At least here nature is of intrinsic value without any anti-human conclusion. But then again, I once heard an environmentalist describe deforestation for economic purposes as akin to “burning a priceless piece of art for firewood” I suppose where he and I differ is that I could understand someone burning the Mona Lisa if they were freezing to death and there was nothing else around. Which analogously is pretty much the perpetual state of humanity with regards to the environment. I like the natural world and would hate to see it destroyed, I just don’t know the best way to defend it without throwing humans under the bus.

    Related Addendum: when looking for conservative views on conservation, I was looking for a speech by E.O. Wilson where he says “What is the heart of conservatism if it does not include leadership in conservation? And why have conservative thinkers needlessly, and against all logic and their own self-interest, surrendered the moral high ground on this issue to the liberals?”. Steve Sailer quoted it in the following Takimag article and I remember reading the speech a few years ago but I can’t recall the details and cannot find it anywhere on the internet. Anyone got a link? I’m genuinely curious how he defended conservation from a conservative viewpoint.

    http://takimag.com/article/country_boys_and_conservative_conservation/print#ixzz4vidL49zI

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    You seem to be operating under the dubious premise that humans are not part of the natural world and that we can survive "without nature."

    An anthropocentric worldview is natural for humans, obviously, but taken to an extreme it is harmful to humans.

    It's just like how an egocentric worldview is natural in an individual, but extremely egoistic behavior like rape, robbery and murder tend to have a net negative effect on the self in the long run.

  155. @dearieme
    gay because he's got a decent vocabulary? Are you a neanderthal with a chip on your shoulder?

    There are people who associate high culture as such with homosexuality, not entirely without foundation. But for this poster I assume it’s not so much about the decentness of his vocabulary, nor that the words are relatively obscure, nor that he uses them correctly. The above poster finds a patter in the quality of the words. They sound not merely intellectual and recondite, but distinctly like something a gay man would say.

    Much like you might guess a person is Catholic because he uses words found in the Bible, the catechism, and the writings of St. Thomas. Or if you guessed a writer is a military man because he uses military terminology. Faggy words in the context of this article are subtler to detect. Unless the author throws in finger-snaps and the word “breeder.”

  156. @anon
    Was told that the reason those Polish girls were brought to Germany late in the war, was to save them from rape by the Red Army.

  157. @AndrewR
    Well on some level, it is arbitrary. It's impossible to measure the effect of a single immigrant in a country of 60 million. For any "non-arbitrary" number n an immigration restrictionist would choose as the maximum number of immigrants to allow, the country could survive n + 1.

    Yes, immigrants have real effects on all those things you mentioned (not all necessarily negative effects), but to say that you could pick a non-arbitrary number is absurd. In theory, there could be a "straw that broke the camel's back" but that exact number would infinitely exceed the capacity of anyone to predict.

    You are applying an autistic mathematician’s interpretation to the term; I am applying a meaningful, connotative significance to it.

    Sure, allowing fifty million immigrants in each year is arbitrary vis-a-vis its distinction in effect from allowing forty-nine million, nine hundred ninety-nine thousand, nine hundred, and ninety nine.

    It is, however, not arbitrary at all to decide that, all things considered, more than, about fifty million immigrants permitted annually is inarguably deleterious to the common weal, and, some numerical limit being needed to administer the matter meaningfully, fifty million is as good as any, and as nearly right as can be determined; wheras twelve and five hundred billion (or even thirty or sixty million) decidedly would not be.

    Your autistic mathematician’s demand for precision renders meaningless any number of useful and by no means arbitrary numbers: speed limits, medical implants’ useful lifetimes, mileage advisable between changing oil and filters, and so on.

    I think you know all this, because your commentary suggests you generally have your poop together, so maybe your just with the lady in Vermont who irrationally derides environmentalism.

    In the event. The emigration cited originally is another stupid straw-man (as if Europe, Canada, what used to be the U.S.A., Australia, and New Zealand have ever had or will have in the foreseeable future meaningful numbers of people emigrating such that the matter must be monitored (indeed, net emigration is of no concern in any event, as it only renders unto those of us who remain greater resources per capita…).

    What’s more, as to whether or not this or that limit on immigration is arbitrary (in my commonsense, meaningful use of the term or your pedantic, unhelpful one): the proper limit is obvious and not arbitrary at all, because it is zero. Zero immigrants should be permitted into what used to be the U.S.A. We’re full up, thanks. Paco, Ting Tong, Bhavagushnajaruthan, and Ndawajongo can try the next hotel down the road, and good luck to them.

    • LOL: AndrewR
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    What country is allowing 50,000,000 immigrants per year lmao
  158. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Western Green Parties support open borders because they believe moving people from poor, rural areas around the world to the fertility sinks of the highly urbanized West will lower their fertility rates, which is true but doesn’t address other aspects of the issue such as policies which allow migrants to avoid assimilating to urban, anti-natalist Western norms, and high fertility rates in poor, rural areas around the world.

  159. @unclesam

    I am a fan of Britain’s National Health Service. I can go to the doctor when ever I need to, and I don’t have to worry about awkward, criminal insurance companies or the prospect of bankruptcy.
     
    I would claim that Britain's pointed lack of innovation and entrepreneurship is directly related to the fact that they tax the living shit out anyone who makes significant money. Your ability to manufacture is for shit. You can't even make a decent automobile. I mean, what the fuck do you folks even do that carries any global impact. Last time I was in an electronics store, most of your stuff sucked ass. Going to an average grocery store, or electronics store is like a 1950's version of an American one. The packaging of your grocery items is old fashioned and stupid. You can't even make a milkshake. It's like a special item, if you can find it.

    Stop trying to brag about anything contemporary and British. Your political system sucks ass. You finally got your wits about you with Brexit, but it's too little, too late. You're a cultural and demographic dead man walking. The first thing any successful entertainer does when they hit pay dirt is to get the hell out of your country.

    By the way, the mean little fat fuck you're so proud of, Winston Churchill, tricked us into getting involved in a stupid civil war he helped to orchestrate, and for what? What did all the Americans die for? On those fucking beaches Hitler ran your silly asses off of at the get-go? So you could establish a Muslim Caliphate that used to be London? And who pays to defend your country now, when push comes to shove?

    WE do. If you had to pay for a military that wasn't a joke, your "free" health benefits would not be free.

    And speaking of your great insurance that you're taxed up the ass for, many of your inhabitants teeth are still atrocious. Out in your hinterlands, Brits can still be found with giant misshapen heads, under serviced jawlines, and every other manifestation of concentrated inbreeding, even after all these years.

    In short, you've been a bunch of fucking two-faced assholes since 1770's, and your shit hasn't changed.

    So... quit trying to feed our sociopath liberals blank ammunition by bragging about your stupid insurance plans. Your country is on welfare. We're carrying your fat brit asses.

    Shut up, and show some respect.

    The packaging of your grocery items is old fashioned and stupid.

    I’m fascinated by this phrase, can you give any examples or specific comparisons?

  160. http://amp.miamiherald.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/leonard-pitts-jr/article178599721.html

    The right wing old white men have started the fight. We the People are going to finish it

    • Replies: @MBlanc46
    Oh, please do. Do it soon so that my knees won’t be totally shot when it starts.
  161. @Pat Boyle
    OT

    This little video from TV points out an obvious point - Fox news landed on its feet with the removal of Bill O'Reilly. A year or two ago I wondered how Fox News was going to manage it's transition. O'Reilly seemed to be on top of the world. He was having books cranked out under his name that seemed to dominate the best seller lists. His nightly news shows were similarly dominating the cable TV ratings. He had dropped most of his goofy fillers like the woman who analyzed the handwriting of political figures. He seemed to be riding high.

    But there was trouble lurking.

    Bill himself was starting to fray around the edges. Increasingly he was blowing his top on camera. It was also becoming clear that he was very impressed with himself. It wasn't just that he couldn't even feign humility his jokes about being a 'simple man' were wearing thin. Big Bill had a serious case of self adoration. He was dizzy with self regard.

    He was also getting old. We had seen how the sweet natured and funny young David Letterman had gone rancid in front of millions of watchers. Could the same thing be happening to O'Reilly the anchor of anchors? We all dreaded the day when he also started to grow a bushy beard.

    O'Reilly still kept holding down the center of the Fox nightly news lineup. His formula was interesting. He purported to serve up hard news but in fact he larded his hour with comedians. Almost every night there would be a segment with Dennis Miller or Greg Gutfeld. This seemed to be his response to the lefty Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart. O'Reilly himself could tell a good joke too.

    So Fox was riding the tiger. They had to get off and get off soon but they feared that first step down. There was no successor in sight. Eric Bowling was dull as dirt. Gutfeld was probably the most talented and the smartest but his shtick was anti-gravitas.

    Somehow it all worked out for Fox. Tucker Carlson had been knocking around the environs of TV News for years. Yet somehow was still baby faced. He seemed like more of a morning show personality than an evening lynchpin. Yet Fox has landed on its feet. Carlson should be good for many decades yet to come. He seems to be the best informed and the best prepared anchor anyone has ever seen on the airwaves. He is as smart as Eric Sevareid once was, but has a bubbly boyish demeanor. He is a heavy weight player who wore an airhead disguise for years so as to escape the notice of the guys with the knives - sort of like Claudius.

    I never could stand Bill O’Reilly.

    Always respected Tucker.

  162. @Achmed E. Newman
    Ignore my links. This site’s got a bug that puts some extra characters at the end of my links (after numbers, after ‘submit’). I’m trying to figure it out, as it doesn’t affect any old links.

    So sorry, Ron Unz, for trying to debug this on another thread. I finally got to another machine – tablet was putting in wrong wacky quote marks. I feel much better now, after figuring it out!

  163. @notanon

    Here's why.
     
    translation: i'm an anti-white political activist masquerading as a journalist who wants white people to be turned into a minority regardless of how much it harms them and their children.

    Concur.
    Simplest explanation: The managerial Elite controlling the Environmentalist megaphone simply WANT the growing 3rd World populations to overwhelm the developed World.
    This Elite harbors anger & resentment towards the developed, White, Euro-derived West & want it smashed, punished, transformed.
    Most of their contortions & Narrative sculpting is towards diverting attention away from reckless procreation in the 3rd World, and towards Techno-panaceas, gadgetry, & trimming consumption levels.
    The bottom line is that any reductions in consumption or technology improvements in the West will be swept away to irrelevance after a few Camp of the Saints invasions which they help facilitate.

  164. OT: Hillary is hitting the sauce again:

    ‘I was running downstairs in heels with a cup of coffee and fell backwards!

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4984972/Clinton-apologetic-missing-BBC-interview.html

    When was the last time Hillary was able to run down a set of stairs in heels? This woman lies about absolutely everything. She is truly a pathological and baldfaced liar and the sad part is that her sycophants actually buy into the lies.

    Notice Bill is nowhere to be found but Huma is. I am increasingly convinced that Weiner was just a “beard” to distract everyone away from the Huma-Hillary romance.

    Whenever any of you are tempted to criticize Trump, just remember what the alternative was.

    • Agree: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    Whenever any of you are tempted to criticize Trump, just remember what the alternative was.
     
    Center shot! Arrow vibrating and its truth reverberating!
    , @EriK

    This woman lies about absolutely everything.
     
    You can say that again. Even when she doesn't have to lie, it's her first instinct.
    , @Abe

    Whenever any of you are tempted to criticize Trump, just remember what the alternative was.
     
    She was on Fareed Zakaria’s show this weekend peddling her book (which earned a $12 million advance, BTW) and recounting how her relationship with Putin really went downhill after he ‘manspread’ in front of her (Hilary’s exact terminology) at a summit. So the first wannabe female President moved the nuclear doomsday clock forward by 3 minutes just to make a point about toxic masculinity. God we dodged a bullet.
    , @Harry Baldwin
    Hillary reflexively lies, but she's not terribly skilled at it. For example, her description of how she happened to fall is too detailed. In his book The Gift of Fear, Gavin De Becker lists the excessively detailed explanation as one of the "tells" that a con-artist is giving you a made-up story. Also, her story is calculated to put her in a flattering light--I was running! down stairs! in high heels! with my coffee! turning to speak to someone!--Ah, what a bustling, engaged life she's leading. More likely, she was drunk and furiously kicked some furniture while screaming at one of her staff. Either that or dodging sniper fire.
    , @Eagle Eye

    Hillary is hitting the sauce again:

    ‘I was running downstairs in heels with a cup of coffee and fell backwards!

    ...
    When was the last time Hillary was able to run down a set of stairs in heels?

     

    The truth may be worse for her - another fainting spell brought on by whatever neurological condition she has? Of course, alcohol rarely helps. NYT's Amy Chosick to her credit noted Hillary's drinking a long time ago: http://freebeacon.com/issues/hillary-drinks/

    BTW the bizarre facial gestures we saw during the campaign don't seem to be as evident now - less stress/better neurological management?

    There were speculations during the election campaign that Hillary had only months to live but she looks better now (touch wood - her activities at this stage help undermine the Left). Is it ridiculous to speculate that she may have been the victim of an undercover operation to manipulate her medical regime during the campaign? Many commentators have noted that Bill was always in two minds about a Hillary presidency that would eclipse his own legacy.

    Notice Bill is nowhere to be found but Huma is. I am increasingly convinced that Weiner was just a “beard” to distract everyone away from the Huma-Hillary romance.
     
    Remember that Anthony Weiner was introduced to Huma by the Clintons. Didn't Bill officiate at the wedding?

    Being criminal riff-raff themselves, the Clintons have since Mena preferred to deal with outright criminals with well-defined criminal aims who are more "flexible" and easier to control than genteel society.
  165. @Tsar Nicholas
    I am a fan of Britain's National Health Service. I can go to the doctor when ever I need to, and I don't have to worry about awkward, criminal insurance companies or the prospect of bankruptcy.

    However, I find myself completly out-of-step with those on the Left who berate the Evil Tories for not providing enough money to cope with "rising demand."

    What accounts for this risng demand? Well, it may advances in medical technology. I suspect more likely it is down to Coca-Cola and MacDonalds, and the poor health outcomes associated with consuming their products. However, it is completely verboten for anybody to mention the other obvious fact - rising population, almost entirely explained by immigration.

    Fan == Fanatic, no?

    GB’s NHS is a good example of how to live off of the sacrifices, and the resulting social capital accumulation, of previous generations. But eating the seed corn of next years planting may not give you what you expect, or even what you need. Check the administrator-to-hospital-bed ratio of your NHS over the last 75 years – and then explain to me how those administrators have improved your health care.

    You have signed on to the societal organization that ensures substandard results. I am pleased to once again see the wisdom of our American Founding Fathers. Keep your socialized health care, and your soul-suffocating socialism to yourself.

    But hey, see if you can recruit to Britain the socialists that want to visit the stupidity of your system onto the American people; start with AndrewR and add 27-Year-Old, and Corvinus if you can.

  166. @Tsar Nicholas
    I am a fan of Britain's National Health Service. I can go to the doctor when ever I need to, and I don't have to worry about awkward, criminal insurance companies or the prospect of bankruptcy.

    However, I find myself completly out-of-step with those on the Left who berate the Evil Tories for not providing enough money to cope with "rising demand."

    What accounts for this risng demand? Well, it may advances in medical technology. I suspect more likely it is down to Coca-Cola and MacDonalds, and the poor health outcomes associated with consuming their products. However, it is completely verboten for anybody to mention the other obvious fact - rising population, almost entirely explained by immigration.

    Fan == Fanatic, no?

    GB’s NHS is a good example of how to live off of the sacrifices, and the resulting social capital accumulation, of previous generations. But eating the seed corn of next years planting may not give you what you expect, or even what you need. Check the administrator-to-hospital-bed ratio of your NHS over the last 75 years – and then explain to me how those administrators have improved your health care.

    You have signed on to the societal organization that ensures substandard results. I am pleased to once again see the wisdom of our American Founding Fathers. Keep your socialized health care, and your soul-suffocating socialism to yourself.

    But hey, see if you can recruit to Britain the socialists that want to visit the stupidity of your system onto the American people; start with AndrewR and add 27-Year-Old, and Corvinus if you can.

  167. @unclesam

    I am a fan of Britain’s National Health Service. I can go to the doctor when ever I need to, and I don’t have to worry about awkward, criminal insurance companies or the prospect of bankruptcy.
     
    I would claim that Britain's pointed lack of innovation and entrepreneurship is directly related to the fact that they tax the living shit out anyone who makes significant money. Your ability to manufacture is for shit. You can't even make a decent automobile. I mean, what the fuck do you folks even do that carries any global impact. Last time I was in an electronics store, most of your stuff sucked ass. Going to an average grocery store, or electronics store is like a 1950's version of an American one. The packaging of your grocery items is old fashioned and stupid. You can't even make a milkshake. It's like a special item, if you can find it.

    Stop trying to brag about anything contemporary and British. Your political system sucks ass. You finally got your wits about you with Brexit, but it's too little, too late. You're a cultural and demographic dead man walking. The first thing any successful entertainer does when they hit pay dirt is to get the hell out of your country.

    By the way, the mean little fat fuck you're so proud of, Winston Churchill, tricked us into getting involved in a stupid civil war he helped to orchestrate, and for what? What did all the Americans die for? On those fucking beaches Hitler ran your silly asses off of at the get-go? So you could establish a Muslim Caliphate that used to be London? And who pays to defend your country now, when push comes to shove?

    WE do. If you had to pay for a military that wasn't a joke, your "free" health benefits would not be free.

    And speaking of your great insurance that you're taxed up the ass for, many of your inhabitants teeth are still atrocious. Out in your hinterlands, Brits can still be found with giant misshapen heads, under serviced jawlines, and every other manifestation of concentrated inbreeding, even after all these years.

    In short, you've been a bunch of fucking two-faced assholes since 1770's, and your shit hasn't changed.

    So... quit trying to feed our sociopath liberals blank ammunition by bragging about your stupid insurance plans. Your country is on welfare. We're carrying your fat brit asses.

    Shut up, and show some respect.

    Two words: “Ariel Atom”.

  168. @unclesam

    I am a fan of Britain’s National Health Service. I can go to the doctor when ever I need to, and I don’t have to worry about awkward, criminal insurance companies or the prospect of bankruptcy.
     
    I would claim that Britain's pointed lack of innovation and entrepreneurship is directly related to the fact that they tax the living shit out anyone who makes significant money. Your ability to manufacture is for shit. You can't even make a decent automobile. I mean, what the fuck do you folks even do that carries any global impact. Last time I was in an electronics store, most of your stuff sucked ass. Going to an average grocery store, or electronics store is like a 1950's version of an American one. The packaging of your grocery items is old fashioned and stupid. You can't even make a milkshake. It's like a special item, if you can find it.

    Stop trying to brag about anything contemporary and British. Your political system sucks ass. You finally got your wits about you with Brexit, but it's too little, too late. You're a cultural and demographic dead man walking. The first thing any successful entertainer does when they hit pay dirt is to get the hell out of your country.

    By the way, the mean little fat fuck you're so proud of, Winston Churchill, tricked us into getting involved in a stupid civil war he helped to orchestrate, and for what? What did all the Americans die for? On those fucking beaches Hitler ran your silly asses off of at the get-go? So you could establish a Muslim Caliphate that used to be London? And who pays to defend your country now, when push comes to shove?

    WE do. If you had to pay for a military that wasn't a joke, your "free" health benefits would not be free.

    And speaking of your great insurance that you're taxed up the ass for, many of your inhabitants teeth are still atrocious. Out in your hinterlands, Brits can still be found with giant misshapen heads, under serviced jawlines, and every other manifestation of concentrated inbreeding, even after all these years.

    In short, you've been a bunch of fucking two-faced assholes since 1770's, and your shit hasn't changed.

    So... quit trying to feed our sociopath liberals blank ammunition by bragging about your stupid insurance plans. Your country is on welfare. We're carrying your fat brit asses.

    Shut up, and show some respect.

    Two words: “Ariel Atom”.

  169. @unclesam

    I am a fan of Britain’s National Health Service. I can go to the doctor when ever I need to, and I don’t have to worry about awkward, criminal insurance companies or the prospect of bankruptcy.
     
    I would claim that Britain's pointed lack of innovation and entrepreneurship is directly related to the fact that they tax the living shit out anyone who makes significant money. Your ability to manufacture is for shit. You can't even make a decent automobile. I mean, what the fuck do you folks even do that carries any global impact. Last time I was in an electronics store, most of your stuff sucked ass. Going to an average grocery store, or electronics store is like a 1950's version of an American one. The packaging of your grocery items is old fashioned and stupid. You can't even make a milkshake. It's like a special item, if you can find it.

    Stop trying to brag about anything contemporary and British. Your political system sucks ass. You finally got your wits about you with Brexit, but it's too little, too late. You're a cultural and demographic dead man walking. The first thing any successful entertainer does when they hit pay dirt is to get the hell out of your country.

    By the way, the mean little fat fuck you're so proud of, Winston Churchill, tricked us into getting involved in a stupid civil war he helped to orchestrate, and for what? What did all the Americans die for? On those fucking beaches Hitler ran your silly asses off of at the get-go? So you could establish a Muslim Caliphate that used to be London? And who pays to defend your country now, when push comes to shove?

    WE do. If you had to pay for a military that wasn't a joke, your "free" health benefits would not be free.

    And speaking of your great insurance that you're taxed up the ass for, many of your inhabitants teeth are still atrocious. Out in your hinterlands, Brits can still be found with giant misshapen heads, under serviced jawlines, and every other manifestation of concentrated inbreeding, even after all these years.

    In short, you've been a bunch of fucking two-faced assholes since 1770's, and your shit hasn't changed.

    So... quit trying to feed our sociopath liberals blank ammunition by bragging about your stupid insurance plans. Your country is on welfare. We're carrying your fat brit asses.

    Shut up, and show some respect.

    Two words: “Ariel Atom”.

  170. @Jack D
    OT: Hillary is hitting the sauce again:

    'I was running downstairs in heels with a cup of coffee and fell backwards!

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4984972/Clinton-apologetic-missing-BBC-interview.html

    When was the last time Hillary was able to run down a set of stairs in heels? This woman lies about absolutely everything. She is truly a pathological and baldfaced liar and the sad part is that her sycophants actually buy into the lies.

    Notice Bill is nowhere to be found but Huma is. I am increasingly convinced that Weiner was just a "beard" to distract everyone away from the Huma-Hillary romance.

    Whenever any of you are tempted to criticize Trump, just remember what the alternative was.

    Whenever any of you are tempted to criticize Trump, just remember what the alternative was.

    Center shot! Arrow vibrating and its truth reverberating!

  171. @Jack D
    OT: Hillary is hitting the sauce again:

    'I was running downstairs in heels with a cup of coffee and fell backwards!

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4984972/Clinton-apologetic-missing-BBC-interview.html

    When was the last time Hillary was able to run down a set of stairs in heels? This woman lies about absolutely everything. She is truly a pathological and baldfaced liar and the sad part is that her sycophants actually buy into the lies.

    Notice Bill is nowhere to be found but Huma is. I am increasingly convinced that Weiner was just a "beard" to distract everyone away from the Huma-Hillary romance.

    Whenever any of you are tempted to criticize Trump, just remember what the alternative was.

    This woman lies about absolutely everything.

    You can say that again. Even when she doesn’t have to lie, it’s her first instinct.

    • Replies: @Eagle Eye

    Even when she doesn’t have to lie, it’s [Hillary's] first instinct.
     
    She needs the practice to stay sharp.
  172. I’m curious, Asia is both the world’s most populous continent and largest source of immigrants, yet the Africa obsession here is never-ending.

    Y’all been cucked one too many times or perhaps it’s the shameful boners of interracial porn that drives this neurosis.

    • Replies: @neutral
    Africa is closer to Europe and also poorer than Asia, it also has a much higher population growth rate so it poses a much greater threat.
  173. @Pat Boyle
    OT

    This little video from TV points out an obvious point - Fox news landed on its feet with the removal of Bill O'Reilly. A year or two ago I wondered how Fox News was going to manage it's transition. O'Reilly seemed to be on top of the world. He was having books cranked out under his name that seemed to dominate the best seller lists. His nightly news shows were similarly dominating the cable TV ratings. He had dropped most of his goofy fillers like the woman who analyzed the handwriting of political figures. He seemed to be riding high.

    But there was trouble lurking.

    Bill himself was starting to fray around the edges. Increasingly he was blowing his top on camera. It was also becoming clear that he was very impressed with himself. It wasn't just that he couldn't even feign humility his jokes about being a 'simple man' were wearing thin. Big Bill had a serious case of self adoration. He was dizzy with self regard.

    He was also getting old. We had seen how the sweet natured and funny young David Letterman had gone rancid in front of millions of watchers. Could the same thing be happening to O'Reilly the anchor of anchors? We all dreaded the day when he also started to grow a bushy beard.

    O'Reilly still kept holding down the center of the Fox nightly news lineup. His formula was interesting. He purported to serve up hard news but in fact he larded his hour with comedians. Almost every night there would be a segment with Dennis Miller or Greg Gutfeld. This seemed to be his response to the lefty Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart. O'Reilly himself could tell a good joke too.

    So Fox was riding the tiger. They had to get off and get off soon but they feared that first step down. There was no successor in sight. Eric Bowling was dull as dirt. Gutfeld was probably the most talented and the smartest but his shtick was anti-gravitas.

    Somehow it all worked out for Fox. Tucker Carlson had been knocking around the environs of TV News for years. Yet somehow was still baby faced. He seemed like more of a morning show personality than an evening lynchpin. Yet Fox has landed on its feet. Carlson should be good for many decades yet to come. He seems to be the best informed and the best prepared anchor anyone has ever seen on the airwaves. He is as smart as Eric Sevareid once was, but has a bubbly boyish demeanor. He is a heavy weight player who wore an airhead disguise for years so as to escape the notice of the guys with the knives - sort of like Claudius.

    Agree with your analysis. I like Tucker Carlson. I always found O’Reilly insufferably pompous and ideologically incoherent.

    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    I always found O’Reilly insufferably pompous and ideologically incoherent.
     
    Yes, well, I suppose that is because O’Reilly is insufferably pompous and ideologically incoherent. But given the circumstances surrounding the current epoch, why should we be troubled by those defects?

    Oh, right, because we want a nation and not a community of imbeciles ruled by morons. Sorry, for a moment I forgot why we are all invested in preserving our heritage.
    , @Mr. Anon
    I agree. "Insufferably pompous and ideologically inchoherent" is a good characterization of O'Reilly.

    When Carlson's show first came on, I thought it funny how he concluded it by saying that his show was "the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness, and group-think". And now, stay tuned for Bill O'Reilly (pomposity, smugness) and Sean Hannity (group-think).

    I found O'Reilly to be an insufferable blowhard. I couldn't even stand to listen to him - that slurring/braying voice of his spewing his self-satisfied BS. Hannity I did not find as offensive - he's just a meathead.

    The one time I watched a "Factor" show all the way through was the last one, hosted by Greg Gutfeld, where he signed the show off the air forever. It was all rather Orwellian - they didn't even say O'Reilly's name once. After years of being their ratings leader, and making FOX a boat-load of money - he didn't even exist anymore. He had become a non-person.

  174. @AndrewR
    Well on some level, it is arbitrary. It's impossible to measure the effect of a single immigrant in a country of 60 million. For any "non-arbitrary" number n an immigration restrictionist would choose as the maximum number of immigrants to allow, the country could survive n + 1.

    Yes, immigrants have real effects on all those things you mentioned (not all necessarily negative effects), but to say that you could pick a non-arbitrary number is absurd. In theory, there could be a "straw that broke the camel's back" but that exact number would infinitely exceed the capacity of anyone to predict.

    “Real effects” of immigration?

    In my youth, California offered free college tuition to its residents and there were plenty of part-time jobs to pay for room, board, books and fees.

    California public K12 was number three or four in the country.

    Now, the only states keeping California public K12 off the bottom of the list are Arkansas and Mississippi.

  175. @conatus
    What's wrong with repeating the story of David Gelbaum buying the Sierra Club's silence?
    from here:
    https://www.noozhawk.com/article/021712_joe_guzzardi_sierra_club


    "But the biggest donation the Sierra Club ever received is the one that altered it forever. In 2004, the Los Angeles Times revealed a $100 million gift made by investor David Gelbaum. Unfortunately for environmentalists, Gelbaum’s money came with the string attached that the club never speak out against or try to limit immigration into the United States no matter how obvious it became that adding more people has severe ecological consequences."

    This is representative of our entire public forum. Money buys silence and the Legacy Frog looks warily around at the demographic changes occurring, as Froggy notices the water getting ever so slightly hotter in the frying pan called the USA.
    And nobody says anything.

    Money buys silence

    Environmentalism has nothing to do with the environment. It’s all about money. If you want a share of the money and we’re talking a lot of money here) you stick to the party line or you miss out.

    • Replies: @Olorin
    I'll agree with your point to some degree but would put it differently.

    "Environmentalism" was the globalists' PR-takeover term for good old fashioned heartland nationalist "conservationism." Which had the horrific quality of being locally or regionally rooted and interested in limiting growth and conversion of every acre of American land either to hive or hive-services. And, of course, being primarily the concern of white Americans of European and/or founding stock ancestry.

    In the 1970s IME, the "environmental movement" had much overlap with older conservationists. The former were often younger and faced with issues that our elders hadn't had to confront, like assessment of technological systems that had been implemented without much understanding or thought.

    For example, the mass use of pesticides in the "Green Revolution." In very short order--less than a generation--they demolished American ecosystems. This was apparently in the service of growing more Africans for Big Ag/Big Pharma profit...and also the military-industrial-media complex, whose strategic decisions often used food as an instrument of negotiation.

    Nothing new about threat-of-famine, and technologically more advanced societies will always have countless begging bowls extended their way.

    But at the point where Antigo Silt Loam is cashed out and aquifers pumped dry so we can hold soy and corn exports over China and Russia, or negotiate oil prices with the Saudis based on the chimera of "biofuels"--and of course this is all about speculative profit for the shekelmeisters who want to feed and proliferate Africans but not be the ones to live next door to them--well, then you're in the realm of destroying something you can never recreate for something (shekels) that ultimately have very little value.

    And then the elites pack up and move to their 10,000-acre doomsteads in Uruguay.

    The best overlaps between the older conservationists and the newer type of "environmental" science, like ecology and ever improving scientific instrumentation and capacity for modeling and calculation, were very good indeed.

    Consider the joint response on avian raptor population collapse in the Northeast. Without it we literally would be bereft of most American raptor species today. Maybe all. I can't see any hawk these days without my throat getting a bit tight, thinking about how close we came to losing them all...and the amount of gut-busting work it took to turn that all around, over entire lifetimes by smart, hardworking white guys and gals. The ones I knew were both old-timey conservationists at heart, but also environmentalists. But not in the Al Gore/Ed Begley/globe-trotting-preacher sense.

    IME there are countless old-timey conservationist "environmentalists." They just aren't allowed the mike* very often, and when they are paid heed at all, it's to call them eugenicist Nazi Hitlernazi Hitlers.

    Among them are the Sierra Club board members who tried very hard to get population and immigration on the club's agenda. Tanton wasn't a "mastermind" per se, he was a lightning rod for something that concerned many many many of us.


    *Yes, it's spelled "mike," given that "mic," by long-standing standards of English orthography, has a short vowel. Could spell it "mice," with the terminal e elongating the vowel. But then the c becomes soft, not hard, and anyway the word refers either to rodents or a device for digital input, not vocal output. And I don't see anybody out there claiming that "bic" is the proper way to spell the two wheeled conveyance, nor that "kic" constitutes an anti-Semitic slur.

  176. @Harry Baldwin
    Agree with your analysis. I like Tucker Carlson. I always found O'Reilly insufferably pompous and ideologically incoherent.

    I always found O’Reilly insufferably pompous and ideologically incoherent.

    Yes, well, I suppose that is because O’Reilly is insufferably pompous and ideologically incoherent. But given the circumstances surrounding the current epoch, why should we be troubled by those defects?

    Oh, right, because we want a nation and not a community of imbeciles ruled by morons. Sorry, for a moment I forgot why we are all invested in preserving our heritage.

  177. @Massimo Heitor

    If humans can already detect peoples agendas in their writing – why not other behaviors/intentions?

    If computers can scan pictures of faces to determine sexual preference why not have them scan peoples writing?
     
    "sentiment analysis" of text is already an active field in Computer Science.

    Remember, reality is on our side. We have to use new technologies better and more effectively than our opponents.

    “Sentiment analysis,” defined as “the process of computationally identifying and categorizing opinions expressed in a piece of text, especially in order to determine whether the writer’s attitude towards a particular topic, product, etc., is positive, negative, or neutral.”

    Easily done by humans, with a bit of practice–involving a sense, a feeling we share of emotive language, read as expressing approval/disapproval, followed by reduction to neutral. It enables description of positions relative to each other–e.g., DAYE: “The glass is half full;” KNIGHT: “The glass is half empty.” They agree in factual belief, that the glass has content in half its capacity, and they disagree in attitude, with Daye approving and Knight disapproving the adequacy of the amount. But the AI guys should not stop short at the reduction to neutral, which discloses the armature of factual belief.

    Read that through a few times, and it should (emotive approval) sharpen up the writing and wit here even further. Be thankful to the ethicist Charles L. Stevenson and his colleague, logician Irving M. Copi.

    BTW, this explains why, as Oliver Wendell Holmes put it, “You cannot argue a man into liking a glass of beer.”

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    In what way does it "disclose the armature of factual belief"?
  178. @whorefinder

    Steve’s blog is not a widely influential national news source.
     
    False. Steve is incredibly influential. Many NR-type cucks come here on the sly to get some truth before they go back to shilling for their corporate masters, and race-realist lefties such as little Matty Yglesias are also lurking here, vacuuming up race realism before they have to go back to pretending race doesn't exist. (Yglesias in particular lurks here a bunch, due to the fact that he was personally subject to a racial knockout game attack by blacks in Washington, D.C.)

    It takes a bit, but many of Steve's ideas eventually get into the bigger corporate media, though with enough time and change of wording as to make sure there's plausible deniability that they read such a "racist." Ross Douthat and David Brooks are prime examples.

    Steve may be influential in the way you say, but that is not the same as being a national news source that one may freely quote without repercussion. Any pundit on TV can freely say “It has even been reported in the New York Times that………..” whereas that same pundit would never say “As Steve Sailer has pointed out……………..”

    This site is samizdat.

  179. @International Jew

    Are you a neanderthal with a chip on your shoulder?
     
    He's from the future:
    https://youtu.be/A6CZ2J8gJtk

    If you talk slowly in a deep voice (like Vin Diesel and the Rock), you’ll always sound tough, authoritative, and masculine.

    Talk like this.

    Or this.

    If you talk in that type of voice, you could be speaking about the Pythagorean Theorem and still sound like an alpha male.

  180. @Jack D
    OT: Hillary is hitting the sauce again:

    'I was running downstairs in heels with a cup of coffee and fell backwards!

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4984972/Clinton-apologetic-missing-BBC-interview.html

    When was the last time Hillary was able to run down a set of stairs in heels? This woman lies about absolutely everything. She is truly a pathological and baldfaced liar and the sad part is that her sycophants actually buy into the lies.

    Notice Bill is nowhere to be found but Huma is. I am increasingly convinced that Weiner was just a "beard" to distract everyone away from the Huma-Hillary romance.

    Whenever any of you are tempted to criticize Trump, just remember what the alternative was.

    Whenever any of you are tempted to criticize Trump, just remember what the alternative was.

    She was on Fareed Zakaria’s show this weekend peddling her book (which earned a $12 million advance, BTW) and recounting how her relationship with Putin really went downhill after he ‘manspread’ in front of her (Hilary’s exact terminology) at a summit. So the first wannabe female President moved the nuclear doomsday clock forward by 3 minutes just to make a point about toxic masculinity. God we dodged a bullet.

    • Replies: @Johann Ricke

    She was on Fareed Zakaria’s show this weekend peddling her book (which earned a $12 million advance, BTW) and recounting how her relationship with Putin really went downhill after he ‘manspread’ in front of her (Hilary’s exact terminology) at a summit. So the first wannabe female President moved the nuclear doomsday clock forward by 3 minutes just to make a point about toxic masculinity. God we dodged a bullet.
     
    Liberal hawkishness is just their way of substituting words for deeds. Every chance they get, defense spending gets cut. Obama tried to end missile defense, but was thwarted at every turn. Democratic hawkishness is a put-on meant to keep moderates on board. Even middle-of-the-roaders understand peace through strength (i.e. military power).

    Note that the Donald is looking at sending military equipment to Ukraine, where Obama was content with sending civilian supplies. The Donald wants to rebuild the nuclear force, where Obama and Clinton wanted to dismantle it. So Obama and Clinton were all bark and no bite. Never mistake a mime's performance for reality.
  181. @Pat Boyle
    OT

    This little video from TV points out an obvious point - Fox news landed on its feet with the removal of Bill O'Reilly. A year or two ago I wondered how Fox News was going to manage it's transition. O'Reilly seemed to be on top of the world. He was having books cranked out under his name that seemed to dominate the best seller lists. His nightly news shows were similarly dominating the cable TV ratings. He had dropped most of his goofy fillers like the woman who analyzed the handwriting of political figures. He seemed to be riding high.

    But there was trouble lurking.

    Bill himself was starting to fray around the edges. Increasingly he was blowing his top on camera. It was also becoming clear that he was very impressed with himself. It wasn't just that he couldn't even feign humility his jokes about being a 'simple man' were wearing thin. Big Bill had a serious case of self adoration. He was dizzy with self regard.

    He was also getting old. We had seen how the sweet natured and funny young David Letterman had gone rancid in front of millions of watchers. Could the same thing be happening to O'Reilly the anchor of anchors? We all dreaded the day when he also started to grow a bushy beard.

    O'Reilly still kept holding down the center of the Fox nightly news lineup. His formula was interesting. He purported to serve up hard news but in fact he larded his hour with comedians. Almost every night there would be a segment with Dennis Miller or Greg Gutfeld. This seemed to be his response to the lefty Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart. O'Reilly himself could tell a good joke too.

    So Fox was riding the tiger. They had to get off and get off soon but they feared that first step down. There was no successor in sight. Eric Bowling was dull as dirt. Gutfeld was probably the most talented and the smartest but his shtick was anti-gravitas.

    Somehow it all worked out for Fox. Tucker Carlson had been knocking around the environs of TV News for years. Yet somehow was still baby faced. He seemed like more of a morning show personality than an evening lynchpin. Yet Fox has landed on its feet. Carlson should be good for many decades yet to come. He seems to be the best informed and the best prepared anchor anyone has ever seen on the airwaves. He is as smart as Eric Sevareid once was, but has a bubbly boyish demeanor. He is a heavy weight player who wore an airhead disguise for years so as to escape the notice of the guys with the knives - sort of like Claudius.

    His formula was interesting. He purported to serve up hard news but in fact he larded his hour with comedians. Almost every night there would be a segment with Dennis Miller or Greg Gutfeld.

    Miller hasn’t been funny in a long while. Gutfeld, as far as I can tell, never was. He seems to amuse himself, with his smug little smile and his smarmy asides hinting at being some kind of sexual deviant, but he has never amused me.

    The thing to remember about O’Reilly is that his viewership had one foot in the grave. The median Factor Viewer (What does “The Factor” even mean, by the way – it’s a stupid name for a show) was something like 68 years old. His audience were largely old-folks in retirement communities who think that America can “come back” if we just had another General Patton or something. It was obvious from the commercials shown during O’Reilly’s show (reverse mortgages, catheters, etc.) and from his………..painfully…………..slow…………way……….of………….talking…………….during…………….his…………….monologues (finger gesture).

    Carlson is, as you say, much better. He tries to appeal to a younger audience and apparently does, to some degree at least. And his selection of guests is much better. FOX shows seem to consist mainly of FOX personalities talking to other FOX personalities. Carlson’s show still does that – unfortunately to still too large a degree – but he does at least have some interesting guests on as well. He actually had a guy on who had written a book about the North Korean regime to talk about North Korea. Imagine that – somebody who is a real expert on the Hermit Kingdom, rather than, say, Charles Krauthammer or Monica Crowley. Carlson even had James Howard Kunstler on his show – now that’s something you don’t see on cable TV everyday.

    • Replies: @Pat Boyle
    I got in an argument with the crew from "The Young Turks" a while back. They made the argument, as you have, that O'Reilly's audience is very old. And of course you're undoubtedly right.

    But it is not a phenomenon unique to O'Reilly. Rachel Maddow's audience averages only a year or so younger. As I remember her audience was about 66 and O'Reilly's about 68. Younger people watched Jon Stewart or one of the nasty lefty comedians not straight news.

    I don't know how long this pattern has obtained. I remember Huntley and Brinkley (Hell I remember John Cameron Swayze). Maybe geezers have always been the backbone of the TV News audiences.

    It doesn't really matter if you think Dennis Miller or Greg Gutfeld is funny. My point was that they were on the air as comedians. Personally I don't think very many stand up comedians are ever very funny. There was the late John Pinette, and Ron White and of course the late Robin Williams. Other than those three I don't find many of the comedians who clog the airwaves to be very funny at all. Years ago I saw this guy Elmo and he was very funny but he disappeared after one show.
  182. As someone who literally has never watched Letterman for more than two minutes per year, can you describe Letterman’s psychological transformation (which even I vaguely perceived), in detail for people like me?

    Rent “Late Shift,” and you can get a clue regarding the obsessive-compulsive introverted narcissist David Letterman. If you believe that character is destiny, then his self-destruction was not a surprise. The rigors of show business will alway wear down your facade, and reveal what you really are.

    History tell us, Leno was a cunning business man, self-contained, disciplined, enjoyed being good at what he did, with his eye always on the bottom line. He won, and left on his own terms.

    History also tells us, as well as most of Letterman’s writers and associates, Dave was/is nuts.

  183. @Harry Baldwin
    Agree with your analysis. I like Tucker Carlson. I always found O'Reilly insufferably pompous and ideologically incoherent.

    I agree. “Insufferably pompous and ideologically inchoherent” is a good characterization of O’Reilly.

    When Carlson’s show first came on, I thought it funny how he concluded it by saying that his show was “the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness, and group-think”. And now, stay tuned for Bill O’Reilly (pomposity, smugness) and Sean Hannity (group-think).

    I found O’Reilly to be an insufferable blowhard. I couldn’t even stand to listen to him – that slurring/braying voice of his spewing his self-satisfied BS. Hannity I did not find as offensive – he’s just a meathead.

    The one time I watched a “Factor” show all the way through was the last one, hosted by Greg Gutfeld, where he signed the show off the air forever. It was all rather Orwellian – they didn’t even say O’Reilly’s name once. After years of being their ratings leader, and making FOX a boat-load of money – he didn’t even exist anymore. He had become a non-person.

    • Replies: @JohnnyWalker123
    Did ever watch Red Eye? I thought it was funny.

    Kennedy (on FOX Business) is sort of funny too.

    These shows are like the right-wing version of Colbert. Hip and ironic, but with a tendency to mock liberals in subtle ways.
  184. @Pat Boyle
    OT

    This little video from TV points out an obvious point - Fox news landed on its feet with the removal of Bill O'Reilly. A year or two ago I wondered how Fox News was going to manage it's transition. O'Reilly seemed to be on top of the world. He was having books cranked out under his name that seemed to dominate the best seller lists. His nightly news shows were similarly dominating the cable TV ratings. He had dropped most of his goofy fillers like the woman who analyzed the handwriting of political figures. He seemed to be riding high.

    But there was trouble lurking.

    Bill himself was starting to fray around the edges. Increasingly he was blowing his top on camera. It was also becoming clear that he was very impressed with himself. It wasn't just that he couldn't even feign humility his jokes about being a 'simple man' were wearing thin. Big Bill had a serious case of self adoration. He was dizzy with self regard.

    He was also getting old. We had seen how the sweet natured and funny young David Letterman had gone rancid in front of millions of watchers. Could the same thing be happening to O'Reilly the anchor of anchors? We all dreaded the day when he also started to grow a bushy beard.

    O'Reilly still kept holding down the center of the Fox nightly news lineup. His formula was interesting. He purported to serve up hard news but in fact he larded his hour with comedians. Almost every night there would be a segment with Dennis Miller or Greg Gutfeld. This seemed to be his response to the lefty Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart. O'Reilly himself could tell a good joke too.

    So Fox was riding the tiger. They had to get off and get off soon but they feared that first step down. There was no successor in sight. Eric Bowling was dull as dirt. Gutfeld was probably the most talented and the smartest but his shtick was anti-gravitas.

    Somehow it all worked out for Fox. Tucker Carlson had been knocking around the environs of TV News for years. Yet somehow was still baby faced. He seemed like more of a morning show personality than an evening lynchpin. Yet Fox has landed on its feet. Carlson should be good for many decades yet to come. He seems to be the best informed and the best prepared anchor anyone has ever seen on the airwaves. He is as smart as Eric Sevareid once was, but has a bubbly boyish demeanor. He is a heavy weight player who wore an airhead disguise for years so as to escape the notice of the guys with the knives - sort of like Claudius.

    I stopped watching Fox years ago because it has as many ignorant yammering jabbering incoherent blacks as BET. The Fox blacks just blurt out an incoherent collection of words and keep repeating the same babble.

    It’s no different than the babbling blacks begging in the 7-11 parking lot. And Fox tells me nothing I don’t know

    • Replies: @Pat Boyle
    I wouldn't know about that. I've never watched BET for as long as a single minute.

    After Ferguson I find that I simply don't listen to anything a black says anymore. Michael Brown had been shot and there were a series of black witnesses who described what happened. It soon became clear that they were were all more or less just making up total fabrications. I began to notice that black witnesses didn't tell the truth very often. Shortly thereafter I just 'tuned out' the testimony of the blacks I saw on TV.

    I understand that in Roman courts the testimony of slaves was only admissible if it had been obtained under torture. This may have been the first use of 'water boarding'. You needed to coerce the slave so as to make his words acceptable but you didn't want to permanently injure the man and thereby reduce his market value.

    I used to simply accept the testimony on camera of anything a black said. But with greater experience I now automatically discount pretty much anything said by a black. This is remarkably easy since so many blacks seem to always speak in stereotyped phrases.

    For example at some point while on camera almost every black will mention 'racism' as a kind of all-purpose explanation. What the hell is that supposed to mean? There used to be real racism. An army buddy explained once how his father, who owned a factory, had had his personnel department put an inconspicuous pin hole in the employment application of all black candidates. This was after it had become illegal to mention race on an application.

    True story, but fifty years out of date. No one does anything like that anymore - much to the discomfort of the SPLC. Fighting racism is so much harder when there is no racism to be found.

    Blacks like to make a public fuss over dead blacks lying about in the street. Why should that be? In the vast majority of the cases the black victim is the result of an equally black perpetrator. Typically no black witness will come forward. They cry and moan and gnash their teeth but they won't make a statement to the police. It makes one begin to doubt their sincerity. Black lives don't seem to matter - at least to other blacks. So I discount the typical black show of concern. I ignore the wailing of the 'baby mamas' or real mamas.

    I wonder if it's time to reintroduce 'benign neglect' in Monahan's felicitous phrase. I watch the 'True Crime' TV shows. Some black guy shoots some other black guy and the cops spend a lot of time and trouble running down the shooter. Why bother? If it is a black victim and the criminal is also described as black - why not just forget it? No one really cares. If you catch the murderer you will just have to feed him and house him at public expense. You can't impose civilization on a populations that is indifferent to it.
  185. @Anonymous
    Why didn't the "green anti-immigrant" faction of the Sierra Club break off and form a new group?

    They turned to vdare.com But there really is no funding for anti immigration lobbies because all the government, charity* and corporate donors plus people who could afford a few thousand a year are all for unlimited non White immigration.
    * charities aka scam artists and con men aka non profit pimps.

  186. @DJF
    """"A group of grassroots members, with some help from powerful funders, attempted to take over the national organization.

    These members advocated sharply restricting immigration, saying the US should be reducing rather than increasing its population. …

    The Sierra Club won that fight,"""

    Great job in rewriting history. As pointed out above the most powerful funder was David Gelbaum and his $100 million for open borders.

    And since Sierra Club pretends to be a member run organization wouldn't the have "won that fight" if the open borders types had won or lost?

    A Jew, why am I not surprised? Their names are all over everything bad that has happened to America since around 1910.

  187. @unclesam

    I am a fan of Britain’s National Health Service. I can go to the doctor when ever I need to, and I don’t have to worry about awkward, criminal insurance companies or the prospect of bankruptcy.
     
    I would claim that Britain's pointed lack of innovation and entrepreneurship is directly related to the fact that they tax the living shit out anyone who makes significant money. Your ability to manufacture is for shit. You can't even make a decent automobile. I mean, what the fuck do you folks even do that carries any global impact. Last time I was in an electronics store, most of your stuff sucked ass. Going to an average grocery store, or electronics store is like a 1950's version of an American one. The packaging of your grocery items is old fashioned and stupid. You can't even make a milkshake. It's like a special item, if you can find it.

    Stop trying to brag about anything contemporary and British. Your political system sucks ass. You finally got your wits about you with Brexit, but it's too little, too late. You're a cultural and demographic dead man walking. The first thing any successful entertainer does when they hit pay dirt is to get the hell out of your country.

    By the way, the mean little fat fuck you're so proud of, Winston Churchill, tricked us into getting involved in a stupid civil war he helped to orchestrate, and for what? What did all the Americans die for? On those fucking beaches Hitler ran your silly asses off of at the get-go? So you could establish a Muslim Caliphate that used to be London? And who pays to defend your country now, when push comes to shove?

    WE do. If you had to pay for a military that wasn't a joke, your "free" health benefits would not be free.

    And speaking of your great insurance that you're taxed up the ass for, many of your inhabitants teeth are still atrocious. Out in your hinterlands, Brits can still be found with giant misshapen heads, under serviced jawlines, and every other manifestation of concentrated inbreeding, even after all these years.

    In short, you've been a bunch of fucking two-faced assholes since 1770's, and your shit hasn't changed.

    So... quit trying to feed our sociopath liberals blank ammunition by bragging about your stupid insurance plans. Your country is on welfare. We're carrying your fat brit asses.

    Shut up, and show some respect.

    This needs a LOL and Agree button.

  188. @The Z Blog
    This is example eleventy billion that Progressivism is a religion, not a political ideology. He's not avoiding the population issue because it is not germane. He avoids it because he fears it could lead to heresy. Like all virtuous Progs, this guy believes mentioning population will lead to xenophobia, eugenics and the 12th Invisible Hitler emerging to impose the Fourth Reich.

    Wait, I thought that was our plan?

  189. @Pat Boyle
    I first encountered David Letterman on an obscure game show. As I remember Betty White was also a panelist. The set up was they showed the celebrity panelists some strange object and they made up a story about it. Letterman was terrific. He was funny and imaginative. Soon he was grabbed up by the major networks and I lost track of him. Flash forward to Carson's retirement. Leno won out but Letterman also got a late night spot.

    Another flash forward and he had turned bitter and nasty. He seemed to have gone rancid. All his jokes were political and he became insufferable. Sorry, my memory is extremely episodic. I don't know just when he became sour.

    Your last line: I so get that. I am horrified that there is not one late night show crazy, wild comedian I can find to sooth my nervous soul, or duh, laugh. Watching Stone & Parker is all what is left for purity of laughing my ass off.

  190. @unclesam

    I am a fan of Britain’s National Health Service. I can go to the doctor when ever I need to, and I don’t have to worry about awkward, criminal insurance companies or the prospect of bankruptcy.
     
    I would claim that Britain's pointed lack of innovation and entrepreneurship is directly related to the fact that they tax the living shit out anyone who makes significant money. Your ability to manufacture is for shit. You can't even make a decent automobile. I mean, what the fuck do you folks even do that carries any global impact. Last time I was in an electronics store, most of your stuff sucked ass. Going to an average grocery store, or electronics store is like a 1950's version of an American one. The packaging of your grocery items is old fashioned and stupid. You can't even make a milkshake. It's like a special item, if you can find it.

    Stop trying to brag about anything contemporary and British. Your political system sucks ass. You finally got your wits about you with Brexit, but it's too little, too late. You're a cultural and demographic dead man walking. The first thing any successful entertainer does when they hit pay dirt is to get the hell out of your country.

    By the way, the mean little fat fuck you're so proud of, Winston Churchill, tricked us into getting involved in a stupid civil war he helped to orchestrate, and for what? What did all the Americans die for? On those fucking beaches Hitler ran your silly asses off of at the get-go? So you could establish a Muslim Caliphate that used to be London? And who pays to defend your country now, when push comes to shove?

    WE do. If you had to pay for a military that wasn't a joke, your "free" health benefits would not be free.

    And speaking of your great insurance that you're taxed up the ass for, many of your inhabitants teeth are still atrocious. Out in your hinterlands, Brits can still be found with giant misshapen heads, under serviced jawlines, and every other manifestation of concentrated inbreeding, even after all these years.

    In short, you've been a bunch of fucking two-faced assholes since 1770's, and your shit hasn't changed.

    So... quit trying to feed our sociopath liberals blank ammunition by bragging about your stupid insurance plans. Your country is on welfare. We're carrying your fat brit asses.

    Shut up, and show some respect.

    By the way, the mean little fat fuck you’re so proud of, Winston Churchill, tricked us into getting involved in a stupid civil war he helped to orchestrate, and for what?

    That’s Pat Buchanan talking. Why is it that he considers Germany threatened by encirclement in 1914, but proposes that Britain accept encirclement in the summer of 1940?

  191. @Jim Christian
    In the DC suburb of Fairfax, Virginia, I grew up with kids in the 60s-70s that came from Catholic families of 12-18 kids. Hell, we were Waspy Scot/Half Greek (the good half Greek), and we had 7 in our family. Then the EPA got going, Green this-and-that and before you knew it, big families evil, small families good. And boy did the Western White comply. Unfortunately, the Public Service Message didn't make it to India, HispanicLand, Africa, Paki-Whaki or anywhere in the Middle East at all.

    Of course, we put all our women to work, made Saints of slutty single mothers who mostly limited their numbers of spawn, except for the Blacks of course, who also didn't get the message about smaller families. Here so we are, short of Whites, importing all else, including for the military. Everyone but White breed like rats..

    How's that working for us? We have infrastructure to support, many problems to solve that don't get solved by people we brought here from third-world countries, which is why those countries are third-world. Do the authors of any of this look at things and say, "Oooopsie!"?

    What does “the good half Greek” mean?

    • Replies: @Jim Christian
    Greek Ma married a Tennessee hillbilly, my Pop, who she met while she was on the train going to the west coast, he on the train going off to his home port to join up with USS Bismark Sea, a carrier, during WW2. Pop's folks came here through the old Jamestown Company down in Virginia, Scottish debtors working for forty acres and a mule. They killed injuns and cleared land across the Blue Ridge and Shenandoah Valley until they settled near what is now Milton, Tennessee near Nashville. Some were gunfighters, a couple were hung for horse-thieving, later, they sold moonshine to men from Chicago who worked for some guy name of Capone. They used to horse around trying to make the cars faster to get away from the cops back then, too. The still was still in the barn when we were down there as kids, big thing, lots of coils, lots of Mason jars about, too. Ma used to fill the car with them. The old rings of corroded lead thrown away, she bought new rings and lids and filled them with jams over the years. Some of the Christians married into a family named Wright, a family that later took up in Kill Devil Hills, NC and spawned Orville and Wilbur, they were bicycle repairmen, I believe. Other Wright-Christian pairings went to Texas and spawned a Congressman Jim Wright, a corrupt old bastard that was drummed out for one corruption or another in the 60s or 70s, maybe. I have a family member that continued the tradition with a charge and 135 year sentence for some mischief with a handgun back when *I* was in the Navy in 1975ish. It all fits. I can't avoid kinship to corruption that surely runs through MY veins, we used to smuggle hashish in and out of Rota Spain and back to the States for the enjoyment of our shipmates. To my credit, however, I never killed anyone that didn't have it coming. My genetic hash is scrambled, my history mixed, heh. But everyone has a story, mine is probably routine. Those are the kinds of folks you need to clear land and kill Injuns, after all.

    And so, the Greeks were the "good half". While there were momentary flashes of brilliance on Pop's side, mostly they were rough, tumble, a little corrupt, a lot criminal at times. It took until WW2 before the clan raised a generation that wasn't criminal to its toenails. The Greek side? Her brothers were millionaires back when it meant something to BE a millionaire. Mellow, gentle men from Samos, theirs were fishermen in the Med and merchants of one sort or another back and forth to Italy and the various Greek Islands. Not a gunfighter among them..
  192. @YetAnotherAnon
    In the UK, the "Green" Party wants effectively open borders. Here's the 2015 manifesto. Remember the current system, which has produced a situation where 30% of primary schoolkids are "minority", is apparently too cruel!

    "Some controls on immigration will be needed for the foreseeable future; for now, we reject an open borders approach. We also reject the imposition of an arbitrary numerical cap on net migration. The latter in particular is impossible to achieve (especially given that there is no control on the numbers emigrating) and leads to many individual injustices.

    Any controls must respect the following principles:
    • Mutual legal obligations within the EU on freedom of movement.
    • International obligations to accept refugees, whether seeking sanctuary from wars, political repression or climate change.
    • Respect for the integrity of families. The arrival of a grandmother might well have no direct economic effect, but her contribution to family life may contribute hugely to our society. We would in particular–abolish the policy that requires a British citizen to have an income of at least £18,600 a year before their partner can come to live in the UK, which discriminates against poorer people ,–make it much easier for adult dependants, mainly elderly parents, of British citizens to come and live here.
    • No restrictions on foreign students. Foreign students contribute hugely to our education system, both financially and in terms of the wider perspectives they bring. They also take back to their home countries skills that they have learnt here that will be valuable at home and positive attitudes towards the UK. In particular we would–allow students to work in the UK for two years after graduation;–widen the Youth Mobility Scheme to allow those from poorer countries to participate.
    • No priority simply for economic reasons. We would in particular aim to retain more of those trained in the UK in the health service so that we have less need to take health service workers from countries that can ill afford to lose them.

    We would also:
    • Review the rules for those wishing to set up or do business here to ensure they are not discriminatory against smaller businesses.
    • Not simply accept people just because they are rich. The London housing market in particular has been gravely distorted by the number of rich migrants buying property, bidding up prices all along the housing chain.
    • Ensure that no prospective immigrant is held in detention. As a matter of urgency, the administrative detention of children and pregnant women should cease immediately.
    • Review the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, particularly with regard to issues of access to legal advice, childcare and levels of subsistence allowance, and reintroduce Legal Aid for reasonable levels of immigration and asylum work.

    In addition, once immigrants have arrived, we would:
    • Assist integration by making available free or affordable English or Welsh language lessons to all new immigrants who want them, costing about £200 million a year.
    • Open up ways for existing irregular migrants who have been here for three years to become legal. In particular, a legal status must be provided for people who have not succeeded in their claim for humanitarian protection but who cannot be returned to their country of origin owing to the political situation there."
     
    Incidentally the UK Green Party's 2010 manifesto was written by a professor at Keele University, who resigned his post after being convicted of various charges. Not a story that I heard on the BBC.

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/renowned-academic-government-advisor-who-9655870

    "A renowned academic, Government advisor and former Green Party Parliamentary candidate had sexually explicit chats with underage girls and downloaded images of child abuse."
     

    This fits in with the general pattern of left-wing parties supporting refugee immigration, and right-wing parties supporting economic immigration. In the 1990s a lot of green parties said that immigration should be in line with a nation’s environmental ” “carrying capacity,” but most seem to have abandoned that idea. The Green Party in New Zealand said NZ’s carrying capacity is 5 million. However, the population has already reached 4.8 million and they haven’t said anything about reducing refugee quotas or tightening family reunification policies.

  193. @YetAnotherAnon
    In the UK, the "Green" Party wants effectively open borders. Here's the 2015 manifesto. Remember the current system, which has produced a situation where 30% of primary schoolkids are "minority", is apparently too cruel!

    "Some controls on immigration will be needed for the foreseeable future; for now, we reject an open borders approach. We also reject the imposition of an arbitrary numerical cap on net migration. The latter in particular is impossible to achieve (especially given that there is no control on the numbers emigrating) and leads to many individual injustices.

    Any controls must respect the following principles:
    • Mutual legal obligations within the EU on freedom of movement.
    • International obligations to accept refugees, whether seeking sanctuary from wars, political repression or climate change.
    • Respect for the integrity of families. The arrival of a grandmother might well have no direct economic effect, but her contribution to family life may contribute hugely to our society. We would in particular–abolish the policy that requires a British citizen to have an income of at least £18,600 a year before their partner can come to live in the UK, which discriminates against poorer people ,–make it much easier for adult dependants, mainly elderly parents, of British citizens to come and live here.
    • No restrictions on foreign students. Foreign students contribute hugely to our education system, both financially and in terms of the wider perspectives they bring. They also take back to their home countries skills that they have learnt here that will be valuable at home and positive attitudes towards the UK. In particular we would–allow students to work in the UK for two years after graduation;–widen the Youth Mobility Scheme to allow those from poorer countries to participate.
    • No priority simply for economic reasons. We would in particular aim to retain more of those trained in the UK in the health service so that we have less need to take health service workers from countries that can ill afford to lose them.

    We would also:
    • Review the rules for those wishing to set up or do business here to ensure they are not discriminatory against smaller businesses.
    • Not simply accept people just because they are rich. The London housing market in particular has been gravely distorted by the number of rich migrants buying property, bidding up prices all along the housing chain.
    • Ensure that no prospective immigrant is held in detention. As a matter of urgency, the administrative detention of children and pregnant women should cease immediately.
    • Review the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, particularly with regard to issues of access to legal advice, childcare and levels of subsistence allowance, and reintroduce Legal Aid for reasonable levels of immigration and asylum work.

    In addition, once immigrants have arrived, we would:
    • Assist integration by making available free or affordable English or Welsh language lessons to all new immigrants who want them, costing about £200 million a year.
    • Open up ways for existing irregular migrants who have been here for three years to become legal. In particular, a legal status must be provided for people who have not succeeded in their claim for humanitarian protection but who cannot be returned to their country of origin owing to the political situation there."
     
    Incidentally the UK Green Party's 2010 manifesto was written by a professor at Keele University, who resigned his post after being convicted of various charges. Not a story that I heard on the BBC.

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/renowned-academic-government-advisor-who-9655870

    "A renowned academic, Government advisor and former Green Party Parliamentary candidate had sexually explicit chats with underage girls and downloaded images of child abuse."
     

    What a surprise, a leftist pedophile….I’m shocked, shocked….

  194. @Pat Boyle
    OT

    This little video from TV points out an obvious point - Fox news landed on its feet with the removal of Bill O'Reilly. A year or two ago I wondered how Fox News was going to manage it's transition. O'Reilly seemed to be on top of the world. He was having books cranked out under his name that seemed to dominate the best seller lists. His nightly news shows were similarly dominating the cable TV ratings. He had dropped most of his goofy fillers like the woman who analyzed the handwriting of political figures. He seemed to be riding high.

    But there was trouble lurking.

    Bill himself was starting to fray around the edges. Increasingly he was blowing his top on camera. It was also becoming clear that he was very impressed with himself. It wasn't just that he couldn't even feign humility his jokes about being a 'simple man' were wearing thin. Big Bill had a serious case of self adoration. He was dizzy with self regard.

    He was also getting old. We had seen how the sweet natured and funny young David Letterman had gone rancid in front of millions of watchers. Could the same thing be happening to O'Reilly the anchor of anchors? We all dreaded the day when he also started to grow a bushy beard.

    O'Reilly still kept holding down the center of the Fox nightly news lineup. His formula was interesting. He purported to serve up hard news but in fact he larded his hour with comedians. Almost every night there would be a segment with Dennis Miller or Greg Gutfeld. This seemed to be his response to the lefty Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart. O'Reilly himself could tell a good joke too.

    So Fox was riding the tiger. They had to get off and get off soon but they feared that first step down. There was no successor in sight. Eric Bowling was dull as dirt. Gutfeld was probably the most talented and the smartest but his shtick was anti-gravitas.

    Somehow it all worked out for Fox. Tucker Carlson had been knocking around the environs of TV News for years. Yet somehow was still baby faced. He seemed like more of a morning show personality than an evening lynchpin. Yet Fox has landed on its feet. Carlson should be good for many decades yet to come. He seems to be the best informed and the best prepared anchor anyone has ever seen on the airwaves. He is as smart as Eric Sevareid once was, but has a bubbly boyish demeanor. He is a heavy weight player who wore an airhead disguise for years so as to escape the notice of the guys with the knives - sort of like Claudius.

    Very good analysis.

    I agree Tucker Carlson is much better. He’s a very thoughtful, witty, and engaging guy who deals in serious ideas. O’Reilly was sort of entertaining, but he was never much of a thinker. O’Reilly just threw lots of red meat to his audience without saying much that was meaningful. O’Reilly also seems like a bit of a grifter that was interested in making money off the right-wing gravy train, but didn’t care much about conservative ideas or policy.

    I don’t dislike him. I used to watch his show occasionally, but it was just entertainment. You watch O’Reilly to see his bombast, not to see any profound analysis.

    • Replies: @pyrrhus
    O'Reilly was a closet Obama supporter, and gave his stooges free rein....But even that didn't save him.
    , @Olorin
    Tucker's dad, Dick Carlson, was head of Voice of America, president of CPB (Corporation for Public Broadcasting), IIRC also headed up USIA, and various other alternative media that operated outside of the bleating-for-ad-revenues model of the commercial/corporate media.

    Bill O'Reilly's dad--don't know much about him, but Bill doesn't seem to have family media, information, or policy pedigree. He appears to have made his own career by being a big shouty person. His background was all in corporate broadcasting...and IIRC his big break came when he was hired by Roone Arledge for ABC News in '86.

    Arledge was in the process of turning news into TV sports, IOW, in the model he'd followed since Edgar Scherick hired him in, what was it, 1960? 1961?, at ABC.

    Garbage all the way down, young man.

    As for the Carlson family's media pedigree, it's poised spectacularly to take advantage of the current moment...and perhaps even return broadcasting/crowdcasting to something more worthy of the American republic. And perhaps more involving of the actual American majority. Which is very different from the spun, honed, constructed, polled, shaped, and invented demographics of the MSM's research divisions/contractors. As we all learned in November, some more bitterly than others.

  195. @AM

    Many of us advocate numbers based upon objectively measurable things like crowding, traffic, housing costs, wages, pollution, water’s availability, and so on. I have never encounted a proposal for arbitrary limits in my life.
     
    Why not? Don't you think it's strange?

    That's thing. We can get on the Sierra Club for being bought off. But nothing about the environmental movement has even a whiff of practicality about it. There's nothing serious that isn't some sort of imposition on poor people over there, to be determined later, with results we never measure.

    Nothing that environmentalists propose actually work. Sure cut off immigration. I'm in agreement for many different reasons. But it doesn't return water the Colorado River. It doesn't make houses smaller or get families to go to one income. It doesn't get environmentalists to stop jetting around the world or even in this case importing students from literally 1/2 way around the world. Immigration is simply just the most obvious hypocrisy of a movement that isn't about the environment.

    What is the movement about?

  196. @Thomas

    Tackling population growth can be done without the enormous, unnecessary risks involved in talking about population growth.
     
    Wow. “We’re going to reorder the entire world, just please don’t make us look politically incorrect.”

    Within a couple of decades, the 3d world will face a massive food (and water) crisis due to two inexorable trends. First, population is still growing, while it has already outstripped food production in those countries. Not one country in Africa can feed itself, for example.Second, topsoil and fresh water aquifers are depleting rapidly, and the nutritional content of food is declining (per the Scientific American)….No doubt the greens will want to let the starving billions into the West, at which point population control will no longer be an academic discussion….

  197. @Mr. Anon
    I agree. "Insufferably pompous and ideologically inchoherent" is a good characterization of O'Reilly.

    When Carlson's show first came on, I thought it funny how he concluded it by saying that his show was "the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness, and group-think". And now, stay tuned for Bill O'Reilly (pomposity, smugness) and Sean Hannity (group-think).

    I found O'Reilly to be an insufferable blowhard. I couldn't even stand to listen to him - that slurring/braying voice of his spewing his self-satisfied BS. Hannity I did not find as offensive - he's just a meathead.

    The one time I watched a "Factor" show all the way through was the last one, hosted by Greg Gutfeld, where he signed the show off the air forever. It was all rather Orwellian - they didn't even say O'Reilly's name once. After years of being their ratings leader, and making FOX a boat-load of money - he didn't even exist anymore. He had become a non-person.

    Did ever watch Red Eye? I thought it was funny.

    Kennedy (on FOX Business) is sort of funny too.

    These shows are like the right-wing version of Colbert. Hip and ironic, but with a tendency to mock liberals in subtle ways.

    • Replies: @whorefinder

    Did ever watch Red Eye? I thought it was funny.
     
    The cancelling of Red Eye and the firing of O'Reilly--which occurred very close to one another---pushed me off Fox. Outside of a national emergency situation, I stopped watching it. Red Eye was cancelled for no discernible reason other than Fox was shifting further left.
  198. @JohnnyWalker123
    Very good analysis.

    I agree Tucker Carlson is much better. He's a very thoughtful, witty, and engaging guy who deals in serious ideas. O'Reilly was sort of entertaining, but he was never much of a thinker. O'Reilly just threw lots of red meat to his audience without saying much that was meaningful. O'Reilly also seems like a bit of a grifter that was interested in making money off the right-wing gravy train, but didn't care much about conservative ideas or policy.

    I don't dislike him. I used to watch his show occasionally, but it was just entertainment. You watch O'Reilly to see his bombast, not to see any profound analysis.

    O’Reilly was a closet Obama supporter, and gave his stooges free rein….But even that didn’t save him.

  199. @Abe

    Whenever any of you are tempted to criticize Trump, just remember what the alternative was.
     
    She was on Fareed Zakaria’s show this weekend peddling her book (which earned a $12 million advance, BTW) and recounting how her relationship with Putin really went downhill after he ‘manspread’ in front of her (Hilary’s exact terminology) at a summit. So the first wannabe female President moved the nuclear doomsday clock forward by 3 minutes just to make a point about toxic masculinity. God we dodged a bullet.

    She was on Fareed Zakaria’s show this weekend peddling her book (which earned a $12 million advance, BTW) and recounting how her relationship with Putin really went downhill after he ‘manspread’ in front of her (Hilary’s exact terminology) at a summit. So the first wannabe female President moved the nuclear doomsday clock forward by 3 minutes just to make a point about toxic masculinity. God we dodged a bullet.

    Liberal hawkishness is just their way of substituting words for deeds. Every chance they get, defense spending gets cut. Obama tried to end missile defense, but was thwarted at every turn. Democratic hawkishness is a put-on meant to keep moderates on board. Even middle-of-the-roaders understand peace through strength (i.e. military power).

    Note that the Donald is looking at sending military equipment to Ukraine, where Obama was content with sending civilian supplies. The Donald wants to rebuild the nuclear force, where Obama and Clinton wanted to dismantle it. So Obama and Clinton were all bark and no bite. Never mistake a mime’s performance for reality.

    • Replies: @Nico

    Democratic hawkishness is a put-on meant to keep moderates on board.
     
    But when they suspect the sheeple might be catching on, they act like a cornered dog and lash out irrationally. Hence Bill Clinton's little stunts in the Sudan and in Serbia/Kosovo. Hence Hillary Clinton's shilling for the removal of Gaddafi. All the better if they can paper over their ill-conceived misdeeds with intersectionalist morality ("liberating the oppressed," "women's rights"). If Latin America had gotten back on the map during a Clinton presidency, you can be sure she would have bombed a Chilean or Nicaraguan government out of power on some dubious pretext and then brag that the puppet she installed had repealed the country's absolute proscription on abortion.
  200. @Dube
    "Sentiment analysis," defined as "the process of computationally identifying and categorizing opinions expressed in a piece of text, especially in order to determine whether the writer's attitude towards a particular topic, product, etc., is positive, negative, or neutral."

    Easily done by humans, with a bit of practice--involving a sense, a feeling we share of emotive language, read as expressing approval/disapproval, followed by reduction to neutral. It enables description of positions relative to each other--e.g., DAYE: "The glass is half full;" KNIGHT: "The glass is half empty." They agree in factual belief, that the glass has content in half its capacity, and they disagree in attitude, with Daye approving and Knight disapproving the adequacy of the amount. But the AI guys should not stop short at the reduction to neutral, which discloses the armature of factual belief.

    Read that through a few times, and it should (emotive approval) sharpen up the writing and wit here even further. Be thankful to the ethicist Charles L. Stevenson and his colleague, logician Irving M. Copi.

    BTW, this explains why, as Oliver Wendell Holmes put it, "You cannot argue a man into liking a glass of beer."

    In what way does it “disclose the armature of factual belief”?

    • Replies: @Dube
    Thanks, Opinionator. I wrote, "The AI guys should not stop short at the reduction [of text] to neutral, which discloses the armature of factual belief"--"armature" meaning "framework" for emotive connotation and value claims. If we sense emotive meaning and diminish it to neutral, we disclose the underlying factual claims, which then more clearly can be judged as True/False.

    It's fun to chirp.
  201. @Johann Ricke

    She was on Fareed Zakaria’s show this weekend peddling her book (which earned a $12 million advance, BTW) and recounting how her relationship with Putin really went downhill after he ‘manspread’ in front of her (Hilary’s exact terminology) at a summit. So the first wannabe female President moved the nuclear doomsday clock forward by 3 minutes just to make a point about toxic masculinity. God we dodged a bullet.
     
    Liberal hawkishness is just their way of substituting words for deeds. Every chance they get, defense spending gets cut. Obama tried to end missile defense, but was thwarted at every turn. Democratic hawkishness is a put-on meant to keep moderates on board. Even middle-of-the-roaders understand peace through strength (i.e. military power).

    Note that the Donald is looking at sending military equipment to Ukraine, where Obama was content with sending civilian supplies. The Donald wants to rebuild the nuclear force, where Obama and Clinton wanted to dismantle it. So Obama and Clinton were all bark and no bite. Never mistake a mime's performance for reality.

    Democratic hawkishness is a put-on meant to keep moderates on board.

    But when they suspect the sheeple might be catching on, they act like a cornered dog and lash out irrationally. Hence Bill Clinton’s little stunts in the Sudan and in Serbia/Kosovo. Hence Hillary Clinton’s shilling for the removal of Gaddafi. All the better if they can paper over their ill-conceived misdeeds with intersectionalist morality (“liberating the oppressed,” “women’s rights”). If Latin America had gotten back on the map during a Clinton presidency, you can be sure she would have bombed a Chilean or Nicaraguan government out of power on some dubious pretext and then brag that the puppet she installed had repealed the country’s absolute proscription on abortion.

  202. @German_reader

    I am a fan of Britain’s National Health Service.
     
    You probably shouldn't, compared to other countries in Western Europe Britain's health system seems to be pretty bad. It's bizarre how it has been quasi-sacralized in British public discourse (e.g. the horrible opening ceremony of the 2012 Olympics).

    The Left has realized that if you stick a government program in there long enough, it will eventually become too entrenched to be removed. Hence why no one outside of a few Cato Institute wackos talk about repealing social security in the U.S., despite the program being a huge drag and boondoggle. The Left has tried this with Obama care, which is less than a decade old, and the arguments are still having the effect.

    Too bad, because all government welfare programs are bad and make the people weaker. NHS is a prime example: it’s pure socialism that has made the British people incredibly dependent.

  203. @JohnnyWalker123
    Did ever watch Red Eye? I thought it was funny.

    Kennedy (on FOX Business) is sort of funny too.

    These shows are like the right-wing version of Colbert. Hip and ironic, but with a tendency to mock liberals in subtle ways.

    Did ever watch Red Eye? I thought it was funny.

    The cancelling of Red Eye and the firing of O’Reilly–which occurred very close to one another—pushed me off Fox. Outside of a national emergency situation, I stopped watching it. Red Eye was cancelled for no discernible reason other than Fox was shifting further left.

    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    I found Red Eye entertaining when Gutfeld was running it. When he left, the show seemed to lose energy and focus--Gutfeld had kept things lively and moving along. Unfortunately, when The Donald appeared on the scene, Gutfeld came out as a Never Trumper and just another cuck. That made it hard for me to enjoy him.
  204. @Opinionator
    What does "the good half Greek" mean?

    Greek Ma married a Tennessee hillbilly, my Pop, who she met while she was on the train going to the west coast, he on the train going off to his home port to join up with USS Bismark Sea, a carrier, during WW2. Pop’s folks came here through the old Jamestown Company down in Virginia, Scottish debtors working for forty acres and a mule. They killed injuns and cleared land across the Blue Ridge and Shenandoah Valley until they settled near what is now Milton, Tennessee near Nashville. Some were gunfighters, a couple were hung for horse-thieving, later, they sold moonshine to men from Chicago who worked for some guy name of Capone. They used to horse around trying to make the cars faster to get away from the cops back then, too. The still was still in the barn when we were down there as kids, big thing, lots of coils, lots of Mason jars about, too. Ma used to fill the car with them. The old rings of corroded lead thrown away, she bought new rings and lids and filled them with jams over the years. Some of the Christians married into a family named Wright, a family that later took up in Kill Devil Hills, NC and spawned Orville and Wilbur, they were bicycle repairmen, I believe. Other Wright-Christian pairings went to Texas and spawned a Congressman Jim Wright, a corrupt old bastard that was drummed out for one corruption or another in the 60s or 70s, maybe. I have a family member that continued the tradition with a charge and 135 year sentence for some mischief with a handgun back when *I* was in the Navy in 1975ish. It all fits. I can’t avoid kinship to corruption that surely runs through MY veins, we used to smuggle hashish in and out of Rota Spain and back to the States for the enjoyment of our shipmates. To my credit, however, I never killed anyone that didn’t have it coming. My genetic hash is scrambled, my history mixed, heh. But everyone has a story, mine is probably routine. Those are the kinds of folks you need to clear land and kill Injuns, after all.

    And so, the Greeks were the “good half”. While there were momentary flashes of brilliance on Pop’s side, mostly they were rough, tumble, a little corrupt, a lot criminal at times. It took until WW2 before the clan raised a generation that wasn’t criminal to its toenails. The Greek side? Her brothers were millionaires back when it meant something to BE a millionaire. Mellow, gentle men from Samos, theirs were fishermen in the Med and merchants of one sort or another back and forth to Italy and the various Greek Islands. Not a gunfighter among them..

  205. @Peter Akuleyev
    When you look back on the annals of history, you find that the most dastardly thing Hitler ever did was to restrict immigration into Germany

    The irony is that Hitler had to import millions of Poles, Russians, French, etc. into Germany to keep the war machine going. By 1945 there were more "immigrants" living in Germany as a percentage of population than you would find today. And they weren't all POWs - thousands of Polish civilian young women were brought to Germany to works as nannies, cleaning women, or just in factories. The Nazis actually set the precedent for the Gastarbeiter programs of the 1960s, at least as far as getting Germans accustomed to the idea of importing foreigners to work in their factories or as domestics.

    The Nazis actually set the precedent for the Gastarbeiter programs of the 1960s,

    One of the special features of imperialism connected with the facts I am describing, is the decline in emigration from imperialist countries and the increase in immigration into these countries from the more backward countries where lower wages are paid. As Hobson observes, emigration from Great Britain has been declining since 1884. In that year the number of emigrants was 242,000, while in 1900, the number was 169,000. Emigration from Germany reached the highest point between 1881 and 1890, with a total of 1,453,000 emigrants. In the course of the following two decades, it fell to 544,000 and to 341,000. On the other hand, there was an increase in the number of workers entering Germany from Austria, Italy, Russia and other countries. According to the 1907 census, there were 1,342,294 foreigners in Germany, of whom 440,800 were industrial workers and 257,329 agricultural workers. [10] In France, the workers employed in the mining industry are, “in great part”, foreigners: Poles, Italians and Spaniards. [11] In the United States, immigrants from Eastern and Southern Europe are engaged in the most poorly paid jobs, while American workers provide the highest percentage of overseers or of the better-paid workers. [12] Imperialism has the tendency to create privileged sections also among the workers, and to detach them from the broad masses of the proletariat.

    Lenin, 1916

    • Replies: @Charles Erwin Wilson II
    You and Lenin, bunkmates in Hell.
  206. @Cagey Beast
    OT: Are these people trying to make themselves look like fools? Is this the journalistic version of producing Springtime For Hitler ?
    https://twitter.com/thehill/status/919732899452215296

    The problem isn’t their lack of credibility, the problem is the monopoly they have on the megaphone. The Left has known for decades the rule of a high school gossip: if they keep repeating a lie to you enough, you’ll believe it, no matter how little credibility they have.

    Smash the media monopolies, however, and they can’t keep repeating it.

    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    Exactly. There needs to be no more Megaphones and Narratives if we're going to actually have anything our ancestors would recognize as a society or culture. The people in the legacy media and academia are individually epigones but are collectively a big deal because they inherited 19th and 20th century institutions and technology that lets them be the arbiters and middlemen. No more.
  207. @Dan Hayes
    Steve,

    What was not reported in the Vox article was the real reason why the "green anti-immigration" Sierra Club movement was defeated. That was the 100 million dollar "donation" by Wall Street fat cat David Gelbaum in 2000-2001. Gelbaum essentially made the SC an offer they couldn't refuse.

    Yes, I know, incredibly dishonest are these liberals. And sanctimonious to boot.

    The Sierra Club was hijacked by an open borders Jewish donor who, like far too many of his tribe, are completely on board with swamping Western nations with the Third World.

    Do not expect this angle of the story to be reported by the honorable David Roberts any time soon.

    As long as the world is being overpopulated by people of color migrating to the West all is working out for the best in this most perfect of worlds.

  208. @Senator Brundlefly
    I think a reason (besides their buyout by corporate, pro-open borders donors) the left ignores over-population is because it gets to the essential anti-human aspect of their environmentalism. If you accept that every other living thing has as much right to exist that we do, the most rational, logically consistent conclusion is that of the voluntary extinction movement. Humans, after all, are the harbingers of mass extinction #6. Since you can't popularize any movement on anything so radical, they accept their current state of incoherence. Been watching a David Attenborough nature series on Netflix called the Hunt. Most of the episodes are your standard (excellent) BBC nature documentary where you follow different species of animal. One, however, focused on how humanity can protect the predators shown in the previous episodes. All of the solutions were banally stupid because all of the problems were due to overpopulation. India's population is growing and some people move to the forest to compete with tigers? Pay them to move to the city (cause I'm sure the city will contain an infinite number of people). People farming have their cattle eaten by lions? Pay tribesmen off to tell other people not to kill in retaliation.

    But I can't be too harsh on them as I have yet to find a fully coherent philosophical basis for protecting nature. The libertarian position amounts to: any human policy should be focused on human benefit. Pollution?: Polluted land is economically unusable so generally is avoided anyway. We can regulate when it becomes a negative externality. Extinction/conservation?: If something is truly of collective value to humanity, a market for it will emerge to preserve it (zoos, ecotourism, controlled hunting). But there really isn't any means of controlling population there. For some cultures, an ultimate value is having lots of kids, one that would override a value for the natural world around them. Perhaps related to the "collective value" point is another "conservative" position which approaches nature as something more like a part of our heritage, a cultural treasure like the Mona Lisa or the Sistine Chapel. Not to put the Nazis in a laudable light, but I'd posit Goring charging the Heck brothers in back-breeding Aurochs (Heck cattle, in their case) in order to recreate Roman quarry as an example of this flavor of environmentalism. The National Park System perhaps is another. At least here nature is of intrinsic value without any anti-human conclusion. But then again, I once heard an environmentalist describe deforestation for economic purposes as akin to "burning a priceless piece of art for firewood" I suppose where he and I differ is that I could understand someone burning the Mona Lisa if they were freezing to death and there was nothing else around. Which analogously is pretty much the perpetual state of humanity with regards to the environment. I like the natural world and would hate to see it destroyed, I just don't know the best way to defend it without throwing humans under the bus.

    Related Addendum: when looking for conservative views on conservation, I was looking for a speech by E.O. Wilson where he says “What is the heart of conservatism if it does not include leadership in conservation? And why have conservative thinkers needlessly, and against all logic and their own self-interest, surrendered the moral high ground on this issue to the liberals?”. Steve Sailer quoted it in the following Takimag article and I remember reading the speech a few years ago but I can't recall the details and cannot find it anywhere on the internet. Anyone got a link? I'm genuinely curious how he defended conservation from a conservative viewpoint.

    http://takimag.com/article/country_boys_and_conservative_conservation/print#ixzz4vidL49zI

    You seem to be operating under the dubious premise that humans are not part of the natural world and that we can survive “without nature.”

    An anthropocentric worldview is natural for humans, obviously, but taken to an extreme it is harmful to humans.

    It’s just like how an egocentric worldview is natural in an individual, but extremely egoistic behavior like rape, robbery and murder tend to have a net negative effect on the self in the long run.

    • Replies: @Senator Brundlefly
    We are part of nature no doubt. Our existence is contingent on the biosphere. But I mean nature here in sense of do we "need" whales or tigers or certain biodiverse forests? If as we lose these things they turn out to be disadvantageous to our economic well being I guess the answer is yes. But really I think the answer is no. There are parts of nature that do not exist necessarily for our benefit (save them being pretty to look at).
  209. @Issac
    "we all have our own blind spots and emotional triggers that render meaningful debate impossible"

    Everyone has some, but those with a particularly vast collection are notable for that reason. Refusal to address the relative trigger load would be to assume the absolute futility of communication. If you actually believed it, you would have just performed a contradictory action by saying so.

    My point is that, yes, obviously leftism is a religion and we all know that. But everyone has a religion (defined as a set of unfalsifiable beliefs about the world). This is not to say that some religions are not better or more rational than others.

  210. @whorefinder
    rofl.

    "bully"= anyone who says anything kinda mean to AndrewR

    "troll"= anyone who contradicts AndrewR.

    Don't you have some leftists to go apologize for, cucky?

    You’re the most dishonest person I’ve seen on this website and that’s saying a lot.

    • Replies: @whorefinder
    Please tell us all again how the term "blind spot" means you're deliberately and knowingly ignoring facts that contradict your world view. As the Leftist in this article was doing.

    Because a blind spot means the opposite: unconsciously overlooking a possible explanation due to your bias.

    Deliberate v. unconscious. Ignoring v. overlooking.
  211. @Autochthon
    You are applying an autistic mathematician’s interpretation to the term; I am applying a meaningful, connotative significance to it.

    Sure, allowing fifty million immigrants in each year is arbitrary vis-a-vis its distinction in effect from allowing forty-nine million, nine hundred ninety-nine thousand, nine hundred, and ninety nine.

    It is, however, not arbitrary at all to decide that, all things considered, more than, about fifty million immigrants permitted annually is inarguably deleterious to the common weal, and, some numerical limit being needed to administer the matter meaningfully, fifty million is as good as any, and as nearly right as can be determined; wheras twelve and five hundred billion (or even thirty or sixty million) decidedly would not be.

    Your autistic mathematician’s demand for precision renders meaningless any number of useful and by no means arbitrary numbers: speed limits, medical implants’ useful lifetimes, mileage advisable between changing oil and filters, and so on.

    I think you know all this, because your commentary suggests you generally have your poop together, so maybe your just with the lady in Vermont who irrationally derides environmentalism.

    In the event. The emigration cited originally is another stupid straw-man (as if Europe, Canada, what used to be the U.S.A., Australia, and New Zealand have ever had or will have in the foreseeable future meaningful numbers of people emigrating such that the matter must be monitored (indeed, net emigration is of no concern in any event, as it only renders unto those of us who remain greater resources per capita...).

    What’s more, as to whether or not this or that limit on immigration is arbitrary (in my commonsense, meaningful use of the term or your pedantic, unhelpful one): the proper limit is obvious and not arbitrary at all, because it is zero. Zero immigrants should be permitted into what used to be the U.S.A. We’re full up, thanks. Paco, Ting Tong, Bhavagushnajaruthan, and Ndawajongo can try the next hotel down the road, and good luck to them.

    What country is allowing 50,000,000 immigrants per year lmao

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous

    Your autistic mathematician’s demand for precision renders meaningless any number of useful

    What country is allowing 50,000,000 immigrants per year lmao
     

     
    Maybe he's also lhao.
    , @Hippopotamusdrome
  212. @whorefinder
    The 1-child policy is leading us to a major war. The large imbalance between men and women in China---because in Chinese society boys were favored over girls, women aborted female fetuses s---has created a large number of now-grown men with no romantic prospects. Historically, a large number of unattached men with no sexual outlets in a given society has created a society eager to invade/attack others for the (literal) booty.

    This is what happened with the early Romans (rape of the Sabine), the Vikings (lack of marriageable women led to their invasions), and currently in the Middle East, especially the Saudis (where the Saudi royals have snapped up so many women as harem/wives that the remainder of the men are easily radicalized in their desperate states, as the 9/11 hijackers (all Saudis) showed).

    China is going to start massive invasions of local countries for their women, or somehow begin massive imports from somewhere else, which will also lead to conflict with nations they import them from. If I were a female I would not "vacation" in China in the next 25 years, as the government will likely begin or allow kidnapping of women on a wide scale.

    Likely North Korea will be a prime place for Chinese men to import brides (by force), and this is why Japan is experiencing a new stereotype: the suave Chinese exchange student picking up Japanese women. Chinese men are becoming the Don Juans of East Asia simply because they need to be.

    Whorefinder, I know about the problem you explain here, so let me say a few more things. 1st, I was off by 3 years or so – the policy was NOT implemented by Mao. Sorry for this mistake. OK that was just a correction for the record, not an argument.

    Anyway, the population of China was 450 million or so even back. in the 1850’s! That’s more than the US population EVEN TODAY. The country has something like 1/3 of the livable land as the US – you must lop off the high mountains/desert of Tibet in the west and Xinjiang in the northwest – only. a small fraction of the population is there. Then subtract all the mountainous area that are steep as all get-out and can’t be developed (Yes, I’ve been all over the US and I know we have mountains and deserts, but we have still so much more usable land). That was all just to say that the place has been crowded forever.

    Again, the one-child policy is about the most tyranical thing I have ever seen implemented by any totalitarian “leader”, so I’d never be for that. It did have the affect anyway of avoiding a ramp up India-like population density, which even with the Chinese good work-ethic and smarts, would have been a disaster.

    Yes, there is a male/female imbalance, and that is solely due to the preference for boys, which is due to the Chinese way of expecting the 1st male to take care of the parents when they are old. This is changing as we speak. Also, the 1-child policy was rescinded in some big cities a good while back, and I will check, but I think it is not in effect anywhere. That doesn’t correct for 38 years, true. I think the “relief valve” (so to speak, haha) of Vietnam and other places will help, but agree that the tendency for the government to be more prone to war is there because of the excess of men.

  213. @whorefinder
    The 1-child policy is leading us to a major war. The large imbalance between men and women in China---because in Chinese society boys were favored over girls, women aborted female fetuses s---has created a large number of now-grown men with no romantic prospects. Historically, a large number of unattached men with no sexual outlets in a given society has created a society eager to invade/attack others for the (literal) booty.

    This is what happened with the early Romans (rape of the Sabine), the Vikings (lack of marriageable women led to their invasions), and currently in the Middle East, especially the Saudis (where the Saudi royals have snapped up so many women as harem/wives that the remainder of the men are easily radicalized in their desperate states, as the 9/11 hijackers (all Saudis) showed).

    China is going to start massive invasions of local countries for their women, or somehow begin massive imports from somewhere else, which will also lead to conflict with nations they import them from. If I were a female I would not "vacation" in China in the next 25 years, as the government will likely begin or allow kidnapping of women on a wide scale.

    Likely North Korea will be a prime place for Chinese men to import brides (by force), and this is why Japan is experiencing a new stereotype: the suave Chinese exchange student picking up Japanese women. Chinese men are becoming the Don Juans of East Asia simply because they need to be.

    More on this (just for the hell of it, I guess) China stuff. Part of my family has people in China. This family had 7 kids, trying to have a boy, who was indeed the last one (about time!). That’s the way it went BEFORE the 1-child policy. Even after it was implemented, people here shouldn’t think that someone would have been jailed or executed when the 2nd kid pops out. The eldest of the 7 kids had 2 babies, and both parents lost their jobs after that 2nd one The 2nd one, a girl BTW, after the 1st, BOY, kid, was unable to be properly registered for school or some such thing. Out in the country, the central gov couldn’t really control what was going. on*.

    It’s not like the 2nd kid had to live in the attic to hide. The kids just lived in the attic there anyway because everyone was poor in the day ;-}. As I wrote on the “Chairman Mao was the cat’s mao” thread (a complete imbecile named Godfree Roberts, right here on unz), China WAS pretty crime-free in the 1970’s because there was nothing to steal. Americans sent over corn, even though we were Cold War enemies. To this day, the Mom there won’t eat corn, as she got sick of feed corn (yeah, we weren’t sending our best sweet corn, haha!). Well, let them eat rice, right?

    * I admire this one part, where the local people do have a lot of control in some areas and tell central gov. people to go straight to hell – that is, only when the locals aren’t suck-ups to Mao like they were during the Cultural Rev., much like bought-off congressman/senators here.

  214. @AndrewR
    You seem to be operating under the dubious premise that humans are not part of the natural world and that we can survive "without nature."

    An anthropocentric worldview is natural for humans, obviously, but taken to an extreme it is harmful to humans.

    It's just like how an egocentric worldview is natural in an individual, but extremely egoistic behavior like rape, robbery and murder tend to have a net negative effect on the self in the long run.

    We are part of nature no doubt. Our existence is contingent on the biosphere. But I mean nature here in sense of do we “need” whales or tigers or certain biodiverse forests? If as we lose these things they turn out to be disadvantageous to our economic well being I guess the answer is yes. But really I think the answer is no. There are parts of nature that do not exist necessarily for our benefit (save them being pretty to look at).

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Their existences are no more inherently meaningless than ours. The thought of losing whales makes me despair.
    , @Dieter Kief

    There are parts of nature that do not exist necessarily for our benefit (save them being pretty to look at).
     
    _ ehh – “pretty to look at” as a stand in for: Pretty alltogether (not o n l y for our eyes, but also for our imagination and our joy and our thoughts and stories…).

    Now: Being pretty in all those senses i s a big benefit. (For Nietzsche, it was all that was left. You know, since he had come to the conclusion, that God had vanished somehow in modern times.

  215. @AM

    Many of us advocate numbers based upon objectively measurable things like crowding, traffic, housing costs, wages, pollution, water’s availability, and so on. I have never encounted a proposal for arbitrary limits in my life.
     
    Why not? Don't you think it's strange?

    That's thing. We can get on the Sierra Club for being bought off. But nothing about the environmental movement has even a whiff of practicality about it. There's nothing serious that isn't some sort of imposition on poor people over there, to be determined later, with results we never measure.

    Nothing that environmentalists propose actually work. Sure cut off immigration. I'm in agreement for many different reasons. But it doesn't return water the Colorado River. It doesn't make houses smaller or get families to go to one income. It doesn't get environmentalists to stop jetting around the world or even in this case importing students from literally 1/2 way around the world. Immigration is simply just the most obvious hypocrisy of a movement that isn't about the environment.

    AM, would you not agree with this: Every REAL* environmental problem would be that much better with fewer people on the same area of land.

    Please dont’ think I’m one of the “people suck” people (at least I don’t think I suck, for example. ;-}. You are correct in your early assesment that when the developed world – Western World, Japan, Russia, E. Europe decreased fertility drastically from the mid-‘60’s on, while Africa, India, and other parts had a population explosion, the future was basically ruined (last part is my writing, not by paraphrase of what you wrote above somewhere)

    We will be overrun, especially at the rate of immigration AND fertility rates within our countries, the way it is going right now.

    Back to environmentalism, just take some small thing like recycling. This is really not about running out of room to throw trash. It’s more just like the landfills end up farther out of town, making trash disposal more expensive. Anyway, I hate wasting stuff so more power to the recylers. Look though, we can recycle 1/2 of our stuff and be all proud, but if the city has grown to double the population, we are back to square one, as far as the landfill are concerned. All those blue cans, sorting/transfer stations, education via flyers hanging off doorknobs – all for NOTHING vs. keeping a stable population.

    * I’m referring specifically now to the scam designated by Peak Stupidity as Global Climate Disruption(TM). Note the trademark – use it at the pleasure of my lawyers. ;-}

  216. @Senator Brundlefly
    We are part of nature no doubt. Our existence is contingent on the biosphere. But I mean nature here in sense of do we "need" whales or tigers or certain biodiverse forests? If as we lose these things they turn out to be disadvantageous to our economic well being I guess the answer is yes. But really I think the answer is no. There are parts of nature that do not exist necessarily for our benefit (save them being pretty to look at).

    Their existences are no more inherently meaningless than ours. The thought of losing whales makes me despair.

  217. @I, commenter

    "I’m an Environmental Journalist, But I Never Write About Overpopulation. Here’s Why."
     
    short answer- because it's 'racist'. The icing on the cake is he's willing to blatantly lie about why the SC changed their stance and allow the wealthy and powerful to corrupt its mission....

    in other words, he'd rather see the planet destroyed than even have a racist thought cross his mind.

    he’d rather see the planet destroyed than even have a racist thought cross his mind.

    When I read about some tragically naive SJW who was beaten to death by blacks, I imagine his final thoughts: “It’s not a black fist pounding my face, it’s a human fist! No ugly stereotypes! No racist thoughts! Prepare to receive me, God, my heart is pure, I’m thinking no racist thoughts!”

  218. @AndrewR
    You're the most dishonest person I've seen on this website and that's saying a lot.

    Please tell us all again how the term “blind spot” means you’re deliberately and knowingly ignoring facts that contradict your world view. As the Leftist in this article was doing.

    Because a blind spot means the opposite: unconsciously overlooking a possible explanation due to your bias.

    Deliberate v. unconscious. Ignoring v. overlooking.

  219. @dearieme
    The Pope is never right about anything. It is his job to be wrong.

    The Pope is never right about anything. It is his job to be wrong.

    NAPALT

  220. @Cagey Beast
    OT: Are these people trying to make themselves look like fools? Is this the journalistic version of producing Springtime For Hitler ?
    https://twitter.com/thehill/status/919732899452215296

    House of Cards may be over-the-top, but it will give a more realistic idea of what goes on in American politics than the New York Times will.

    • Replies: @Nico
    The original U.K. version was also over-the-top, but had a nice subtle verisimilitude about it that was absolutely bone-chilling.
  221. @whorefinder
    David Letterman seemed like a genius when I was 14. Then I turned 15.

    The man was a typical lefty: absolutely self-hating and miserable, who tried to make everyone else more miserable than him. As he got older, like most sociopaths (as Anonymous Conservative points out), it got harder and harder for him to hide his rancid bitterness, whereas when he was younger he was better at wearing the mask. his interview style---make the other person uncomfortable---was always just nasty and meanness-without-meaning, but early on he covered up with wit enough to give him plausible deniability.

    By the end, the mask had slipped, and had no more wit to give; he was exposed as just enjoying making people feel bad on camera.

    I agree with your assessment. I got a negative vibe from him and never watched his show, but he had legions of fans so obviously there was a market for him.

    • Replies: @whorefinder
    The same people who loved him were people just like him: miserable self-loathing sociopaths who wanted nothing more than to see other people humiliated, mocked, and insulted, all under the guise of "hey, it's just comedy."

    Cher got it right (at 3:57): Letterman was just an a**hole:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcblpszrwAk
  222. @Anonymous
    I just love the classic 'green'(Marxist) lefty strawman sophistry de jour in we selling out of the concrete reality of the world population crisis.

    "Oh, it's not a crisis of population" they cry, "it's a crisis of *consumption*!" thereby killing two birds with one stone, deflecting any blame from the sacralized non-white third workers and dumping all the scorn on the hated universal punch-bag target, white males. It let's the darkies and the lefties off the hook, diverts blame to 'where it's due' and thoroughly side-steps the real crux of a genuinely urgent and vitally important dilemma, thus allowing the smug lefty the satisfaction of having to deal with any real 'dirty work' in tackling the crisis at source.

    Basically, it's deceit, self-deceit,all compounding on denial. Plus a nifty bit of reflection and projection. A real triumph of the pathological liar's art - but only in this particular case billions (literally) of lives of suffering and starvation are in play. Not to mention the death of the west.

    Anyhow, it's rather simple to call the pathological liar's bluff in this particular case. It is a simple matter to calculate the global 'average' level of material consumption, and to translate this into plain dollar terms. Thus any individual so minded can, if they will, live on the dollar salary consistent with this average, and if generous enough, donate the balance to a charity of his choice. Out goes the Hummer, central heating etc. The liar is earnestly entreated to set the example himself for fellow Americans to follow.


    Don't hold your breath.

    Great comment Anonymous. That is such a good analysis of the lies. I usually can’t even begin to argue with some of these people because there are so many wrong premises in what they say, that you’ve got to start off with corrected definitions of everything involved. By the time you get through that, they have finished their lattes and are on the way to the Wymyns studies class (meanwhile I’ve thrown my chocolate yoohoo bottle out the window and am on my way home rockin to Lynyrd Skynyrd). NOBODY uses vowels anymore – it’s DeClass.

    • Replies: @Nico

    I usually can’t even begin to argue with some of these people because there are so many wrong premises in what they say, that you’ve got to start off with corrected definitions of everything involved.
     
    Hell, I have liberal friends who are sharp enough to anticipate I'll want to redefine terms and they hit me with them up the front so they can caricature and knock down on their own perverted terms. Their commitment to these lies of which there is technically no central magisterial body would make a cult leader jealous. But then, that's how George Soros, Pierre Bergé, Harvey Weinstein et. al. got rich...
  223. @YetAnotherAnon
    "Like all virtuous Progs, this guy believes mentioning population will lead to xenophobia, eugenics and the 12th Invisible Hitler emerging to impose the Fourth Reich."

    That means that, for Hidden Hitler to emerge from occultation, there must be (or have been) 10 other Hitlers since the first, and at the rate I've been reading about "the new Hitler" we must be going through them fast.

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

    Saddam I'm pretty sure was the new Hitler, George Bush II was, Trump definitely is - that's three. Is Assad?

    I bet Nasser was the new Hitler back in the day. Any other candidates?

    George Wallace, Lester Maddox, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Jesse Helms, Rudi Giuliani, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney–I’m pretty sure each of them was identified as the new Hitler at one time or another. Among foreign leaders, Slobodan Milošević.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    Next time we have a candidate who is called Hitler, we should have a Spartacus moment...

    "I'm literally Hitler."
    "I'm literally Hitler!"
    "No, I'm literally Hitler!"

  224. @Jack D
    OT: Hillary is hitting the sauce again:

    'I was running downstairs in heels with a cup of coffee and fell backwards!

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4984972/Clinton-apologetic-missing-BBC-interview.html

    When was the last time Hillary was able to run down a set of stairs in heels? This woman lies about absolutely everything. She is truly a pathological and baldfaced liar and the sad part is that her sycophants actually buy into the lies.

    Notice Bill is nowhere to be found but Huma is. I am increasingly convinced that Weiner was just a "beard" to distract everyone away from the Huma-Hillary romance.

    Whenever any of you are tempted to criticize Trump, just remember what the alternative was.

    Hillary reflexively lies, but she’s not terribly skilled at it. For example, her description of how she happened to fall is too detailed. In his book The Gift of Fear, Gavin De Becker lists the excessively detailed explanation as one of the “tells” that a con-artist is giving you a made-up story. Also, her story is calculated to put her in a flattering light–I was running! down stairs! in high heels! with my coffee! turning to speak to someone!–Ah, what a bustling, engaged life she’s leading. More likely, she was drunk and furiously kicked some furniture while screaming at one of her staff. Either that or dodging sniper fire.

  225. @whorefinder

    Did ever watch Red Eye? I thought it was funny.
     
    The cancelling of Red Eye and the firing of O'Reilly--which occurred very close to one another---pushed me off Fox. Outside of a national emergency situation, I stopped watching it. Red Eye was cancelled for no discernible reason other than Fox was shifting further left.

    I found Red Eye entertaining when Gutfeld was running it. When he left, the show seemed to lose energy and focus–Gutfeld had kept things lively and moving along. Unfortunately, when The Donald appeared on the scene, Gutfeld came out as a Never Trumper and just another cuck. That made it hard for me to enjoy him.

    • Replies: @whorefinder
    Shilhue was a great new host, if different from Gutfeld --Shilhue wasn't impish or crassly funny as Gutfeld was, but more like a polite Dad who's getting ticked in his political argument and has a few sly Dad lines to toss in there. In any event, with Shilhue the show was up in the demographics ratings and Andy Levy and Shilhue melded well together. I will probably never forgive Fox for that cancellation, and not just because I'm up a lot at 3am.

    Yeah, in order to get The Five going Gutfeld went full cuck. When the Jeb! Bush started running in 2016 Gutfeld was all about "electability" and how Jeb! would save us all. He's establishment neocon now, although I like when he needles Juan/Bob; if he'd been 10-15 years younger he'd be an Alt Right personality.

  226. @Altai
    You always know there'll be some epic content when the headline has 'here's why' in the title.

    Stuff like this pisses me off. Because issues like the environment are largely based on a 'sanctity' morality, that is what is motivating him. He is thus unable to disentangle other sanctity motives from it, in his case immigration. Therefore immigration can't be a problem for the environment.

    But it's obvious to any observer of places like Brussels, London or Dublin that immigration drives a crisis shortage in housing leading to massive over-development, that consumes nature and destroys some of the most high-value, high productive farmland in the world.

    It's obvious that new immigrants are highly mercenary with low attachment to their new homes and will thus not support environmental regulations or show much concern over global warming if they get in the way of any gibs for them, as those are more abstract concerns expressed and internalised by Westerners. Their influence on these democracies will thus undermine this.

    It's obvious that people living Western countries consume more resources and thus increases the population through mass migration will hurt global resources.

    It's obvious that people regard immigration as a huge directly existentially threatening political issue that will distract away from global warming in exactly those new developed Western countries with welfare states that have done so much to champion it. Reducing social trust and cohesion in the likes of Sweden, Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, etc is insane! Those states and populi should be considered the core of any movement towards more green economies and everything about them that powers that protected! This moron likely believes that if Americans hadn't 'gone crazy' and elected Trump, we'd be making more progress, instead of understanding that political arguments about immigration are inevitable and Trump was given total monopoly on it by idiots like him.

    It's further obvious that given the last point, making people focus on global warming by reminding them how many Bengali, Africans etc, who might be displaced and be able to guilt-trip developed nations as an argument in the West, is a good strategy.

    It's shit like this that leads people to doubt in global warming for their own tribal-political reasons in reaction. (The reason people doubt the official narrative on race often despite their desire for it to be true as a result of the live experience of their lives, people doubt Global Warming because they didn't want it to be true in the first place) Disasters like the March for Science, which was a bad enough idea itself, but within days of being announced had already been hijacked by SJWs, contribute.

    Regarding the 1st part of your post, you describe environmental problems that are (should be) obvious to all. You didn’t even get to the basics of it though: People have to throw out things, as we are not true omnivores, like billy goats. Besides simple garbage, along with more complicated garbage (say cars, the most recycled products there ever have been BTW – been to the junkyard lately? You can barely find a door handle still on the car), we can include real pollutants like oxides of nitrogen and particulates, and oils, heavy metals, old medicines, etc, in “things”.

    So, we’ve got stuff to get rid of. The smaller the population vs. the land area/ocean volume/atmospheric volume, the easier it is for Mother Earth (really just wind/rain/freezing-thawing ice/lots of bugs-worms-bacteria) to clean up after us. The American Indians have always been thought of as environmentalists, but with only 5-10 million people on 10 million square miles (just N. America, depending on how you define it), it’s more like Earth had time to clean up after them, that’s all.

    Oh back to your point, Altai, your view of Global Climate Disruption(TM – mine) as an “existential” problem shows that you have some kind of arrogance about those Trump voters, thinking you are so much smarter, I guess. People don’t doubt GCD for “tribal” reasons, as many have a lot more common sense than you, and understand that there IS NO WORKING MATH. MODEL OF THE ENTIRE WORLD CLIMATE!. Any significant predictions made have been wrong. I don’t expect a working model of the earth’s climate to be easy, and I respect climate science when it is not politicized. It IS politicized now, even to the dismay of many a real scientist just trying to study or model piece parts of the extremely complex climate of this planet.

    This climate nonsense is the biggest scam since the Diamond Business (continued here and here) and running a close 2nd to the ponzi scheme called Social Security. Leave this nonsense behind and FOCUS, Altai, on the real problems.

  227. @Jack D
    OT: Hillary is hitting the sauce again:

    'I was running downstairs in heels with a cup of coffee and fell backwards!

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4984972/Clinton-apologetic-missing-BBC-interview.html

    When was the last time Hillary was able to run down a set of stairs in heels? This woman lies about absolutely everything. She is truly a pathological and baldfaced liar and the sad part is that her sycophants actually buy into the lies.

    Notice Bill is nowhere to be found but Huma is. I am increasingly convinced that Weiner was just a "beard" to distract everyone away from the Huma-Hillary romance.

    Whenever any of you are tempted to criticize Trump, just remember what the alternative was.

    Hillary is hitting the sauce again:

    ‘I was running downstairs in heels with a cup of coffee and fell backwards!


    When was the last time Hillary was able to run down a set of stairs in heels?

    The truth may be worse for her – another fainting spell brought on by whatever neurological condition she has? Of course, alcohol rarely helps. NYT’s Amy Chosick to her credit noted Hillary’s drinking a long time ago: http://freebeacon.com/issues/hillary-drinks/

    BTW the bizarre facial gestures we saw during the campaign don’t seem to be as evident now – less stress/better neurological management?

    There were speculations during the election campaign that Hillary had only months to live but she looks better now (touch wood – her activities at this stage help undermine the Left). Is it ridiculous to speculate that she may have been the victim of an undercover operation to manipulate her medical regime during the campaign? Many commentators have noted that Bill was always in two minds about a Hillary presidency that would eclipse his own legacy.

    Notice Bill is nowhere to be found but Huma is. I am increasingly convinced that Weiner was just a “beard” to distract everyone away from the Huma-Hillary romance.

    Remember that Anthony Weiner was introduced to Huma by the Clintons. Didn’t Bill officiate at the wedding?

    Being criminal riff-raff themselves, the Clintons have since Mena preferred to deal with outright criminals with well-defined criminal aims who are more “flexible” and easier to control than genteel society.

  228. @EriK

    This woman lies about absolutely everything.
     
    You can say that again. Even when she doesn't have to lie, it's her first instinct.

    Even when she doesn’t have to lie, it’s [Hillary’s] first instinct.

    She needs the practice to stay sharp.

  229. @Harry Baldwin
    I found Red Eye entertaining when Gutfeld was running it. When he left, the show seemed to lose energy and focus--Gutfeld had kept things lively and moving along. Unfortunately, when The Donald appeared on the scene, Gutfeld came out as a Never Trumper and just another cuck. That made it hard for me to enjoy him.

    Shilhue was a great new host, if different from Gutfeld –Shilhue wasn’t impish or crassly funny as Gutfeld was, but more like a polite Dad who’s getting ticked in his political argument and has a few sly Dad lines to toss in there. In any event, with Shilhue the show was up in the demographics ratings and Andy Levy and Shilhue melded well together. I will probably never forgive Fox for that cancellation, and not just because I’m up a lot at 3am.

    Yeah, in order to get The Five going Gutfeld went full cuck. When the Jeb! Bush started running in 2016 Gutfeld was all about “electability” and how Jeb! would save us all. He’s establishment neocon now, although I like when he needles Juan/Bob; if he’d been 10-15 years younger he’d be an Alt Right personality.

  230. @Harry Baldwin
    I agree with your assessment. I got a negative vibe from him and never watched his show, but he had legions of fans so obviously there was a market for him.

    The same people who loved him were people just like him: miserable self-loathing sociopaths who wanted nothing more than to see other people humiliated, mocked, and insulted, all under the guise of “hey, it’s just comedy.”

    Cher got it right (at 3:57): Letterman was just an a**hole:

    • Agree: Bernardista
    • Replies: @Nico
    Among the many compelling reasons to despise television and nearly every bit of its legacy one is that in substituting itself for the civic form yet inserting itself into "the privacy of one's own home" it flattered the idiocratic delusions and anti-social tendencies of simple, abject losers because suddenly there was a market for them. Previously they would have been too awkward to express themselves or be catered to in any social setting, and while trashy books have existed almost since the printing press one needs a minimum of cognitive power to read them. But the Idiot Box gave them the sensation that they were at least some subtype of "normal," and this terrible idea spread to the rest of the population, as well.

    These days one finds genuinely "well-brought-up" specimens only in a few reduced niches. This above all explains why the young prefer Letterman, Daily, Colbert, etc. to actual news seemingly regardless of their socioeconomic background and education, and why the audience for Comedy Central does not "move on" elsewhere: they grow old, but they sure don't grow up.
  231. @Mr. Anon

    His formula was interesting. He purported to serve up hard news but in fact he larded his hour with comedians. Almost every night there would be a segment with Dennis Miller or Greg Gutfeld.
     
    Miller hasn't been funny in a long while. Gutfeld, as far as I can tell, never was. He seems to amuse himself, with his smug little smile and his smarmy asides hinting at being some kind of sexual deviant, but he has never amused me.

    The thing to remember about O'Reilly is that his viewership had one foot in the grave. The median Factor Viewer (What does "The Factor" even mean, by the way - it's a stupid name for a show) was something like 68 years old. His audience were largely old-folks in retirement communities who think that America can "come back" if we just had another General Patton or something. It was obvious from the commercials shown during O'Reilly's show (reverse mortgages, catheters, etc.) and from his...........painfully..............slow............way..........of.............talking................during................his................monologues (finger gesture).

    Carlson is, as you say, much better. He tries to appeal to a younger audience and apparently does, to some degree at least. And his selection of guests is much better. FOX shows seem to consist mainly of FOX personalities talking to other FOX personalities. Carlson's show still does that - unfortunately to still too large a degree - but he does at least have some interesting guests on as well. He actually had a guy on who had written a book about the North Korean regime to talk about North Korea. Imagine that - somebody who is a real expert on the Hermit Kingdom, rather than, say, Charles Krauthammer or Monica Crowley. Carlson even had James Howard Kunstler on his show - now that's something you don't see on cable TV everyday.

    I got in an argument with the crew from “The Young Turks” a while back. They made the argument, as you have, that O’Reilly’s audience is very old. And of course you’re undoubtedly right.

    But it is not a phenomenon unique to O’Reilly. Rachel Maddow’s audience averages only a year or so younger. As I remember her audience was about 66 and O’Reilly’s about 68. Younger people watched Jon Stewart or one of the nasty lefty comedians not straight news.

    I don’t know how long this pattern has obtained. I remember Huntley and Brinkley (Hell I remember John Cameron Swayze). Maybe geezers have always been the backbone of the TV News audiences.

    It doesn’t really matter if you think Dennis Miller or Greg Gutfeld is funny. My point was that they were on the air as comedians. Personally I don’t think very many stand up comedians are ever very funny. There was the late John Pinette, and Ron White and of course the late Robin Williams. Other than those three I don’t find many of the comedians who clog the airwaves to be very funny at all. Years ago I saw this guy Elmo and he was very funny but he disappeared after one show.

  232. @whorefinder
    David Letterman seemed like a genius when I was 14. Then I turned 15.

    The man was a typical lefty: absolutely self-hating and miserable, who tried to make everyone else more miserable than him. As he got older, like most sociopaths (as Anonymous Conservative points out), it got harder and harder for him to hide his rancid bitterness, whereas when he was younger he was better at wearing the mask. his interview style---make the other person uncomfortable---was always just nasty and meanness-without-meaning, but early on he covered up with wit enough to give him plausible deniability.

    By the end, the mask had slipped, and had no more wit to give; he was exposed as just enjoying making people feel bad on camera.

    You could say the same of countless comics; humour is often a sublimated expression of hostility toward the world. There are exceptions, of course, but generally speaking, successful comedians are not happy, well-adjusted people. The underlying bitterness often becomes more obvious with age.

    • Replies: @whorefinder
    I remember some comedian stating something taboo--that it was ridiculous that people were getting political information /arguments/opinions from comedians such as Jon Stewart or the gang at SNL, or that those guys were praised for speaking "truth" about politics.

    In effect, he said that comedians were a bunch of depressed alcoholics and drug users with extreme self-esteem issues, mental health problems, and absolutely horrible childhoods who are always one step away from living in a cardboard box. He was like, if you wouldn't get your opinions from a hobo, you shouldn't get them from a comedian.

    Makes me also think of a humorous line a friend ripped off when he saw the opening remarks at the Oscars one year (from memory): "Welcome prostitutes, pimps, whores, sluts, drug dealers, addicts, rapists, thieves, liars, murderers, butt-pirates, sociopaths, psychopaths, and sundry mental patients. Let's see whose pathology gets validated tonight!"

  233. @I, commenter

    What was not reported in the Vox article was the real reason why the “green anti-immigration” Sierra Club movement was defeated.
     
    It's interesting how the left now supports wealthy, powerful globalists subverting democracy and democratic process. once of the clauses to the donation was that the SC would never broach the subject of immigration again.

    Yep, I, for the leaders of the cntrl-left, it’s all about power, not ideas at all. For the masses of useful idiots that follow, well, they are idiots, so you know ….

  234. @MEH 0910
    This Ron Unz post might be relevant:
    Open Thread: Software Bugs?

    MEH 0910, thank you for the reply and your concern. I regret having done testing under a post here (they got deleted anyway), as 2 things that I hadn’t done yet were 1) get on another computer (a real one – this is a tablet) and then 2) try links elsewhere, as on my site. I did (2), then realized that the problem was somewhere on my end*, then (1) proved that my stupid tablet is putting in the wrong type of double-quote marks.

    I haven’t solved my problem yet, but understand it at least. (I had seen this thread you linked to, and it did seem weird that unz would have ANY kind of bug. I don’t agree with Mr. Unz all the time on politics, but his site is the “Cat’s Mao”.

    * but had to get to work and leave it behind till later.

  235. @AndrewR
    What country is allowing 50,000,000 immigrants per year lmao

    Your autistic mathematician’s demand for precision renders meaningless any number of useful

    What country is allowing 50,000,000 immigrants per year lmao

    Maybe he’s also lhao.

  236. @Senator Brundlefly
    We are part of nature no doubt. Our existence is contingent on the biosphere. But I mean nature here in sense of do we "need" whales or tigers or certain biodiverse forests? If as we lose these things they turn out to be disadvantageous to our economic well being I guess the answer is yes. But really I think the answer is no. There are parts of nature that do not exist necessarily for our benefit (save them being pretty to look at).

    There are parts of nature that do not exist necessarily for our benefit (save them being pretty to look at).

    _ ehh – “pretty to look at” as a stand in for: Pretty alltogether (not o n l y for our eyes, but also for our imagination and our joy and our thoughts and stories…).

    Now: Being pretty in all those senses i s a big benefit. (For Nietzsche, it was all that was left. You know, since he had come to the conclusion, that God had vanished somehow in modern times.

    • Replies: @Senator Brundlefly
    Agreed. Though the point I was trying to make in my comments was that such abstract benefits (unfortunately) have their limits. A lion is beautiful and majestic but those qualities don't override how it eats your cattle. Mammoths captured the imaginations of our ancestors enough to lead to cave paintings. Didn't stop us from eating them all.
  237. @Harry Baldwin
    George Wallace, Lester Maddox, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Jesse Helms, Rudi Giuliani, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney--I'm pretty sure each of them was identified as the new Hitler at one time or another. Among foreign leaders, Slobodan Milošević.

    Next time we have a candidate who is called Hitler, we should have a Spartacus moment

    “I’m literally Hitler.”
    I’m literally Hitler!”
    “No, I’m literally Hitler!”

  238. @Harry Baldwin
    House of Cards may be over-the-top, but it will give a more realistic idea of what goes on in American politics than the New York Times will.

    The original U.K. version was also over-the-top, but had a nice subtle verisimilitude about it that was absolutely bone-chilling.

  239. @Achmed E. Newman
    Great comment Anonymous. That is such a good analysis of the lies. I usually can’t even begin to argue with some of these people because there are so many wrong premises in what they say, that you’ve got to start off with corrected definitions of everything involved. By the time you get through that, they have finished their lattes and are on the way to the Wymyns studies class (meanwhile I’ve thrown my chocolate yoohoo bottle out the window and am on my way home rockin to Lynyrd Skynyrd). NOBODY uses vowels anymore - it’s DeClass.

    I usually can’t even begin to argue with some of these people because there are so many wrong premises in what they say, that you’ve got to start off with corrected definitions of everything involved.

    Hell, I have liberal friends who are sharp enough to anticipate I’ll want to redefine terms and they hit me with them up the front so they can caricature and knock down on their own perverted terms. Their commitment to these lies of which there is technically no central magisterial body would make a cult leader jealous. But then, that’s how George Soros, Pierre Bergé, Harvey Weinstein et. al. got rich…

  240. And where do our immigrants now come from?

  241. @whorefinder
    The same people who loved him were people just like him: miserable self-loathing sociopaths who wanted nothing more than to see other people humiliated, mocked, and insulted, all under the guise of "hey, it's just comedy."

    Cher got it right (at 3:57): Letterman was just an a**hole:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcblpszrwAk

    Among the many compelling reasons to despise television and nearly every bit of its legacy one is that in substituting itself for the civic form yet inserting itself into “the privacy of one’s own home” it flattered the idiocratic delusions and anti-social tendencies of simple, abject losers because suddenly there was a market for them. Previously they would have been too awkward to express themselves or be catered to in any social setting, and while trashy books have existed almost since the printing press one needs a minimum of cognitive power to read them. But the Idiot Box gave them the sensation that they were at least some subtype of “normal,” and this terrible idea spread to the rest of the population, as well.

    These days one finds genuinely “well-brought-up” specimens only in a few reduced niches. This above all explains why the young prefer Letterman, Daily, Colbert, etc. to actual news seemingly regardless of their socioeconomic background and education, and why the audience for Comedy Central does not “move on” elsewhere: they grow old, but they sure don’t grow up.

  242. @whorefinder
    The problem isn't their lack of credibility, the problem is the monopoly they have on the megaphone. The Left has known for decades the rule of a high school gossip: if they keep repeating a lie to you enough, you'll believe it, no matter how little credibility they have.

    Smash the media monopolies, however, and they can't keep repeating it.

    Exactly. There needs to be no more Megaphones and Narratives if we’re going to actually have anything our ancestors would recognize as a society or culture. The people in the legacy media and academia are individually epigones but are collectively a big deal because they inherited 19th and 20th century institutions and technology that lets them be the arbiters and middlemen. No more.

  243. @Dieter Kief

    There are parts of nature that do not exist necessarily for our benefit (save them being pretty to look at).
     
    _ ehh – “pretty to look at” as a stand in for: Pretty alltogether (not o n l y for our eyes, but also for our imagination and our joy and our thoughts and stories…).

    Now: Being pretty in all those senses i s a big benefit. (For Nietzsche, it was all that was left. You know, since he had come to the conclusion, that God had vanished somehow in modern times.

    Agreed. Though the point I was trying to make in my comments was that such abstract benefits (unfortunately) have their limits. A lion is beautiful and majestic but those qualities don’t override how it eats your cattle. Mammoths captured the imaginations of our ancestors enough to lead to cave paintings. Didn’t stop us from eating them all.

    • Replies: @Dieter Kief

    Mammoths captured the imaginations of our ancestors enough to lead to cave paintings. Didn’t stop us from eating them all.
     
    I see your point. I'd hold that those are wrong, ho think, that everything is running kinda automatically smoothly as soon as people are finally liberated from their big old burden of God, and the sins and the Devil and all that.

    Nietzsche would hold, that from then on, style and the cultivation and the appreciation of beauty become as important as God - had been. Liberation as a means, that thought could mark a good beginning.

    Anyhow - aesthetics can indeed be be looked upon as an argument to limit population growth.

    And as Kant has shown: There's no need to destroy or negate the idea of God in order to estimate aesthetics. Nietzsche was born a little late, therefor this will always be looked upon as a serious omission, that he did not see what Kant had seen (he could have seen it quite easily, it was right in front of his nose - and Heinrich Heine had already written at length about these things, and Nietzsche love Heine - but only up to a point, that is....).
  244. @Maj. Kong
    The space elevator is supposed to promise large cost reductions, making asteroid mining feasible. That means a power source and raw materials to build on Mars. And if you can build a space elevator, you can probably build giant orbital mirrors to make Mars warmer.

    The long term solution is probably some kind of cryonics that will freeze people long enough to get to another star system.

    I’m familiar with beanstalks, and wish that we’d seriously pursue their development. Nevertheless, they would do nothing to relieve or reduce overpopulation. Even if you could ship tens (hundreds?) of millions of humans off into space, there’s really no place to send them. And even if you could terraform Mars within just a few centuries, you’re still talking about shipping tens (hundreds?) of millions of humans off to a completely underdeveloped (and probably only marginally habitable) world that could at most support a tenth of Earth’s population. And the idea of shipping a meaningful portion of humanity to an entirely different star system is too silly to even comment on.

    Our future might well be in space. But that will do little to help those teeming billions who will remain stuck on Earth.

    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    Improved hydroponics?

    Could be a spin-off
    , @Mr. Anon

    Our future might well be in space. But that will do little to help those teeming billions who will remain stuck on Earth.
     
    Another way of saying that is: our future (for most of us included in the word "our") is NOT in space.
  245. @Thea
    But to terrascape Mars, what mass would that require?

    Mars already has enough CO2. If it doesn’t have enough water, that would need to be supplied by redirected comets/asteroids. The biggest problem is the absence of nitrogen. Humans can’t breathe an atmosphere of just O2 and CO2. You need nitrogen as a buffer (78 % of Earth’s atmosphere). I’ve never seen any proposals for how to supply all that N2 to Mars.

    At any rate, nobody proposes that we ship all the necessary raw resources to Mars from Earth.

    • Replies: @Nico
    Mars also lacks sufficient gravity to facilitate normal movement: humans would need special resistance suits or some other compensatory measure to head off significant muscular atrophy or underdevelopment.
  246. @AndrewR
    Well on some level, it is arbitrary. It's impossible to measure the effect of a single immigrant in a country of 60 million. For any "non-arbitrary" number n an immigration restrictionist would choose as the maximum number of immigrants to allow, the country could survive n + 1.

    Yes, immigrants have real effects on all those things you mentioned (not all necessarily negative effects), but to say that you could pick a non-arbitrary number is absurd. In theory, there could be a "straw that broke the camel's back" but that exact number would infinitely exceed the capacity of anyone to predict.

    The use of the word “arbitrary” to mean “random” illustrates how, through sloppy and permissive usage, vulgar understandings change the understanding of a word.

    At its root, “arbitrary” has the same origins as “arbitrate,” where an expert listened to evidence and then rendered a decision. It did not have the connotation of “random” or “capricious.”

    In reality, we make decisions all the time around where the limits ought to be. Because the world we live in is not a sophomoric mathematical model.

    Yes – the impact of the n+1 immigrant is zero compared to the impact of the first n. And by a sort of through the looking glass math induction, *no* level of immigration can be set.

    It’s an absurd notion, because obviously, at some point between 0 immigrants and 7 billion (every person on earth in the US) there is a point where the country could not sustain the environmental (not to mention economic and social) impact. Because we cannot precisely model what that number is (is it 100,000 vs 101,000, or 1 million versus 1.01 million?) we are unable to make *any* rule?

    I think this is, from my old days in school, akin to Zeno’s paradox, and one of the reasons that integral calculus was created.

    When I was in high school, we were shown an instructive lesson called “Infinite Acres,” to illustrate some of the limitations of mathematics in the practical world. A conic is formed where 1/x , x->00 is rotated about the X axis. The volume area of such an object is finite due to the limitations for the integral, but the surface area is unbounded (integrate 1/x, as x-> 00).

    So one could theoretically fill up the cone inside with paint, but not cover the outside surface.

    Countries make choices all the time – we set speed limits at 65 mph in the US because it’s ridiculous to imagine cars travelling at 200 mph or more on the roads. We set voting ages at 18 because we cannot have 3 year olds voting.

    And we put limits on integration, because unlike the conic, the volume (and surface area) of the US is in fact, limited.

    • Agree: Autochthon
    • Replies: @guest
    Eh, "arbitrary" has descended from one meaning to another, but I wouldn't say it's been corrupted by vulgar understanding and permissive usage. The current definition's relation to the original is valid. Also, the meaning drifted a long time ago, before every Tom, Dick, and Shitavious was using words like that.

    Unlike judges, arbitrators are not rule-bound. They are at liberty to decide according to their discretion. That's the core meaning of the term. That's why "arbitrary rule" back when was tied to absolutism in politics.

    It isn't far to go from "at one's discretion" or "at one's will" to "uncertain" and up in the air, which is the mathematical definition, incidentally.

    It's unfair that "arbitrary" has come to mean "an abuse of arbitration." Or the abuse of individual judgment, if you will. But at least in legal terminology they won't say something is bad simply because it's arbitrary, I don't think. They'll pair it with another word, as in the case of the popular phrase "arbitrary and capricious."

    , @AndrewR
    It seems you're complaining about an inevitable and universal linguistic phenomenon.

    Look up the history of any word and it's likely you'll see how meanings change. Take the word "deer." In other Germanic languages it refers to any animal.

    From wiktionary:

    From Middle English deere, dere, der, dier, deor (“small animal, deer”), from Old English dēor, dīor (“an animal, beast, any sort of wild animal, wild beast; deer, reindeer”), from Proto-Germanic *deuzą (“animal”), from Proto-Indo-European *dʰewsóm (“living thing”), from *dʰéws (“breath”), full-grade derivative of *dʰwés-. Cognate with Scots dere, deir (“deer”), North Frisian dier (“animal, beast”), West Frisian dier (“animal, beast”), Dutch dier (“animal, beast”), German Low German Deer, Deert (“animal”), German Tier (“animal, beast”), Swedish djur (“animal, beast”), Icelandic dýr (“animal, beast”). Related also to Albanian dash (“ram”), Lithuanian daũsos (“upper air; heaven”), Lithuanian dùsti (“to sigh”), Russian душа́ (dušá, “breath, spirit”), Lithuanian dvėsti (“to breath, exhale”), Sanskrit ध्वंसति (dhvaṃsati, “he falls to dust”). For semantic development compare Latin animālis (“animal”), from anima (“breath, spirit”).
  247. @Bies Podkrakowski
    Germans wanting to save Polish girls from rape? Don't think so.

    Besides they were safer in Poland. There Red Army was theoretically an allied army. Of course it was safer to avoid them. Especially rear and support troops. First line soldiers were more decent - at least that's the tale I was told.

    In Germany Red Army soldiers could got revenge and relieve their work stress and the officers were looking the other way.

    Besides they were safer in Poland. There Red Army was theoretically an allied army.

    Huh? Allied?

    Soviet invasion of Poland, 17 September 1939

  248. @AM

    Human population is an integral part of the environment. Anyone refusing to discuss human overpopulation should not be able to call themselves an environmental journalist.
     
    Which highlights the point that modern environmental movements are essentially neo-Gnosticism.

    It isn't about the environment, it's about getting rid of all those evil, nasty people who are made of flesh (again.)

    This was never about population control either, because Westerners have only successful neutered themselves and those who enter into their societies (a process which takes a generation or so.)

    You want population control and nice environments?

    -Lower the West's standard of living. No fresh vegetables, less travel, no ski resorts, etc, etc.

    -Raise the West's day to day lifestyle. Get women to stay home. Less income, smaller houses, less travel, more sanity.

    -Spread the fear of God over Africa. They don't use birth control. Give it up. It's not happening. Only Westerners are quite so special needs as to completely divorce sex from children. You might however, convince the average African that God is watching and wishes them to properly take care of the children in monogamous, lifelong relationships. That real men stick around and raise their children and real women don't let themselves be doormats on the point.

    -Close all of the West's borders and allow only private charities to operate in Africa. No more large scale UN or foriegn aid, including meddling with reproductive habits.

    And almost everything I have stated would be anathema to average self proclaimed environmentalist concerned about populations.

    Which brings me back around to the idea that modern environmentalism is neo-Gnosticism in a green coat. Modern environmentalism has little or nothing to do with effective results, and everything to do with assuming that people are bad, which is why the average environmentalist is so wholly for open borders.

    Leave the Africans to live as they choose. But keep them confined to Africa.

  249. @Dan Hayes
    Steve,

    What was not reported in the Vox article was the real reason why the "green anti-immigration" Sierra Club movement was defeated. That was the 100 million dollar "donation" by Wall Street fat cat David Gelbaum in 2000-2001. Gelbaum essentially made the SC an offer they couldn't refuse.

    Precisely correct, Dan.

    While the Vox article attempts to present this as a “takeover” from the grassroots, Sierra in fact had a highly democratic process for electing its board members. It was the MEMBERSHIP who elected those candidates.

    The takeover was Carl Pope and his rich handlers’ attempts to overturn what the membership had voted. Sound familiar?

    I presume Voxy McRoberts prefers his special interests to be financiers and members of the IT/data corporate state to guys like, oh, say, SPLC’s reviled and targeted John Tanton.

    Note that Roberts echoes SPLC talking points here by asserting this.

    https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2002/john-tanton-mastermind-behind-organized-anti-immigration-movement

    VDARE still has Brenda Walker’s series on the entire matter.

    Last I Ducked, LA Times had taken down its pretty good piece (or pieces, can’t recall) on the matter.

    This push against grassroots, heartland, and urban environmentalists was a corollary of the billionaire takeover of the DNC for the personal use of global elites. Who are devotees of the cult of Growth Uber Alles. A lot of the extreme rhetoric we’ve seen in recent years derives from this effort to distract attention from the 1% who fund Situationist street theatre to bitch about the 1%.

    This is a flawed piece but limns some of actual events in that takeover quite well IMO:

    https://www.counterpunch.org/2013/03/15/the-progressive-movement-is-a-pr-front-for-rich-democrats/

    • Agree: Dan Hayes
  250. @AndrewR
    What country is allowing 50,000,000 immigrants per year lmao
    • Replies: @guest
    Apparently you didn't bother reading your own link. Or you're confused by the distinction between the total number of immigrant residents in the Current Year and the total number of immigrants in any particular year. I can't tell which.

    The 84 million figure isn't for people who immigrated the previous year. That would be preposterous, even for our ruling class. It obviously represents all foreign-born occupants of the U.S. and their children, without regard for when they came over.

    The article states that in 2015 (I guess that was the latest available year for data) 1.38 million foreign born individuals moved to the U.S.* That's a hair shy of of 50 million, if I have my math correct.

    That's more than 48 million fictitious immigrants the above poster is allowed to lhfao over.

    *It says that includes naturalized citizens and legal residents who have lived in the U.S. previously.

    , @AndrewR
    Math is hard lets go shopping
  251. @Mr. Anon

    If you can stomach it, watch this entire segment with Tucker Carlson of Fox News — it hits all the usual notes, culminating in an interview with some professor who wrote a book about reducing immigration for environmental reasons.
     
    "If you can stomach it".

    Somebody saying bad things about immigration.............how sickening! Tucker Carlson - my God - he's practically Julius Streicher.

    Somebody get David Roberts some smelling salts. He's got the vapors.

    Leave the Africans to live as they choose. But keep them confined to Africa.

  252. @Mr. Anon

    If you can stomach it, watch this entire segment with Tucker Carlson of Fox News — it hits all the usual notes, culminating in an interview with some professor who wrote a book about reducing immigration for environmental reasons.
     
    "If you can stomach it".

    Somebody saying bad things about immigration.............how sickening! Tucker Carlson - my God - he's practically Julius Streicher.

    Somebody get David Roberts some smelling salts. He's got the vapors.

    “Literally Julius Streicher!” I’m sure we’ll be hearing that before long.

  253. @AndrewR
    Well on some level, it is arbitrary. It's impossible to measure the effect of a single immigrant in a country of 60 million. For any "non-arbitrary" number n an immigration restrictionist would choose as the maximum number of immigrants to allow, the country could survive n + 1.

    Yes, immigrants have real effects on all those things you mentioned (not all necessarily negative effects), but to say that you could pick a non-arbitrary number is absurd. In theory, there could be a "straw that broke the camel's back" but that exact number would infinitely exceed the capacity of anyone to predict.

    So the number is arbitrary? Who said that we had to have an infinite number of immigrants unless we can calculate a non-arbitrary limit?

    • Replies: @guest
    "Who said that we had to have an infinite number of immigrants unless we can calculate a non-arbitrary limit?"

    Emma Lazarus?
  254. @AndrewR
    I don't understand what I said that created the urge in you to be so disrespectful towards me, but your status as a bully and a troll have been duly noted.

    Bullies and trolls, oh no!

  255. @unclesam

    I am a fan of Britain’s National Health Service. I can go to the doctor when ever I need to, and I don’t have to worry about awkward, criminal insurance companies or the prospect of bankruptcy.
     
    I would claim that Britain's pointed lack of innovation and entrepreneurship is directly related to the fact that they tax the living shit out anyone who makes significant money. Your ability to manufacture is for shit. You can't even make a decent automobile. I mean, what the fuck do you folks even do that carries any global impact. Last time I was in an electronics store, most of your stuff sucked ass. Going to an average grocery store, or electronics store is like a 1950's version of an American one. The packaging of your grocery items is old fashioned and stupid. You can't even make a milkshake. It's like a special item, if you can find it.

    Stop trying to brag about anything contemporary and British. Your political system sucks ass. You finally got your wits about you with Brexit, but it's too little, too late. You're a cultural and demographic dead man walking. The first thing any successful entertainer does when they hit pay dirt is to get the hell out of your country.

    By the way, the mean little fat fuck you're so proud of, Winston Churchill, tricked us into getting involved in a stupid civil war he helped to orchestrate, and for what? What did all the Americans die for? On those fucking beaches Hitler ran your silly asses off of at the get-go? So you could establish a Muslim Caliphate that used to be London? And who pays to defend your country now, when push comes to shove?

    WE do. If you had to pay for a military that wasn't a joke, your "free" health benefits would not be free.

    And speaking of your great insurance that you're taxed up the ass for, many of your inhabitants teeth are still atrocious. Out in your hinterlands, Brits can still be found with giant misshapen heads, under serviced jawlines, and every other manifestation of concentrated inbreeding, even after all these years.

    In short, you've been a bunch of fucking two-faced assholes since 1770's, and your shit hasn't changed.

    So... quit trying to feed our sociopath liberals blank ammunition by bragging about your stupid insurance plans. Your country is on welfare. We're carrying your fat brit asses.

    Shut up, and show some respect.

    @Unclesam

    The NHS doesn’t require the British people to have the shit taxed out of them. European health systems in general are cheaper than the American one because they not only have to pay dividends to shareholders, but they also lack that element of racketeering characteristic of health provision in the United States.

    But you make the same error that many commit when talking of public debt. Yes, it may be bad to have a large public sector deficit, but it doesn’t do any good if you simply shift that debt over to private individuals, as with tuition fees and the ready availablity of credit to make up for low wages. Similarly, you have to pay for healthcare unless you are willing to die of minor illnesses or endure pain for no good reason. But paying through the nose to a private insurer who just wants to rip you off seems to be the worst possible way to go about financing your medical sector, rather like scrapping the police and putting public protection in the hands of the Mafia.

  256. @dfordoom

    Money buys silence
     
    Environmentalism has nothing to do with the environment. It's all about money. If you want a share of the money and we're talking a lot of money here) you stick to the party line or you miss out.

    I’ll agree with your point to some degree but would put it differently.

    “Environmentalism” was the globalists’ PR-takeover term for good old fashioned heartland nationalist “conservationism.” Which had the horrific quality of being locally or regionally rooted and interested in limiting growth and conversion of every acre of American land either to hive or hive-services. And, of course, being primarily the concern of white Americans of European and/or founding stock ancestry.

    In the 1970s IME, the “environmental movement” had much overlap with older conservationists. The former were often younger and faced with issues that our elders hadn’t had to confront, like assessment of technological systems that had been implemented without much understanding or thought.

    For example, the mass use of pesticides in the “Green Revolution.” In very short order–less than a generation–they demolished American ecosystems. This was apparently in the service of growing more Africans for Big Ag/Big Pharma profit…and also the military-industrial-media complex, whose strategic decisions often used food as an instrument of negotiation.

    Nothing new about threat-of-famine, and technologically more advanced societies will always have countless begging bowls extended their way.

    But at the point where Antigo Silt Loam is cashed out and aquifers pumped dry so we can hold soy and corn exports over China and Russia, or negotiate oil prices with the Saudis based on the chimera of “biofuels”–and of course this is all about speculative profit for the shekelmeisters who want to feed and proliferate Africans but not be the ones to live next door to them–well, then you’re in the realm of destroying something you can never recreate for something (shekels) that ultimately have very little value.

    And then the elites pack up and move to their 10,000-acre doomsteads in Uruguay.

    The best overlaps between the older conservationists and the newer type of “environmental” science, like ecology and ever improving scientific instrumentation and capacity for modeling and calculation, were very good indeed.

    Consider the joint response on avian raptor population collapse in the Northeast. Without it we literally would be bereft of most American raptor species today. Maybe all. I can’t see any hawk these days without my throat getting a bit tight, thinking about how close we came to losing them all…and the amount of gut-busting work it took to turn that all around, over entire lifetimes by smart, hardworking white guys and gals. The ones I knew were both old-timey conservationists at heart, but also environmentalists. But not in the Al Gore/Ed Begley/globe-trotting-preacher sense.

    IME there are countless old-timey conservationist “environmentalists.” They just aren’t allowed the mike* very often, and when they are paid heed at all, it’s to call them eugenicist Nazi Hitlernazi Hitlers.

    Among them are the Sierra Club board members who tried very hard to get population and immigration on the club’s agenda. Tanton wasn’t a “mastermind” per se, he was a lightning rod for something that concerned many many many of us.

    *Yes, it’s spelled “mike,” given that “mic,” by long-standing standards of English orthography, has a short vowel. Could spell it “mice,” with the terminal e elongating the vowel. But then the c becomes soft, not hard, and anyway the word refers either to rodents or a device for digital input, not vocal output. And I don’t see anybody out there claiming that “bic” is the proper way to spell the two wheeled conveyance, nor that “kic” constitutes an anti-Semitic slur.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    By standard usage amongst broadcasters, audio and radio engineers, and musicians and actors, it's "mic".
    , @Autochthon

    Old and weary you seem now, and yet you are fell and grim beneath, I deem.
     
    , @Achmed E. Newman
    Great post there, Olorin. As to the spelling of the short version of microphone, I think Anonymous is right, but who cares?
  257. @jamie b.
    I'm familiar with beanstalks, and wish that we'd seriously pursue their development. Nevertheless, they would do nothing to relieve or reduce overpopulation. Even if you could ship tens (hundreds?) of millions of humans off into space, there's really no place to send them. And even if you could terraform Mars within just a few centuries, you're still talking about shipping tens (hundreds?) of millions of humans off to a completely underdeveloped (and probably only marginally habitable) world that could at most support a tenth of Earth's population. And the idea of shipping a meaningful portion of humanity to an entirely different star system is too silly to even comment on.

    Our future might well be in space. But that will do little to help those teeming billions who will remain stuck on Earth.

    Improved hydroponics?

    Could be a spin-off

  258. @Rapparee
    You could say the same of countless comics; humour is often a sublimated expression of hostility toward the world. There are exceptions, of course, but generally speaking, successful comedians are not happy, well-adjusted people. The underlying bitterness often becomes more obvious with age.

    I remember some comedian stating something taboo–that it was ridiculous that people were getting political information /arguments/opinions from comedians such as Jon Stewart or the gang at SNL, or that those guys were praised for speaking “truth” about politics.

    In effect, he said that comedians were a bunch of depressed alcoholics and drug users with extreme self-esteem issues, mental health problems, and absolutely horrible childhoods who are always one step away from living in a cardboard box. He was like, if you wouldn’t get your opinions from a hobo, you shouldn’t get them from a comedian.

    Makes me also think of a humorous line a friend ripped off when he saw the opening remarks at the Oscars one year (from memory): “Welcome prostitutes, pimps, whores, sluts, drug dealers, addicts, rapists, thieves, liars, murderers, butt-pirates, sociopaths, psychopaths, and sundry mental patients. Let’s see whose pathology gets validated tonight!”

    • LOL: Harry Baldwin